Proceeding contribution from Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 15 March 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Fixed-term Parliaments Bill.
Fixed-term Parliaments Bill
My Lords, I do not accept that. It might indeed be desirable to have a written constitution, but that is a matter for another day. I accept that the Bill provides for an important constitutional reform, but it is not a fundamental change to our constitution. I say that for a number of reasons. First, in terms of whether or not a referendum is appropriate, the fixed term proposed is within the existing maximum term of a Parliament. Under the 1911 Act, Parliament can last for up to five years; under this Act a Parliament will last for five years unless either of the trigger mechanisms for an early dissolution is activated.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c182
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Absent voting Devolution Elections Legislatures Fixed-term parliaments Dissolution Northern Ireland Referendums Parliament Scotland Voting behaviour Religion Wales
- Legislation
- Fixed-term Parliaments Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:12:06 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726265
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726265
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726265