Proceeding contribution from Viscount Astor (Conservative) 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, when I looked just now at the amendment that I had put down, I thought to myself, ““Why on earth did I put it down?”” Luckily, some inspiration came to me and I remembered. The amendment would remove Clause 18(1). I put it down because I was unclear as to why Parts 1 and 3 should not come into force for three months. On Part 1, I realise that it would take some time to set up the appointments commission, which I presume is the reason. Therefore, I perhaps should not have included Part 1 in the amendment and I apologise to the noble Lord, Lord Steel. In any event, he does not wish to proceed with Part 1. However, it is relevant to ask my noble friend about Part 3. I was unclear on why Part 3, on permanent leave of absence and failure to attend the House, should not come into force at the same time as the rest of the Act. It seemed to me that there was no reason to delay Part 3 being enacted when the Bill is passed. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 731 c512-3
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:34:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776661
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776661
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_776661