Page 4159 - Week 13 - Thursday, 10 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MADAM SPEAKER, I TABLE THE TENANCY TRIBUNAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994.
WHEN THE TENANCY TRIBUNAL BILL WAS DEBATED ON 21 SEPTEMBER 1994, VARIOUS AMENDMENTS WERE MOVED IN SEPARATE BLOCKS.
THE FIRST GROUP OF GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS WERE TAKEN TOGETHER AND ACCEPTED BY ALL MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY. THE SECOND GROUP OF GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF RETROSPECTIVITY IN RELATION TO RENT REVIEW CLAUSES. THESE AMENDMENTS WERE TAKEN TOGETHER AND PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY AFTER A DIVISION.
BOTH SETS OF AMENDMENTS PURPORTED TO INSERT A NEW PARAGRAPH (1)(C) INTO CLAUSE 6 OF THE TENANCY TRIBUNAL BILL. THE LATER AMENDMENTS WERE MEANT TO REPLACE THE EARLIER AMENDMENT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH USUAL DRAFTING PROCEDURE, THE SECOND SET OF AMENDMENTS DID NOT AMEND THE FIRST SET OF AMENDMENTS BUT RATHER AMENDED THE BILL. THIS MEANT THAT THE ASSEMBLY PASSED BOTH SETS OF AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL. THE SECOND SET OF AMENDMENTS DEALT SPECIFICALLY WITH ONE POINT - RESTRICTING THE BAN ON RENT REVIEW CLAUSES TO LEASES ENTERED INTO AFTER 1 JANUARY 1994.
IN CASES SUCH AS THESE, THERE IS POWER GIVEN UNDER STANDING ORDER 191 TO ALLOW FORMAL OR TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO A BILL BEFORE PRINTING. THE POWER MAY HAVE BEEN USED TO SUBSTITUTE THE SECOND SET OF AMENDMENTS FOR THE FIRST. HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT INVOKED IN THIS CASE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ACT WAS PRINTED WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT AS PARAGRAPH 6(1)(c) AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT RENUMBERED PARAGRAPH 6(1)(d).
THE RESULT HAS BEEN THAT THE REFERENCES TO SECTION 6(1)(c) IN
THE PRINTED ACT DO NOT GIVE EFFECT TO THE ASSEMBLYS
INTENTION AND ARE INCONSISTENT. THE BILL THAT I HAVE JUST
TABLED WILL AMEND THE TENANCY TRIBUNAL ACT 1994, AS
4159
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .