Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 9 February 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 (Money) (No. 3)
I refer the Secretary of State to his son's blog. [Interruption.] Yes, I do. I commend it to the right hon. Gentleman, because it highlights the fact that the Government have not chosen to give the electorate any viable choice in this bogus referendum. The only choice is between an established system and a system that is so manifestly flawed—except for the possible short-term advantage that it delivers—that it is not worthy of consideration. I have some sympathy with the Liberal Democrats, because, if the Government wanted to offer a constitutional convention-style approach to the electorate, with a multiplicity of choices, the Secretary of State's argument might have some force. At the moment, however, it has none, because what is being offered is a short-term gimmick.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 505 c814
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Boundary commissions Constituency size Constituencies Alternative vote Administration Constitutional and administrative law House of Commons General elections Members Referendums Voting methods
- Legislation
- Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:52:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_623937
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_623937
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_623937