Proceeding contribution from Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 7 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
My Lords, that is almost a reason not to support the amendment to which my noble friend Lord Touhig has spoken. I will say just a few words in support of Amendment 5D in my name and that of my noble friend Lord McAvoy. As my noble friend Lord Howarth said, the Scottish Parliament, by a substantial vote of 90 to 30, called on this Parliament and the Government not to hold the referendum on the same day as the elections to the Scottish Parliament. The Prime Minister Mr Cameron, when he was elected, spoke about an agenda of respect—of mutual respect—for the Scottish Parliament. However, one of the first things that the Government did was to ignore the views of the elected Scottish Parliament—the people who know best because they are there on the ground and will campaign in the election. That is one strong argument in favour of the amendment. The second is that there will be two confusing campaigns. In a previous debate, when I indicated my total support for the sane and sensible remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, even Members of this House drew a sharp intake of breath at that unusual alliance. That alliance will be there again—campaigning in Scotland against AV, which the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, and I are both against. However, we will be campaigning on opposite sides in the Scottish parliamentary election, and that will cause confusion. I use the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, as just one example. There will be many such people. Indeed, I previously said that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde—whom I remember saying he was against AV early in the debate—and I could be tramping the streets of Mauchline together on the same side in the referendum but on entirely different sides in the campaign for the Scottish Parliament. That will cause confusion. The posters will be confusing, as will the campaign with loudspeakers. I am not allowed to repeat arguments but, as I said previously, the two campaigns will cause confusion. My last point is about the franchises. I have made the point before but will make it in a different form now because the Ministers have still not addressed it. There will be difficulty in dealing with two substantially different franchises when in Scotland, as my noble friends know, many Polish, German and French people will be entitled and able to vote in the Scottish Parliament election but not in the AV referendum. It will cause great confusion, which would not arise if the polls were not held on the same day. Respect for the views of the Scottish Parliament and the confusion caused by two campaigns and two franchises are very powerful arguments that should make the Government think again.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 725 c63-4
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Constituency size Alternative vote Broadcasting Age Australia Elections Eligibility Expenditure Electoral Commission General elections Local government Northern Ireland Scotland Voting methods Young people Wales Scottish Parliament Single transferable vote Party political broadcasts Mayors
- 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 14:57:34 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711779
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711779
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_711779