Official Report 114KB pdf
We now consider instruments subject to the negative procedure. Various points have been raised on the instrument. Apparently this is the 22nd set of amendments to the principal regulations, and we should expect some response from the Executive on that point. Furthermore, there are various typos, missing footnotes and problems with the inconsistent use of words. It would also be interesting to find out from the Executive how the dead can make applications for refunds. I can understand how someone could make an application "on behalf of" a dead person, but how can an application be made "by" a dead person? Perhaps the Executive is privy to some new-found scientific investigations that we are not.
It's the cloning.
The instrument also appears to breach the 21-day rule. We can draw the Executive's attention to a variety of issues. Perhaps we could invite the Executive along to the committee to answer some questions, although I am not sure that that is necessary.
How much time does the Executive have to get it right?
It has another 10 days, so we will have to consider a response next week. I would be more inclined to write to the Executive, rather than inviting its representatives along. Some of the points are fairly general, but the problem has been compounded because the errors are all in the one instrument. It is the number, rather than the nature of our points that is of concern. However, if members are otherwise minded, we could invite the Executive along.
I think that potential witnesses' time would be better spent in the office.
Ian Jenkins would have to give them a lesson in basic grammar. Look at all the mistakes in the regulations.
That point has been well made.