 In the High Court, the wording of the 1911 act was held not to imply any entrenchment.Support for this conclusion can be drawn from the parliamentary debates on the 1911 act, in which an entrenchment clause was considered but rejected, the Government clearly displaying the intention to be able to make such amendments if necessary.However, the 2005 decision was made on other grounds, so the question of whether the courts could refer to the 1949 Act's Parliamentary debates under the principle established in "Pepper v Hart" was not decided.