It's academic adventure time!
I'll be spending the summer (well, winter) as this year's De Carle Distinguished Lecturer in the Division of Humanities @otago hosted by @OtagoLaw
My main engagement will be this series of public lectures on Brexit:
https://t.co/JOeYxkz47l
There are only a couple of days left to make a submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill. Here's my own short submission if you need some inspiration.
@RajivShah90 I absolutely appreciate the argument that the safeguards aren't enough.
I think particular worries that the Bill could be more precise are important.
But think the delegations - even conceived as a bundle of uncertainties - don't even nearly justify the label skeleton bill.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is *categorically not* a skeleton bill.
(a THREAD, without comment on any of Dominic Grieve's other concerns:)
https://t.co/5UPKsR1VMK
@RajivShah90 The policy, to be made by Parliament is clear (and legally binding): capacity is required
As well as the Guidance (to which you refer, but which won't have legal force) the Bill references other legislation on what that means in cl 3 - admittedly clumsily, but significantly.
But the idea that it is a "skeleton bill" really doesn't stack up. If it passes, the significant policy change it makes will have been made, in its entirety, by Parliament. Executive involvement will be limited to settling internal details and some administrative processes.
And I accept that there may be disagreement about the precise distribution of power between Parliament and the Executive the bill sets up - maybe targeted amendments (either way) could improve the Bill, although Grieve didn't say that (and fwiw I don't have a view)