Proceeding contribution from Baroness Stowell of Beeston (Conservative) 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
I want to repeat a point I made on Second Reading, which does not seem to have been raised so far today. I do not bring any preconceived ideological support for fixed-term Parliaments. The Bill is a positive step to address the lack of public confidence in the political system. One of the points I made on Second Reading, which is the most powerful reason to support the Bill, is that it would ensure that the Government and the Opposition had to face the electorate on a predetermined date, whatever the political conditions are at that time. That is the most compelling thing about fixed-term Parliaments. As to the length of the term and whether it should be four or five years, I was struck by the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Armstrong of Ilminster. He made the point about Governments being distracted by preparing for elections and said that if there were to be a fixed-term Parliament, in his view as a former Cabinet Secretary, it should be five years.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c223
- 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 15:05:31 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726343
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726343
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726343