1-20 of 43 results for subject:Reform
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.259 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.011 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Reform
- We searched for
- subject_t:Reform OR subject_ses:92771
Primary member
X
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord (43)
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Statement on the NATO summit of 19 to 21 November 2010.
Statement on the NATO summit of 19 to 21 November 2010.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Armed forces; Deployment; ICT; Peacekeeping operations; Terrorism; Training; Security; Reform; Afghanistan; NATO; Russia; Military aid; NATO-Russia Council; Cuts
Date
22 November 2010
Reference
519 c23-37
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Thirteen years into government and 90 days before a general election, can the Prime Minister tell us what first attracted him to changing the voting system?
Thirteen years into government and 90 days before a general election, can the Prime Minister tell us what first attracted him to changing the voting system?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
3 February 2010
No one on the Opposition Benches seems to understand that the politics of the last year has changed for ever the way the public view the House of Commons and our parliamentary institutions or that the status quo cannot last and has to be changed. If the Conservatives want to defend the hereditary principle in the House of Lords, if they want to postpone reform of the House of Lords for more than 10 years and if they want to refuse the people a referendum on the alternative vote, they are making a mistake about what the British people are thinking. My message today is to the British people: we are prepared to change our constitution—and to change it for the better. We are for the alternative vote; the Opposition are for the hereditary vote.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform; Public expenditure
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
505 c295-6
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Why do we not go over some of the history? The last Liberal leader who got suckered into this was, of course, Paddy Ashdown. He wrote this in his diary about Tony Blair:""Time after time after time, he'd say 'Yeah Paddy, I agree, but I can't get it past Gordon.'""
He went on to say:""Gordon was the "primary block.""
Does not real improvement mean cutting the size of the House of Commons, cutting Ministers' pay, and complete transparency on expenses, but is not the one thing that we should not change the ability, at a general election in Britain, to get rid of a tired, incompetent, useless and divided Government?
Why do we not go over some of the history? The last Liberal leader who got suckered into this was, of course, Paddy Ashdown. He wrote this in his diary about Tony Blair:""Time after time after time, he'd say 'Yeah Paddy, I agree, but I can't get it past Gordon.'""
He went on to say:""Gordon was the "primary block.""
Does not real improvement mean cutting the size of the House of Commons, cutting Ministers' pay, and complete transparency on expenses, but is not the one thing that we should not change the ability, at a general election in Britain, to get rid of a tired, incompetent, useless and divided Government?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
3 February 2010
There would be no change under the Conservatives; no change at all. The right hon. Gentleman is supporting the hereditary principle in the House of Lords. He is supporting the—[Interruption.]
The right hon. Gentleman's answer is about no change. It is the politics of no change at all. He supports the hereditary principle in the House of Lords. He supports no reform of the House of Lords for a decade. He supports no referendum to allow the electorate to have a chance. This is a party that has fundamentally not changed at all. The Conservatives are the same as they always were. We will vote for the alternative vote; they are still voting for the hereditary vote.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform; Public expenditure
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
505 c296-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
It is back to the bunker time with that line. I do not know whether the Prime Minister pulled the secretary out of the chair before he typed that one, but it was a lot of old rubbish. The Prime Minister talks about the hereditary principle, but there is only one leader in this House who inherited his title. What a lot of rubbish! [Interruption.] It is good of the Chancellor to have a laugh.
The reason why the Prime Minister is in favour of the alternative vote is that it is election time. This is the man who ducked the leadership election and bottled the general election, and now he is trying to fiddle with the electoral system. He must think that the whole country is stupid. Have another go! Why are you doing it?
It is back to the bunker time with that line. I do not know whether the Prime Minister pulled the secretary out of the chair before he typed that one, but it was a lot of old rubbish. The Prime Minister talks about the hereditary principle, but there is only one leader in this House who inherited his title. What a lot of rubbish! [Interruption.] It is good of the Chancellor to have a laugh.
