Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
No; the hon. and learned Gentleman asked me a question, and I am giving him an answer. Moreover, it must be true—the noble Lord Steel, who as far as I know believes in an appointed Chamber, has made the same point—that the principal arrangement in respect of which the original commitment was given concerned the 90 hereditary peers who were retained. The by-elections came later. Yes, we confirmed them, but the original deal was in respect of those 90 peers. Now we have the completely absurd, risible system of by-elections, which cannot continue.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 504 c695
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disciplinary proceedings Crime By-elections Constitutional and administrative law Elections House of Lords Disqualification Hereditary peers Misconduct Political parties Peers Parliament Life peers Reform Resignations
- Legislation
- Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-11 09:57:19 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828