One for the lawyers and paperclip fans today, this time from Hansard in January 1998. It's Conrad Russell at work:
As far as I understand it, it would be intra vires to confine those regulations to authorising them to restrict the allocation of their paperclips. I do not suggest that that is the policy intention. But I should like to know whether it would be intra vires, under those words, to restrict the powers that much. I also want to know how far the powers they could be given could be extended. When I know what could be done under these words, I shall be in a position to judge whether they are the right words in which to confer the powers. I still do not see why it is necessary to use a regulation-making power to confer them at all.
Liked this story? Find other gems from Hansard on my archive page for this series of posts.
Two questions that should probably be asked of all such regulations:
1) How much can these powers be used to restrict something
2) How much can these powers be used to allow something.
But then Conrad was a very wise man
[...] this series of entries from Hansard's past to an end as there are only so many speeches about paperclips and potato salad to be written. So to finish off the series, here's a rather more sombre written [...]