Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Reynolds (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 24 November 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Fixed-term Parliaments Bill.
Fixed-term Parliaments Bill
The hon. Gentleman is making another fine speech, which I am always glad to hear. He spoke about the mandate for constitutional change and the previous mandates that previous changes have enjoyed. Does he agree that it is important to have a mandate not only to introduce a change in the constitution such as that proposed, but to entrench it? Without such a mandate, is there not a danger that future Governments may feel that they have the authority to introduce such constitutional changes to their own benefit, much as the present Government are seeking to bring in a constitutional change through the measures in the Bill for their own benefit?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 519 c331
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- General elections Fixed-term parliaments Dissolution Prime Minister Powers Divisions Censure motions
- Legislation
- Fixed-term Parliaments Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 19:21:08 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685201
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685201
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685201