Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Williamson of Horton (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.


Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

In this case, as in many others, timing—in particular, the timing of this review—is the principal question. That is apparent from the amendments tabled by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer. I sometimes think that it would have been instructive if, when we started the whole of this great debate on the Bill, we had installed a couple of clocks on the wall of the Chamber—not clocks to keep a record of the length of our speeches but to show the number of hours and minutes remaining until a referendum on 5 May, and until the completion of the constituency and boundary changes in October 2013. It is those periods and the Government’s fear that proposals might prejudice them which have determined the fate of many proposed amendments. In the case of this amendment, as the noble Lord, Lord McNally, said, there have been a lot of questions about the decision to move to 600 Members of the House of Commons, the reasons for that change and a demand for some independent study of the consequences. The most comprehensive of those was the amendment moved yesterday, which was not accepted, by the noble Lord, Lord Wills. In Committee, I myself proposed an amendment that would have deferred the coming into force of Clause 11 until the end of the Boundary Commissions’ work, thus providing some time in which it would have been possible to undertake some examination of the consequences. The Government, however, made it quite clear that any infringement of the march to October 2013 is not acceptable to them. I assume that they will have the same difficulties with the amendments of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer. We should therefore consider the proposal of the noble Lord, Lord McNally, on its merits as a proposal for post-legislative scrutiny—which is what it is now. For myself, I think that it would be useful to have it in the Bill. It is a requirement that there should be a committee to carry out a review of the effects of the reduction and the changes to the constituencies; otherwise we may very well not get one at all, ever. Who knows what Government will be in power from 2015? It will be useful to have a review to draw some conclusions. I do not think that we should overrate its importance, but I think that it would be useful to do that. I am aware that yesterday the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, described Amendment 28A as ““almost contemptible””. I do not agree with that. However, I was extremely glad that he included the word ““almost””. I think that it is reasonable to have this proposal which the Government have now put forward in the Bill, and I hope that it will pass this evening.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c294-5 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Disability Boundary commissions Constituency size Constituencies Alternative vote Administration Absent voting Cornwall Inquiries Isles of Scilly Referendums Ministers Polling stations Reviews Ynys Môn South Lanarkshire Brecon and Radnorshire
Legislation
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk