Proceeding contribution from Bernard Jenkin (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
I survived, but I have to say that it is a very disappointing whirlpool, but that is no reflection on either my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Mr Cash) or my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg)—whichever was representing the whirlpool or the many-headed monster. However, if this is an opportunity to put some instability under the Bill, I will certainly support new clause 5 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Stone. I have my name on it in any case. I would echo the sentiment that the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) expressed in an interesting speech in response to new clause 3. The question of constitutional Bills is an interesting innovation introduced by Lord Justice Laws, but I would tell my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset that Lord Justice Laws was merely including in his judgments something that had been widely understood by constitutional theorists for some time, although it had never been legally expressed in such terms. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend's sentiment and, indeed, with that of the hon. Member for Rhondda that Parliament should determine which of these laws is constitutional and overrides subsequent Acts of Parliament. Clearly, the European Communities Act 1972 was expressly intended to do that, as has been recognised by the courts, and the 1689 Bill of Rights does that, but Lord Phillips concluded in a recent case that the doctrine of implied repeal applies to the 1689 Act. For that reason, as was said in Committee by the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Tristram Hunt), who has just left his place, this is an extremely important matter to which the House should return at a future date. I am not sure that I want the Bill to become one of those constitutional Acts, although I fully accept that the House of Lords has a role to play in preventing a tyranny of the majority—incidentally, a role that it cannot play if it becomes an elected House.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 521 c724
- 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 14:24:49 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701818
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701818
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701818