The reason why the Prime Minister is in favour of the alternative vote is that it is election time. This is the man who ducked the leadership election and bottled the general election, and now he is trying to fiddle with the electoral system. He must think that the whole country is stupid. Have another go! Why are you doing it?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
3 February 2010
This is the man who, at Christmas, promised us a policy-a-day blitz to show us the substance of the Conservative party if it were in government. We have had confusion over the married couples allowance, we have had chaos over public spending, we have had exaggerations about crime, and we have had the Conservatives retreating on the hereditary principle and now supporting it for the House of Lords. This is a Conservative party that is in a complete muddle and has no manifesto. The Conservatives do not have the substance to be able to govern the country. They are a shambles.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform; Public expenditure
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
505 c296
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Of course, but the point is that Kelly made a series of recommendations, and the Prime Minister said that the whole point of prolonging this Parliament was to put them into place. Many of these recommendations require legislation, so the legislation needs to be brought forward.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is about to stand up and deliver his pre-Budget report. He should be announcing measures to bring the deficit under control. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that we should show some leadership, and begin with this place? Will he therefore support our plans for a 5 per cent. cut in ministerial pay followed by a five-year freeze, and a 10 per cent. cut in the size of the House of Commons?
Of course, but the point is that Kelly made a series of recommendations, and the Prime Minister said that the whole point of prolonging this Parliament was to put them into place. Many of these recommendations require legislation, so the legislation needs to be brought forward.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer is about to stand up and deliver his pre-Budget report. He should be announcing measures to bring the deficit under control. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that we should show some leadership, and begin with this place? Will he therefore support our plans for a 5 per cent. cut in ministerial pay followed by a five-year freeze, and a 10 per cent. cut in the size of the House of Commons?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
9 December 2009
Our deficit reduction plan involves major changes in how government operates, including how Ministers and civil servants operate. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree with the measures that we are bringing forward. I would say to him that the reason why we have a deficit is that we have spent to take ourselves through the recession. If we had taken his advice, more people would have been unemployed, more small businesses would have gone under, more mortgage owners would have lost their homes, and we would be facing a higher deficit and higher debt as a result. Mr. Speaker, when I listen to him now, it seems to me that he has lost the art of communication, but not, alas, the gift of speech.
Subjects
House of Commons; Reform
Date
9 December 2009
Reference
502 c350-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I have to say to the Prime Minister that remarks such as that make him a figure of ridicule across this country. Everyone is entitled to ask what the Prime Minister's motive is. For 12 years there was not a squeak about electoral reform, but now that he has been trashed at two elections he suddenly wants to put it on the agenda.
This is all of a piece with the Prime Minister treating the nation like fools—expecting us to believe that the right hon. Member for Edinburgh, South-West (Mr. Darling) is his first choice as Chancellor, and telling us that he cancelled the election because he was going to win it. The Prime Minister said that he had "no plans" for a referendum. We all know what that means—he said that he had no plans to put up taxes in 1997. Instead of saying "no plans", let him stand up at that Dispatch Box and rule out a referendum.
I have to say to the Prime Minister that remarks such as that make him a figure of ridicule across this country. Everyone is entitled to ask what the Prime Minister's motive is. For 12 years there was not a squeak about electoral reform, but now that he has been trashed at two elections he suddenly wants to put it on the agenda.
This is all of a piece with the Prime Minister treating the nation like fools—expecting us to believe that the right hon. Member for Edinburgh, South-West (Mr. Darling) is his first choice as Chancellor, and telling us that he cancelled the election because he was going to win it. The Prime Minister said that he had "no plans" for a referendum. We all know what that means—he said that he had no plans to put up taxes in 1997. Instead of saying "no plans", let him stand up at that Dispatch Box and rule out a referendum.
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
I said that I had no plans, and I repeat that I have no plans. Is it not again remarkable? What MPs are being told by their constituents is that they should concentrate on getting the politics of this country sorted out, on getting us through the recession and on building us a better future. Not one question from the Leader of the Opposition has been about the central issues facing our country.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c787
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Everyone will agree with what the Prime Minister says about defeating the BNP, and it does mean all mainstream parties making sure that they go door to door and get their voters to go out and vote.
Let me ask about the process, and let us be clear about what the Prime Minister seems to be considering. We are in the fifth and final year of a Parliament, and there have been reports that a referendum is being considered for before the general election. Can the Prime Minister confirm those reports? Is that something that he is considering?
Everyone will agree with what the Prime Minister says about defeating the BNP, and it does mean all mainstream parties making sure that they go door to door and get their voters to go out and vote.
