tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11340801.post4520905204752714169..comments2023-10-06T16:45:25.381+13:00Comments on "Elephants and the Law" by Dean Knight: TID-BIT: Parliamentary Due ProcessDean Knighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03069298298745322597noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11340801.post-72900637063069904102010-01-08T15:18:04.224+13:002010-01-08T15:18:04.224+13:00Just came across what I regard as another subversi...Just came across what I regard as another subversion of proper Parliamentary process, and thought this might be a good place to mention it: provision for an Act of Parliament to be brought into force by Order in Council, rather than on a date specified in the Act - see eg s 2 Immigration Act 2009. Surely when Parliament enacts legislation, this should normally come into force at a not too distant date determined by Parliament, rather than leaving it to executive discretion to bring it into force.<br /><br />The Order in Council version has long been common practice in the UK, but I had thought we were doing better in NZ - I don't know whether it has been used in other Acts recently (anyone?). The problems it can cause are illustrated by the case of R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 539 (HL). Parliament had enacted a compensation scheme, but left it to Order in Council to bring it into force. Government had subsequently gone cold on the idea, and simply never brought it into force. The Minister had then instituted a different non-statutory one instead. Surely that's not how we make law in a democracy?Hanna Wilbergnoreply@blogger.com