Proceeding contribution from Lord Dear (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, with an eye on the clock— as we know, we have been considering this matter for getting on for three hours now—I shall be very brief indeed. I join the universal chorus by saying that I, too, congratulate the authors of the report, particularly the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Eames. I think that they got the sense of the House correctly. I, too, agree that the report is comprehensive and of the very highest quality. It is against that background that I shall comment briefly on the two amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, particularly the suggestion that we delete paragraph 5. I, too, felt that paragraph 5 was demeaning—I was irritated by the requirement to sign such a declaration. I, too, ask whether we are the only second Chamber in the world that would have to do so. I have regard particularly to paragraph 8, which says that Members of the House must comply with the code of conduct. Do paragraphs 5 and 8 sit comfortably together? Had we been considering a Bill in your Lordships’ House, I would almost certainly have tabled an amendment to the wording of paragraph 5 to say that the code should be binding on all Members taking the oath. In other words, it would tie in that requirement to the very powerful requirement under the oath—an oath to the sovereign—to behave in the way that your Lordships and I understand. However, I would not support the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, on this. To do so would set us into very deep water. The general public have a view of Parliament at the moment. It is often misguided, but we all know what it is. We are now engaged in a public debate on the conduct of our House. To start to unpick individual wording and paragraphs in this report would set us on a course that would be totally misinterpreted, certainly by some elements of the media and probably by many members of the general public. We would be seen to try to duck and dive and wrestle out of the very things that we are trying to correct today. I, too, support both Motions today and will not support either amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 715 c629
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-08 16:38:40 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_597824
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_597824
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_597824