Let me ask about the process, and let us be clear about what the Prime Minister seems to be considering. We are in the fifth and final year of a Parliament, and there have been reports that a referendum is being considered for before the general election. Can the Prime Minister confirm those reports? Is that something that he is considering?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
There are no plans for that, and let me just say that when the right hon. Gentleman hears the statement later, he will hear that there is an interest throughout the country in what happens on electoral reform. We published a review—[Interruption.] I am sorry, but we published a review on electoral reform only a few months ago. That has led to a serious debate in the country, but we are not putting proposals forward today. If I may say so, I said that he had moved on to policy, but there seems to be an element of self-interest in the way that he is approaching—[Interruption.] Is it not strange—[Interruption.] Is it not strange, Mr. Speaker—[Interruption.]
...Is it not strange that the Opposition are not even interested in discussing that democratic reform, and that the first questions that the right hon. Gentleman asks on policy are not about the economy, not about the health service, not about education, not about public services—not about the issues that the public out there know that we and they are concerned about?
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c786-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
One of my plans for dealing with the recession was the same as the Prime Minister's last week—to sack the Chancellor. The Prime Minister might be talking about a second-preference voting system, but the fact is that he is left with a second-preference Chancellor.
On the issue of public spending, let us be clear about the answers that the Prime Minister has given. He said last week:""Public spending is rising every year"."
His Chancellor said:""I have cut overall public spending"."
The figures that the Prime Minister is hawking around are his own figures. He is planning to cut public spending by 7 per cent. in every Department over the next three years. The next election—when he has the guts to call it—will not be about Labour investment versus Tory cuts, but about the mismanagement—[Interruption.] It will be about the mismanagement of the public finances, the appalling deficit that he has left and his plan for cuts.
Let me just ask the Prime Minister this question. On the issue of electoral reform, why not admit that the current system gives the country the chance to throw out a Government who are weak, divided and incompetent? That election is what we should be having now.
One of my plans for dealing with the recession was the same as the Prime Minister's last week—to sack the Chancellor. The Prime Minister might be talking about a second-preference voting system, but the fact is that he is left with a second-preference Chancellor.
On the issue of public spending, let us be clear about the answers that the Prime Minister has given. He said last week:""Public spending is rising every year"."
His Chancellor said:""I have cut overall public spending"."
The figures that the Prime Minister is hawking around are his own figures. He is planning to cut public spending by 7 per cent. in every Department over the next three years. The next election—when he has the guts to call it—will not be about Labour investment versus Tory cuts, but about the mismanagement—[Interruption.] It will be about the mismanagement of the public finances, the appalling deficit that he has left and his plan for cuts.
Let me just ask the Prime Minister this question. On the issue of electoral reform, why not admit that the current system gives the country the chance to throw out a Government who are weak, divided and incompetent? That election is what we should be having now.
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
Let me read the figures for public spending, so that there is absolutely no doubt about the truth of what I am saying and that the right hon. Gentleman has got it wrong. Public spending this year is £621 billion; it rises next year to £672 billion—that is this financial year. It then rises to £702 billion, then to £717 billion, then to £738 billion and then to £758 billion. Those are public spending rises. The only party proposing a cut in public spending is the Conservative party.
The right hon. Gentleman is right. At the next election, there will be a choice: a choice between a Government who helped people and actively intervened to take us through a downturn and a Conservative party that would do nothing. [Interruption.]
...There will now be a choice between a Government who have actually intervened to deal with the recession and a Conservative party that said "do nothing". It will be a choice between a Government who are increasing public spending by the figures that I gave and a Conservative leader who, for the first time in the House of Commons during this Parliament, has now admitted that the policy of his party is spending cuts. That is what he has told us today; that is going to be the choice before the country.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c788
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister has chosen today to make a statement about constitutional reform; he cannot complain that I am asking questions about it. The Prime Minister talks about the economy, but let us be clear about what his legacy will be: not the most useless Government that we have had in history—although they are—but the biggest budget deficit in Europe and the biggest that we have had in our history. So let us be clear about "no plans" or "no proposals today", as he put it. A man with no democratic legitimacy, who has never been elected as our Prime Minister, who has been defeated every time the public have been able to vote for him, is now considering trying to fix the election rules before the next general election. Is that not what is happening?
