Proceeding contribution from Lord Browne of Ladyton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 January 2012. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Scotland Bill.
Scotland Bill
I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for continuing my education. I am better informed than I was when I rose to speak. I have to say that when I started in my political life, the people of Wales and the Labour Party were almost synonymous. In any event, one of the consequences of our generous devolution of power has been that with proportional representation in the political colour of the United Kingdom, parties have taken advantage of opportunities. I accept that and it is all part of democracy. I am not arguing for maintaining the status quo because of the outcome. In fact, I pray in aid Arbuthnott. The Arbuthnott commission was set up to look into constituency boundaries for the Scottish Parliament, because there was an issue of divergence of boundaries between the Scottish Parliament and the United Kingdom Parliament, and voting and representation in Scotland. I have an extract of the commission’s report, entitled Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland. I am looking at paragraphs 4.5 onwards. In moving his amendment, my noble friend quoted from Arbuthnott. I do not intend to quote all these 12 or 13 paragraphs, but they seem to set out a very coherent argument for why it would be inappropriate to depart by law from what has become the practice of dual candidacy. With all due respect to my noble friend, I will read the conclusion, paragraph 4.60, which in a sense contradicts some of the thinking. It states: "““The Commission believes that preventing dual candidacy would be undemocratic and agrees that it would place””—" and here I think it is quoting a witness— "““‘an unnecessary restriction on the democratic rights of potential candidates, parties and local electors to have as unrestricted a choice as possible in an election’.””." Certainly, in Scotland, as a consequence of divergent party practice, in a situation that permitted dual candidacy, there is a belief that people took advantage. In my view, political parties just need to learn to make the best of the circumstances in which they are operating and then we can all take advantage of the circumstances, rather than changing the circumstances or the opportunities that other people take advantage of.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 734 c1222-3
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Devolved matters Constituencies Administration Age Devolution Elections Legislative competence Legislation Electoral systems Fixed-term parliaments Dual mandate Ministerial powers Powers Members Referendums Ministers Parliamentary session Scotland Voting rights Scottish Parliament Supreme Court Scottish National Party Independent members Reserved matters Legislative consent motions Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament
- Legislation
- Scotland Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 18:45:57 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_804585
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_804585
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_804585