Proceeding contribution from Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 1 May 2012. It occurred during Debate on select committee report on Draft House of Lords Reform Bill.
Draft House of Lords Reform Bill
My Lords, my noble friend Lady Andrews is right to say that this has been a fascinating debate. I, too, pay tribute to my noble friend Lord Richard, his committee and the clerks for the work that they have done. However, we are also indebted to those members of the Select Committee who produced the alternative report. Taken together, they provide an invaluable reference point for our future debates on reform of your Lordships’ House. In this excellent debate many noble Lords have questioned the priority that the Government are giving to Lords reform when our economy is in such a perilous position. I agree with that. Over these two days of debate some noble Lords have argued that reform of the second Chamber cannot be considered in isolation from other constitutional issues such as a referendum in Scotland and other changes that the Government are making or have made. I agree with that. However, we will have further ample opportunity to debate those wider issues when we discuss the Queen’s Speech. I would like to focus my remarks on the role and powers of an elected second Chamber and its relationship with the Commons. The Joint Committee has identified this, as have most other noble Lords, as going to the heart of the controversy over Lords reform. The noble Lord, Lord Tyler, teases me about my position and that of the Opposition. I make it clear that the Official Opposition support reform of your Lordships’ House. We are proud of the legislation that we introduced in 1999, which removed most of the hereditary Peers. In the years since, this House has become ever more effective as a House of scrutiny and revision. It is this House that has held Ministers properly to account and has so often saved Governments from themselves. Would the other place have acted similarly? I want to see reforms make us better still. The Official Opposition support an elected House. However, that must not be at the expense of primacy of the Commons, nor must it threaten gridlock or detract from our role as an effective revising Chamber. Further, these changes should take place only with the specific consent of the British people. Mr Clegg told the other place on 20 March 2012 that nothing in his plans would change the primacy of the Commons. Remarkably, he denied that there was an automatic link between changing the composition of the Lords and changing the balance of power between the two Houses.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 736 c2100
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Elections House of Lords House of Commons House of Lords composition Electoral systems Pay Powers Public appointments Referendums Peers Reform Transitional arrangements Length of service
- Legislation
- Parliament Act 1911
- Parliament Act 1949
- Draft House of Lords Reform Bill
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:12:45 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_827346
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_827346
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_827346