The Prime Minister has chosen today to make a statement about constitutional reform; he cannot complain that I am asking questions about it. The Prime Minister talks about the economy, but let us be clear about what his legacy will be: not the most useless Government that we have had in history—although they are—but the biggest budget deficit in Europe and the biggest that we have had in our history. So let us be clear about "no plans" or "no proposals today", as he put it. A man with no democratic legitimacy, who has never been elected as our Prime Minister, who has been defeated every time the public have been able to vote for him, is now considering trying to fix the election rules before the next general election. Is that not what is happening?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
First of all, on public spending and deficits, let the right hon. Gentleman confirm that his proposals are for a 10 per cent. cut in most departmental expenditure. If he wishes to raise the question of deficits and debt, let him confirm that the proposal of the shadow Chancellor is now to cut public expenditure by 10 per cent., as confirmed by the shadow Health Secretary this morning.
Let us have a debate about the choice that really does exist in the country: between a Conservative party that now wants to cut, even at a time of recession, into our basic public services, and a Labour party that wants to invest in them. Let him also be honest with the country that when it comes to calling for an election, he has absolutely no plan for dealing with the recession. He has no policies for dealing with unemployment, no policies for dealing with small businesses and no policies for dealing with the problems of this country. He is an Opposition leader who has no plans for government, and he does not deserve to be in government.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c787-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am sure that you will agree that it is no good the Prime Minister saying, "Wait for the statement," when he has briefed all the details to the press. And, I have to say that, on asking questions about personalities, what is there left to ask when so many members of the Cabinet have walked out because they cannot work with him?
I want to ask the Prime Minister questions about the issue of electoral reform and the process that he intends to follow. On that issue, does he agree that a truly proportional system has massive drawbacks? Did we not see that on Sunday night, when the British National party, a bunch of fascist thugs, got two members elected to the European Parliament? Does he agree with me that that is a very, very strong argument against proportional systems?
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am sure that you will agree that it is no good the Prime Minister saying, "Wait for the statement," when he has briefed all the details to the press. And, I have to say that, on asking questions about personalities, what is there left to ask when so many members of the Cabinet have walked out because they cannot work with him?
I want to ask the Prime Minister questions about the issue of electoral reform and the process that he intends to follow. On that issue, does he agree that a truly proportional system has massive drawbacks? Did we not see that on Sunday night, when the British National party, a bunch of fascist thugs, got two members elected to the European Parliament? Does he agree with me that that is a very, very strong argument against proportional systems?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
Let the whole House send the message that the politics of discrimination, prejudice and bigotry have no part to play in the democratic life of our country. Let us all take action together to expose the racist and bigoted policies of the British National party. And, let us be clear that, on the Labour side of the House, we will do everything in our power to show that the problems that made people vote for the BNP are the problems that we are dealing with—on housing, on social justice and on employment. Nobody, however, will support the BNP's anti-Semitic policy or its policy that is even against mixed-race marriage. I believe that the whole country can unite on that.
What I say about electoral reform, however, is that I have never myself supported the policy of proportional representation for a Westminster Parliament; that has always been my view. The right hon. Gentleman has to accept that the policy of proportional representation exists for the European elections, and I do not see a proposal from his party to change it at the moment. He has to accept also that the Jenkins proposals for the additional vote plus PR laid down criteria by which it would be impossible for the British National party to hold a seat—even under the PR system—in the British Parliament, unless it won a constituency seat.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c785-6
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
When even the old-timers are reading out the Whips' handout questions, we know things are really bad for the Government. May I say how pleased I am to see the Prime Minister in his place? Let me be clear about what we think of electoral reform. We want to keep the existing system. We support the link between one MP and one constituency, and we back our system because weak, tired and discredited Governments can be thrown out. We supported the system when we were behind, when we were ahead, when we won, when we lost. Why has the Prime Minister suddenly discovered an interest in changing the electoral system? Does it have anything to do with the fact that his party got 15 per cent. of the vote last week?
