Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Jay of Ewelme (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 30 November 2009. It occurred during Debate on House of Lords: Code of Conduct.


House of Lords: Code of Conduct

My Lords, I should like to say one or two words in my capacity as chairman of the House of Lords Appointments Commission. In that capacity, I greatly welcome the report and the clarification that it provides of the role of the House of Lords and the responsibilities of Members of the House. The commission is firmly of the view that membership of the House is of course a privilege and an honour, but that it is much more than that. There is increasing public expectation, which the commission shares, that Members of the House, by whichever route they enter it, should play an active and effective role in its business. The greater the clarity about the role of the House and about the responsibilities of its Members—and though it is not the subject of today's debate, the greater the clarity too about the financial support arrangements for Members of the House—the greater the chance that the commission will receive the kind of nominations that will enable it to continue to recommend appointments of people of real merit to your Lordships' House, who will contribute significantly to its work. I therefore greatly welcome the revised code of conduct and I welcome in particular its emphasis on what Members are expected to do and not just on what they are expected not to do. On one specific point—this echoes what the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford, has just said—I greatly welcome the clear statement in the report that Peers’ experience and expertise gained outside Parliament should be regarded as an asset and, ""one of the greatest strengths of this House, which should be protected"." We know and see that every day. One of our tasks collectively is to ensure that that is recognised more widely. The measures in the report to clarify and prevent potential or actual conflicts of interest will contribute greatly to that end. I welcome the proposed appointment of the House of Lords commissioner for standards and I am particularly grateful for the clarification on that point provided by my noble friend Lady O’Neill and my noble and learned friend Lord Woolf. It may not have been necessary in the past, but there is widespread public disenchantment with the political process in, I fear, both Houses. I wish that I could share the confidence of the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, that the waves of disenchantment are not lapping at our own House: I fear that they are. I believe that this provides a strong argument for such an appointment today in order to provide public reassurance about the transparency of the processes of this House. I am happy therefore to support both Motions before us today.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
715 c627 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disciplinary proceedings Disclosure of information Codes of practice Conduct Enforcement House of Lords Misconduct Peers Registration Peers' interests House of Lords Code of Conduct Leader's Group House of Lords Commissioner for Standards
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk