---

House of Commons (Participation) Bill

I am surprised to hear the hon. Lady say that, because the Prime Minister hardly ever votes for any of his legislation. The fact is that we are stuck with that and I do not think that the hon. Lady’s point holds water for a moment. I would also like to say that the hon. Member for Sherwood was on to a point when he said that we should look into the Westminster situation as a whole and that matters are not set in stone. One of the things about our constitution that I personally like and support is its flexibility: if circumstances change, the constitution can change. He is absolutely right that if the Government wish to proceed with what seems to be the logic of the votes earlier this week—that democracy should prevail in the other place—it is incumbent on them to come up with a detailed set of proposals about how exactly it will work. The House voted for something that the Government did not propose, so he was right to point that out, and the Government may want to consider the relationship between the different nations of the Union in that context. Let us consider cross-border matters. The Scottish Parliament currently deals with health matters for Scotland, and hospitals in the south of Scotland are subject to that. As far as I know, that does not create a problem in the north of England, but if the hon. Gentleman has evidence that some new procedure is required, he will doubtless present it. However, I felt that he was flying a kite. If we consider constitutional reform under the Government, some measures are welcome but the procedure has often been botched. One example is the abolition of the post of Lord Chancellor. It was announced as part of a reshuffle after a mere five minutes’ consultation with the Lord Chief Justice. It required a concordat with the Lord Chief Justice to settle his concerns and more than 250 amendments in the other place because the proposal was so badly thought through. In the end, the Lord Chancellor was not abolished. The Conservative party should try to do better. That is why we have a democracy taskforce, which is a measured approach to constitutional reform. I am especially conscious of the Union because of the 300th anniversary. Conservatives are strong supporters of the Union and we would not wish to do anything to undermine it. Indeed, if anything, we would like to strengthen it. That is not based on sentimental reasoning. I firmly believe that the Union has been one of the greatest political success stories of modern European history. It continues to contribute massively to the UK’s culture, strength, stability and prosperity while enabling each constituent part to retain its proud sense of national and local identity. All four nations that make up the UK benefit from the Union and continue to achieve much more together than they would separately. The Union must be strengthened, hence the need to address the unfinished business of the devolution settlement.