When even the old-timers are reading out the Whips' handout questions, we know things are really bad for the Government. May I say how pleased I am to see the Prime Minister in his place? Let me be clear about what we think of electoral reform. We want to keep the existing system. We support the link between one MP and one constituency, and we back our system because weak, tired and discredited Governments can be thrown out. We supported the system when we were behind, when we were ahead, when we won, when we lost. Why has the Prime Minister suddenly discovered an interest in changing the electoral system? Does it have anything to do with the fact that his party got 15 per cent. of the vote last week?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 June 2009
Finally, after many, many weeks, a question on policy. Is it not remarkable that it has taken that amount of time for the Conservatives to come up with a question? [Hon. Members: "Answer."] The statement that I shall make in a few minutes, after 12.30, will deal with exactly those problems. I have to remind the right hon. Gentleman that there are different electoral systems in different parts of the United Kingdom, in many cases with the Conservative party's support. There is a different one in Northern Ireland, a different one in Scotland, a different one in Wales, a different one for the European Parliament, which is based on proportional representation, and a different one in the House of Commons. I shall deal with the issue in the constitutional statement in a few minutes.
Subjects
Electoral systems; Reform
Date
10 June 2009
Reference
493 c785
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister says that it is open to the House. That is so often his answer. What we want is some leadership to cut some of these costs. He seems to have such a tin ear to these issues. In an age where we are going to have to ask the public sector to do more for less, should we not start with ourselves? We have in the House of Commons 646—[Interruption.] ... I am just making the point—[Interruption.] ... The House of Commons has 646 MPs. We have one of the largest lower Houses in the western world—larger than in Spain, France, Germany and Italy. In fact, if we take the Lords and Commons together, we have more political representatives than any country other than China. Should we not reduce the cost of politics by asking the next Boundary Commission to reduce the size of the House of Commons?
The Prime Minister says that it is open to the House. That is so often his answer. What we want is some leadership to cut some of these costs. He seems to have such a tin ear to these issues. In an age where we are going to have to ask the public sector to do more for less, should we not start with ourselves? We have in the House of Commons 646—[Interruption.] ... I am just making the point—[Interruption.] ... The House of Commons has 646 MPs. We have one of the largest lower Houses in the western world—larger than in Spain, France, Germany and Italy. In fact, if we take the Lords and Commons together, we have more political representatives than any country other than China. Should we not reduce the cost of politics by asking the next Boundary Commission to reduce the size of the House of Commons?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
13 May 2009
Many of the countries that the right hon. Gentleman is talking about are federal systems that have not only central Parliaments but federal Parliaments. I do not know whether he is proposing that we make an instant judgment now to reduce the number of MPs by 50, 100 or 150. Those are matters that have to go before an independent commission and people have to look at the boundaries. On all these issues, I am trying to build a political consensus on change. I am trying to build a consensus across all—[Interruption.] ... I am trying to build a political consensus on change. It is unfortunate that we cannot today highlight those issues on which we agree that action needs to be taken immediately. That is the way forward for this House to restore trust in its affairs. We have got to deal immediately with the issues ahead of us. We have got to take the extreme action that I propose—I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to support it—and, at the same time, we have got to reform the expenses system. I think that today is a time for us all to come together to make the changes that are necessary.
Subjects
House of Commons; Reform
Date
13 May 2009
Reference
492 c849-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I must say to the Prime Minister that Spain and France are not federal systems, and they have much smaller Parliaments than we do. The Prime Minister says again that he wants to have an independent commission. I sometimes wonder whether—[Interruption.] ... Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the Prime Minister needs an independent commission to work out whether to have tea or coffee in the morning. Whether by putting expenses online, by cutting the cost of politics by abolishing the communications allowance, or by making this place smaller and more efficient, is it not time to wake up and see what is going on in the country? Is it not time for us to see ourselves as the rest of the country sees us? Is it not time to stop the talking and the endless committees, and start showing some real leadership to deliver some real change? How can we bring about the change this country needs if we cannot change ourselves?
