Proceeding contribution from Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 21 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on House of Lords: Reform.
House of Lords: Reform
I propose to address that argument during this speech, but I do not agree with it. I will set out my reasons for that in detail. The primacy of the House of Commons, I suggest, is not affected by the proposals in the draft Bill for a number of reasons. The second of those reasons is that the substantial differences in composition that are proposed between the two Houses, along with the effect that those differences will have on their relative roles and importance, support the primacy of the House of Commons. Nor does the argument take into account the conventions governing the relationship between the two Houses, which, while they may develop, will set the ground rules for how the new arrangements operate if and when the draft Bill is enacted in whatever form. As to the law, the effect of the Parliament Acts is that this House has no more than a delaying power of one year and no power at all over money Bills. As Members of this House have said many times, the Parliament Acts were all about the powers of the House of Lords in the context of a less developed democracy, where the composition of this House was not in question. However, one should not forget the political importance of the power to appoint Peers, even in that context. The 1911 Act was passed only because of the agreement of George V to create up to 400 new Liberal Peers—not a threat, I note, that the present Government have been prepared to replicate. Yet the Parliament Acts set conclusive limits to the powers of this House. It follows that the primacy of the House of Commons is founded on the rock of statute and not, as is sometimes implied, on the shifting sands of parliamentary conventions. After all, parliamentary conventions could not and did not prevent this House from defeating the House of Commons on the Hunting Bill and then standing firm. This House maintained its determination not to pass the Bill. The House of Commons then asserted its will, and therefore its statutory primacy, by relying on the Parliament Acts.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 728 c1167
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disciplinary proceedings Elections House of Lords House of Commons Disqualification House of Lords composition Electoral systems Misconduct Offenders Powers Public appointments Peers Reform Single transferable vote
- Legislation
- Draft House of Lords Reform Bill
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:56:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_751398
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_751398
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_751398