Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Laing of Elderslie (Conservative) 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

The Minister has explained very well why it is necessary to have clause 33, and I do not disagree with him. My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg)—he has been in his place all day, and now he is not—made a distinction earlier between what he described as "volunteer peers" and those who have the peerage thrust upon them. He is well qualified to address the matter. My right hon. and learned Friend was absolutely correct in saying that there has to be a mechanism whereby someone can choose not to be a peer. In any other walk of life we believe in choice and the freedom of the individual, so it would simply be wrong to force a particular role in life on someone, even if it might appear to be a great honour, if they did not wish to take on that honour and the responsibilities and duties that come with it. We entirely see that the clause is necessary, so we support the Government on it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
504 c775 
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