Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Steel of Aikwood (Liberal Democrat) 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, my noble friend behind me asked me earlier why there was a reference to a conviction for a serious criminal offence, and how that was defined. It is defined by the courts, not by Parliament. As I understand it, the current position in the Commons is that any offence for which a year's sentence is given must by definition be serious. I am not familiar with the details of the Road Traffic Acts, but my guess is that if somebody were not convicted in a magistrate’s court, because, as we have just heard from the Front Bench, sentences there are limited to six months, then it must be a very serious offence. It might be dangerous or reckless driving. I do not know. I am not an expert on that. I do not see why we should exempt one particular kind of serious offence just because we are rather partial to the Road Traffic Acts.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c501-2 
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