Proceeding contribution from Caroline Lucas (Green Party) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 February 2011. It occurred during Adjournment debate and Backbench debate on Parliamentary Reform.
Parliamentary Reform
The Government are by definition the majority. It struck me that, when trying to get measures passed, I could perhaps be kinder to the majority in addressing their concerns. I agree with the hon. Gentleman; I have not nobbled many Ministers during my time here. I return to the subject of having votes held over to a certain time of day. The Modernisation Committee noted:"““Members seem interested in the possibility of holding divisions over, so that all votes could be taken after one another at a convenient time, instead of holding divisions immediately at the end of each debate.””" That was back in 1998, but despite the fact that a majority were interested, little has changed. Although 2004 saw the introduction of the so-called deferred Divisions, when some votes that would otherwise have taken place at the end of the day's sitting would be conducted in writing on Wednesday morning and early afternoon, the option is seldom used. I acknowledge that there will be occasions—the votes on tuition fees for example, or the vote on the Iraq war—when it will appropriate to vote straight away, because of the significance of the vote and the public's interest in it. However, the fact that there are certain exceptions to such proposals does not undermine the direction of the proposals themselves. I still believe that they are worth considering. I shall talk briefly about abstentions. I got myself into trouble when talking about abstentions in the past, with people telling me, ““Well, if you can't make up your mind you shouldn't be in Parliament.”” Abstention does not mean that that we cannot make up our minds. It does not mean that we do not know. Abstentions are often the result of being presented with two opposing ideas, but being asked to vote on them as one amendment. One may agree with one part of an amendment but not the other, yet there is no way in this Parliament of taking amendments in parts. I note in passing that in the European Parliament, which uses 20 languages, it is possible to take an amendment in parts, but we cannot do that here. We might then think to ourselves, ““What shall I do? I know, I'll abstain.”” It is difficult to abstain in this place. In 1998, a majority of MPs indicated strong or general support for an option to record abstentions, but 12 years later nothing has happened. Richard Taylor, the former Independent MP for Wyre Forest and the late David Taylor, the independent-minded former Labour MP for North West Leicestershire, were both known for voting yes and no. Of course, the media made much fun of them, making it seem that they were not able to make up their minds.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 522 c346-7WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Accountability Debates House of Commons Electronic voting Electronic equipment Private members' bills Members Parliamentary scrutiny Parliament Parliamentary session Working hours Reform Religious practice Resignations Divisions Times of sittings
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 22:41:58 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711196
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711196
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711196