Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hughes of Woodside (Labour) in the House of Lords on Friday, 21 October 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on House of Lords Reform Bill [HL].


House of Lords Reform Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am disappointed to hear that the noble Lord seeks to withdraw Part 1 of the Bill. One of the great discussions we need on the reform of your Lordships’ House is not on the matter of election—we will leave that aside for the moment—but on how an appointment to the House can be made. An attempt was made with the so-called people’s Peers to establish a commission to decide which people, other than politicians, might be elected to this House. It is not for me to judge whether or not that is a success. The suggestion is that a number of people—appointed by who?—should have the final decision on who should be appointed to this House. Is it another super-quango? All these issues have to be discussed and it is not good enough, I am sorry to say to the noble Lord, to go this far with the Bill—and it has been in gestation far longer than the four years he has mentioned—and then say, ““Well we can just abandon Part 1””. It is a real mistake. We need to debate the issue thoroughly in every aspect if we are to proceed properly.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c452 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
House of Lords Disqualification Hereditary peers House of Lords composition Referendums Peers Reform Appointments Commission
Legislation
House of Lords Reform Bill (HL) 2010-12
House of Lords (Amendment) Bill (HL) 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk