Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Adrian Bailey (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 27 April 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Honours System (Reform).


Honours System (Reform)

: I am not sure that I understand the hon. Gentleman's point. The point that I am trying to get across is that if the House of Lords question were resolved, one of the issues about reform of the honours system would go away. Questions that have arisen in the debate about the role of those who fund parties and party policies might well also be resolved as a result of concluding that debate. It is unfortunate that people with strong views—perhaps completely legitimate views in the other two debates from the one in which we are taking part today—use language that could sully and undermine the honours system. I have heard today words such as ““patronage”” and ““corruption””, and inevitably when such words are used—I accept that they are used more in the media than in this Chamber—there is a danger that the thousands of people throughout the country who have earned honours for meritorious service will feel that their own contribution is demeaned.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
445 c358WH 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Honours Reform Public Administration Select Committee
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk