Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Tomlinson (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 12 March 2007. It occurred during Debate on House of Lords: Reform.


House of Lords: Reform

My Lords, consensus is one of the most overworked words in the general debate leading up to the White Paper and in the discussion of House of Lords reform. My right honourable friend Jack Straw claimed from the beginning that he was trying to get consensus between the parties, within the parties and between the Houses. Of course, if that was one of his goals, he singularly failed. Last week we saw Labour MPs voting against their Government’s preferred option, Conservative MPs voting against their party leader’s preferred option, and I am sure that we will see disagreement in this House between ourselves and the House of Commons. The only consensus that has been reached is that of the Joint Committee on Conventions under the chairmanship of my noble friend Lord Cunningham. I certainly agree with the proposal of the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, that if we are going to reconvene anything, it ought to be that Joint Committee, trying to get consensus on how we go forward. However, I gather that the threat is that Jack Straw proposes to reconvene what he calls his ““cross-party group””. That cross-party group is not representative of anything much. The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, clearly does not command overwhelming support from his noble friends.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c527 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Bishops Elections House of Lords House of Commons Hereditary peers House of Lords composition Legislation Electoral systems Powers Public appointments Parliamentary scrutiny Life peers Reform Crossbenchers
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk