Proceeding contribution from Lord Tyler (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 17 January 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on House of Lords Bill [HL].
House of Lords Bill [HL]
Indeed, there are later amendments. I accept the note of caution. These are premature amendments. I hope that there will be a general feeling throughout the Committee that that is the case. I am relieved to hear that my noble friend Lord Steel and his colleagues who promote the Bill also feel that this is inappropriate for this Bill. He and his colleagues have, on so many occasions, referred to the Bill as transitional, incremental and as dealing with short-term problems. In this House, short-term problems seem to me, as a comparative newcomer, sometimes to stretch over decades. Even given that, it would be wrong to include this amendment in this Bill. The issue, as the noble Lord, Lord Richard, has already said, is that we are expecting very soon a White Paper from the Government, after years of digestion of the issues. I hope that the noble Lord will tell us what ““the new year”” means in this context. Is it early spring, mid-spring or Cornish spring, which is earlier than spring everywhere else in the country? I hope that we will see the White Paper in March. I further hope—I hope that the Minister, when he responds, will give us some indication—that, when it comes, there will indeed be draft clauses for pre-legislative scrutiny. I hope that they will be submitted to a Joint Committee for that pre-legislative scrutiny. In this House, we all recognise that ignorance of the way in which the two Houses co-operate is manifest. It was certainly true when I was serving in the other place. Therefore, it would be really helpful if, when those draft clauses come forward, they are subject to pre-legislative scrutiny by both Houses. My noble friend Lord Steel thought that the fact that Ken Clarke, with whom I have worked on these issues, did not expect to see the full comprehensive reform in his lifetime was a good reason for making rapid progress in some directions. I would simply say that new Clause 1 is the wrong direction in which to make rapid progress. I hope that the Committee will endorse the general view expressed in Amendment No. 2, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Richard.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 697 c1511-2
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Elections House of Lords Hereditary peers Public appointments Peers Parliament Reform
- Legislation
- House of Lords Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:20:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436124
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436124
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436124