Proceeding contribution from Lord Rooker (Labour Independent) in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 December 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
Amendment 30 takes care of that. I know that I shall be criticised for Amendment 30 but, if you are going to have multi-choice answers, you have to be able to rank them so that there is a clear winner. What I have here are two questions that are intended to be on one ballot paper: ““Do you want to change the system? Yes or no?””. If the yes vote wins, which will not be known until the papers are counted, then the second question comes in: ““Which family would you choose?””. In New Zealand, there was a year’s gap between the two referendums. The first referendum was not binding but the second one was. It was do or die between one system or another. As the noble Lord, Lord Skidelsky, said, the second referendum required a yes or no answer and so was absolutely clear.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 723 c99
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Alternative vote Ballots Administration Elections Local government Referendums Proportional representation Reform
- Legislation
- Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:59:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_689683
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_689683
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_689683