HOUSE OF LORDS
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
Wednesday 22nd June 2005
The House met at half-past two o’clock.
PRAYERS were read by the Lord Bishop of Coventry.
1. Lord Howarth of Newport—The Right Honourable Alan Thomas Howarth, CBE, having been created Baron Howarth of Newport, of Newport in the County of Gwent, for life by Letters Patent dated in the forenoon of 15th June 2005, was introduced between the Baroness Hollis of Heigham and the Lord Ashley of Stoke, the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod and Garter King of Arms preceding; and took and subscribed the oath pursuant to statute.
2. Lord Foster of Bishop Auckland—The Right Honourable Derek Foster, having been created Baron Foster of Bishop Auckland, of Bishop Auckland in the County of Durham, for life by Letters Patent dated in the afternoon of 16th June 2005, was introduced between the Lord Burlison and the Lord Sawyer, the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod and Garter King of Arms preceding; and took and subscribed the oath pursuant to statute.
3. Oath—William Bishop of Truro took and subscribed the oath pursuant to statute.
Judicial Business
4. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Appellant) v. M (Respondent)—The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.
5. Appeal Committee—The 12th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—
Birmingham City Council (Respondents) v. Doherty (FC) (Petitioner) and others—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999; and that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(c); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
6. Appeal Committee—The 13th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made—
Madden (Petitioner) v. Preferred Technical Group CHA Limited and another (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
Kay and others and another (FC) (Petitioners) v. London Borough of Lambeth and others (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be given; and that the petition of appeal be lodged by 6th July.
Clare (FC) (Petitioner) v. Perry (trading as Widemouth Manor Hotel) (Respondent)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999; and that the respondent be at liberty to apply for his costs in accordance with direction 5.1(c); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
NCR Limited (Petitioners) v. Riverland Portfolio No. 1 Limited (Respondents)—That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d); and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
7. Appeal Committee—The 14th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Order was made—
O (FC) (Appellant) v. Crown Court at Harrow (Respondents) (Criminal Appeal from Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice)—That the petition of the Secretary of State for the Home Department that he might be heard or otherwise intervene in the said appeal be allowed.
Papers
8. Instrument withdrawn—The following instrument, laid before the House on 21st June 2005, was withdrawn:
Revised Funding Code prepared by the Legal Services Commission.
9. Command Papers—The following papers were presented to the House by command of Her Majesty and ordered to lie on the Table:
1. Debt—Exchange of Notes between the UK and Yugoslavia concerning Certain Commercial Debts; (6589)
2. Departmental Performance—Review of the State Pathologist’s Department in Northern Ireland, June 2005. (—)
10. Affirmative Instruments—The following instruments were laid before the House for approval by resolution and ordered to lie on the Table:
1. Draft Civil Partnership (Amendments to Registration Provisions) Order 2005, laid under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, together with an Explanatory Memorandum;
2. (i) Draft Financial Assistance Scheme Regulations 2005, together with an Explanatory Memorandum—
(ii) Draft Financial Assistance Scheme (Internal Review) Regulations 2005, together with an Explanatory Memorandum—
laid under the Pensions Act 2004.
11. Negative Instruments—The following instruments were laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table:
1. Electricity and Gas Appeals (Designation and Exclusion) Order 2005, laid under the Energy Act 2004; (1646)
2. Legal Aid in Criminal Proceedings (Costs) (Amendment No. 2) Rules (Northern Ireland) 2005, laid under the Legal Aid, Advice and Assistance (Northern Ireland) Order 1981. (—)
Private Business
12. Liverpool City Council (Prohibition of Smoking in Places of Work) Bill [HL]—
13. London Local Authorities (Prohibition of Smoking in Places of Work) Bill [HL]—
A message was brought from the Commons that they concur with the resolutions of this House of 19th May.
Public Business
14. Budget (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 2005—It was moved by the Lord Rooker, on behalf of the Lord President (Baroness Amos), that the draft Order be referred to a Grand Committee; the motion was agreed to.
15. Traffic Management (Northern Ireland) Order 2005—It was moved by the Lord Rooker, on behalf of the Lord President (Baroness Amos), that the draft Order be referred to a Grand Committee; the motion was agreed to.
16. Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL]—It was moved by the Lord Evans of Temple Guiting that it be an instruction to the Grand Committee to which the Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL] has been committed that they consider the bill in the following order:
Clause 1
Schedule 1
Clauses 2 and 3
Schedule 2 | Clauses 4 to 6
Schedule 3
Clauses 7 to 23; |
the motion was agreed to.17. Equality Bill [HL]—It was moved by the Lord Falconer of Thoroton that it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole House to which the Equality Bill [HL] has been committed that they consider the bill in the following order:
Clauses 1 and 2
Schedule 1
Clauses 3 to 33
Schedule 2
Clauses 34 to 42 | Schedule 3
Clauses 43 to 89
Schedule 4
Clauses 90 to 93; |
the motion was agreed to.18. Fraud Bill [HL]—It was moved by the Lord Goldsmith that the bill be now read a second time; after debate, the motion was agreed to.
19. Intellectual property rights—The Baroness Buscombe asked Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to protect intellectual property rights for the creative industries; after debate, the question was answered by the Lord McKenzie of Luton.
20. Street children in Latin America—The Lord Alton of Liverpool asked Her Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the governments of Latin American countries about the plight of street children; after debate, the question was answered by the Lord Triesman.
The House was adjourned at twenty-seven minutes before eight o’clock
till tomorrow, eleven o’clock.
PAUL HAYTER
Clerk of the Parliaments | 
Subscribe to Email Alerts for this page
