Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bates (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 15 June 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Political Parties and Elections Bill.


Political Parties and Elections Bill

My Lords, I must admit that I feel some professional sympathy for the noble Lord, Lord Tyler. His amendment seems to be struggling for any support at all, having been demolished pretty effectively by the comments of the noble Lords, Lord Borrie, Lord Foulkes and Lord Campbell-Savours. If there were any stumps still left in the ground, my noble friend Lord Hodgson has ensured that they have been taken out. However, the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, has done the House a service by raising this matter. I do not think that anybody who has been out on the campaign trail knocking on doors over the past six weeks can be in any doubt about the anger felt by members of the public at the breach of trust that has been revealed through the articles, mostly in the Daily Telegraph, on expenses. There is intense anger. We need to ensure that there are degrees of protection for Members of Parliament. Those who are in favour of representative democracy and the notion of Members of Parliament ought to be encouraged that people feel so strongly and expect such standards from the people who represent them in the House of Commons and, for that matter, in the House of Lords. The fact that people feel so strongly is welcome. One way of recognising it is to be able to recall a Member of Parliament in extreme circumstances. The noble Lord, Lord Tyler, was right to say that in a wide-ranging speech my right honourable friend David Cameron referred to this as one of the possibilities, along with a range of other things, including fixed-term Parliaments, that are needed to restore trust in the parliamentary process and the trust of constituents in their Members of Parliament. That process has a long way to go. We are at the beginning—I am looking at the Minister. Is he about to come in? No. He is just listening intently; how generous. In moving his amendment, the noble Lord said that it is not entirely in order or watertight in its present form because it does not specify the role of the public standards agency. I could not see the reference to the public standards agency—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c872-3 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Staff Education Civil proceedings Finance Elections Fixed penalties Eligibility Donors Electoral Commission European Union Electoral register Domicil Misconduct Powers of entry Public appointments Members Political parties Referendums Politics and government Standards Taxation Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
Legislation
Political Parties and Elections Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk