HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 AND PRIVATE LEGISLATION

Summary

That this House believes that there are no valid grounds for distinguishing between Public and Private Bills insofar as the application of the Human Rights Act 1998 is concerned; considers the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill to be profoundly anti-democratic in that it gives votes to owners of buildings and breaches the Human Rights Act 1998; and calls on the Leader of the House to rectify this anomaly and bring forward proposals from the Modernisation Committee to put both classes of Bill on the same footing.

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

1. 25 January 2000

   Early Day Motion

   That this House believes that there are no valid grounds for distinguishing between Public and Private Bills insofar as the application of the Human Rights Act 1998 is concerned; considers the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill to be profoundly anti-democratic in that it gives votes to owners of buildings and breaches the Human Rights Act 1998; and calls on the Leader of the House to rectify this anomaly and bring forward proposals from the Modernisation Committee to put both classes of Bill on the same footing.

   Source: Early Day Motion

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

• Mr Gordon Prentice · Labour · Primary sponsor

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.