Proceeding contribution from Daniel Byles (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 entirely agree with my hon. Friend's comments. One problem sometimes cited in relation to a democratic system such as ours is the tendency for Governments to take the short-term approach to fixing problems. If five years became the norm, that would help to create slightly more stable government, because Governments could look to the longer term when considering some of the difficult decisions that they might have to make, and not always be worried that they were only a few years from a general election. It seems that five-year Parliaments are not a problem for Labour Members when it is their party that is clinging to power in the dying days of a Government, as was the case in 2009 and 2010. True to form, their principles changed the moment they found themselves in opposition. Now, sadly, they stand as obstacles to reform. May I conclude the point about whether the term should be four years or five, and move on with my speech?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 521 c758
- 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 14:27:56 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953