Proceeding contribution from William Cash (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 18 January 2011. 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 corrects me by saying that it is proper scrutiny. The Committee stated:"““Whilst acknowledging the case made by the Deputy Prime Minister for a five year term””—" it is so nice when the authors of such reports use expressions like ““whilst acknowledging the case”” and ““with respect to””—[Interruption.] My hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr Shepherd) knows what is in my mind. The Committee continued:"““nonetheless the majority of the Committee consider that a four year term should be adopted for any fixed-term Parliamentary arrangement at Westminster. In the view of the majority, the shift from a five year maximum to a five year norm would be inconsistent with the Government's stated aim of making the legislature more accountable, inconsistent with existing constitutional practice and inconsistent with the practice of the devolved institutions and the clear majority of international legislatures.””" That is quite a condemnation.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 521 c718
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Administration General elections Fixed-term parliaments Dissolution Censure motions Prorogation Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Fixed-term Parliaments Bill 2010-12
- Parliament Act 1911
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 14:24:48 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701800
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701800
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701800