Skip to main content

1-20 of 44 results for subject:Peers

Member X
Lord Campbell of Alloway

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Campbell of Alloway, Lord (44)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

My Lords, I want to make a very short intervention because everything I have on my notes has been said by my noble friend Lord Wakeham and the noble Lord, Lord Grenfell, so really there is little more to say but this. The question is: are we to retain a...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
8 November 2011
Reference
732 c134-5
House
House of Lords

On the question of the agreement: an agreement is an agreement. I have supported that agreement on three occasions. Of course, I am not a hereditary Peer but an agreement is an agreement, and I fully understood the circumstances in which it was made. I shall not take very much...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
21 October 2011
Reference
731 c465
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I have a question that is relevant to what was said. It was not an agreement for all time, if the noble Lord will accept that, but an agreement until a certain event took place, which was a substantive amendment of the constitution. That was the agreement. Forgive...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
21 October 2011
Reference
731 c466
House
House of Lords

I am very confused. I am not being wicked about this, but I did not understand what the noble Lord was saying. Is he suggesting that we should abolish this House?

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 June 2011
Reference
728 c1261
House
House of Lords

My Lords, it is a privilege to speak after the noble Lords, Lord Armstrong of Ilminster, Lord Norton and Lord Grenfell. The analysis put forward this morning is really all that is required to support the argument for maintaining the appointed House. Like everyone who spoke yesterday in favour of...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 June 2011
Reference
728 c1258-9
House
House of Lords

My Lords, perhaps the noble Lord will forgive me, but this is the 20th time that he has referred to his concept of democracy. Quite frankly, does he not realise that the people do not understand the Lib Dem concept of democracy?

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
21 June 2011
Reference
728 c1168
House
House of Lords

Perhaps I may ask my noble friend two very short questions. Whatever may be the option, is it not wholly essential that the due process by which any Member of this House has imposed a leave of absence should first be accepted by the House? Secondly, in respect of all...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 November 2010
Reference
722 c682
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does this Question not pre-empt the decision of this House as to whether it will retain an appointed Chamber? Is it really possible to consider this, which is a matter of cost, when retention of the Chamber as constituted is a matter of quality of advice to the nation?
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
26 October 2010
Reference
721 c1123
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I do not have a prepared speech, but I made a few jottings and shall try to deal with them in relation to what has been said. At this stage of the debate, it is just as well that I did not try to make a speech, because...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
29 June 2010
Reference
719 c1721-2
House
House of Lords

Is my noble friend the Leader of the House aware that there is another point of view? On 5 July, the question of due process concerning the setting up of this committee and its functions is due for consideration. There are two views. One is that of my noble friend...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
29 June 2010
Reference
719 c1665
House
House of Lords

I apologise for interrupting but exactly the same problem is raised by the intervention of my noble friend and the noble Baroness’s reply. We come again to the question of due process, which must be dealt with long before a Joint Committee is in place to scrutinise the Bill. At...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
29 June 2010
Reference
719 c1671
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I do not want to challenge in any way the recommendations of my noble friend the Leader of the House but, for clarification, was the proposal of my noble friend Lord Wakeham accepted by the committee or was it not?

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
28 June 2010
Reference
719 c1518
House
House of Lords

Answer the question.

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2009
Reference
715 c1402
House
House of Lords

My Lords, is it too late to intervene? If not, I should like to say just one thing. Is this not another example of the problems of the Back Benches, which are not exercisable under the authority of the usual channels?

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2009
Reference
715 c1402
House
House of Lords

I believe that it is.

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 December 2009
Reference
715 c1402
House
House of Lords

My Lords, after so many long and magnificent speeches, I shall be very brief. Nothing has yet been said, apart from by the noble and learned Lord who has just spoken, of any great merit about what the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, is really getting at. I support him because...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
30 November 2009
Reference
715 c613
House
House of Lords

My Lords, it is a sheer privilege and pleasure to follow the noble and right reverend Lord, who enlivens the House. I agree with everything that he said, albeit that I have been here for 20 years and am 92. I accept totally what he says about 15-year terms, although...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 November 2009
Reference
715 c222-3
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I attended this debate not to speak but to listen. I was greatly impressed by the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, because he hit the nail straight on the head; that is, that an evolutionary process is our constitutional tradition. It is evolutionary and, in this...

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
27 February 2009
Reference
708 c464-5
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I apologise for intervening. The noble Lord talks about a strong case. Is there not a strong case for the retention of our position under our Standing Orders—indeed, a stronger case if you look forward a little? Will the Government reconsider their attitude on this aspect?

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
27 February 2009
Reference
708 c491
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I did not intend to speak but I happen to know, because I was told by the noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury—the then noble Viscount, Lord Cranborne—that that was not modified. That was part of the verbal deal made between him and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine....

Member
Lord Campbell of Alloway (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 February 2008
Reference
699 c404
House
House of Lords