Proceeding contribution from Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 March 2012. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Scotland Bill.
Scotland Bill
I can understand why my noble friend says that using this Bill to discuss or legislate for a referendum might not have seemed appropriate. However, if the amendments had not been put down all those months ago by the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, and myself, and if the pressure had not been put on the Government, does my noble friend think that we would have had two consultative documents? Does he think that we would have achieved what we have achieved today? Is there not extra advantage in putting down amendments, even though at the end of the day they may have to be withdrawn? Does it not achieve something in the end, and has something not been achieved in relation to this?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 736 c987
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Devolved matters Accountability Devolution Aggregates levy Block grant Electoral Commission Legislative competence Excise duties Legislation Powers Referendums Parliamentary scrutiny Public finance Scotland Tax allowances Scottish Parliament Taxation Tax rates and bands Shetland Orkney Rockall Scottish Government Legislative consent motions
- Legislation
- Scotland Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:11:04 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186