I must say to the Prime Minister that Spain and France are not federal systems, and they have much smaller Parliaments than we do. The Prime Minister says again that he wants to have an independent commission. I sometimes wonder whether—[Interruption.] ... Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the Prime Minister needs an independent commission to work out whether to have tea or coffee in the morning. Whether by putting expenses online, by cutting the cost of politics by abolishing the communications allowance, or by making this place smaller and more efficient, is it not time to wake up and see what is going on in the country? Is it not time for us to see ourselves as the rest of the country sees us? Is it not time to stop the talking and the endless committees, and start showing some real leadership to deliver some real change? How can we bring about the change this country needs if we cannot change ourselves?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
13 May 2009
It is precisely because we have to change that these radical proposals are being put forward. I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman has chosen today to divide on issues, instead of to concentrate on the issues on which we agree. I think everybody will agree that this is a problem of the political system that has got to be dealt with by all of us. If we are to restore confidence in politics, that means restoring confidence in all of politics, and it means all Members of Parliament being part of that process of restoring confidence. Leadership is about the whole of the political system responding to the changes that need to be made, and leadership is me saying to all the political parties that they have got to act immediately to change the system. I hope that, on reflection, the right hon. Gentleman will agree that what is most important for politics today is to move forward with the changes on which we can agree and that are urgently necessary. Of course we should discuss other issues over a period of time, but we must discuss them in a way that is non-partisan so that we can reach proper agreement.
Subjects
House of Commons; Reform
Date
13 May 2009
Reference
492 c850
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
We have gone from ““all prisoners”” to ““all significant prisoners””, and now we have got the ““vast bulk””—the Prime Minister is making it up as he goes along. That is an example of a Government in complete paralysis. Let me give him another example: he has said that the Human Rights Act 1998 has led to an abuse of common sense and that he will review it, and a few moments ago he said that perhaps the House of Commons will legislate. Three years ago, however, in January 2003, he announced a review of the operation of the Act—what happened to that review?
We have gone from ““all prisoners”” to ““all significant prisoners””, and now we have got the ““vast bulk””—the Prime Minister is making it up as he goes along. That is an example of a Government in complete paralysis. Let me give him another example: he has said that the Human Rights Act 1998 has led to an abuse of common sense and that he will review it, and a few moments ago he said that perhaps the House of Commons will legislate. Three years ago, however, in January 2003, he announced a review of the operation of the Act—what happened to that review?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
17 May 2006
It was precisely because we believed it important to rebalance the system that we introduced, for example, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which allowed us to take money off those suspected of being involved in drug dealing. It was for precisely that reason that we introduced the antisocial behaviour legislation. And it was for precisely that reason that we introduced the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed us to impose mandatory minimum sentences on people carrying illegal firearms. What those things have in common is that the Conservative party either opposed them or refused to vote for them. Yes; we will make sure that our human rights legislation does not get in the way of commonsense legislation to protect our country. However, when we have tried to legislate to toughen up the law, the Liberal Democrats have opposed all the measures and the right hon. Gentleman has opposed most of them.
Legislation
Human Rights Act 1998
Subjects
Administration of justice; Deportation; Human rights; Law; Offenders; Reform; Reviews
Date
17 May 2006
Reference
446 c990
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
He will see me in the Lobbies. We back school freedom. That is 200 of us. If he can just find 150 of his own MPs, we can get on and pass the Bill.
Two former Cabinet Ministers, the right hon. Members for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) and for Darlington (Mr. Milburn), have said that the Prime Minister's position would be untenable if he relied on Conservative support. Does he agree that that is nonsense and that he should just get on and do the right thing for school standards and for our children?
He will see me in the Lobbies. We back school freedom. That is 200 of us. If he can just find 150 of his own MPs, we can get on and pass the Bill.
Two former Cabinet Ministers, the right hon. Members for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) and for Darlington (Mr. Milburn), have said that the Prime Minister's position would be untenable if he relied on Conservative support. Does he agree that that is nonsense and that he should just get on and do the right thing for school standards and for our children?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
We are doing the right thing for our children. What we have done so far as a result of the changes and the investment and reform in our schools is that we have raised standards substantially. We have 100,000 extra staff in our schools—teachers and teaching assistants—the biggest ever building programme for schools is under way, and this country's schools have had the best results they have ever had for children at the ages of 11, 16 and 18. We will continue to do the right thing for children in our country because we want to ensure that every child, no matter what their background, gets the best start in life.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Good, so trust schools remain. That is important. That is clear. Let me try to clarify something else. The Government's White Paper said that local authorities would not be able to provide new schools. The Prime Minister made a concession and said that they could, but that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills would have a veto. Will he confirm that, as the Bill goes through the House, that veto will remain in the Bill?
Good, so trust schools remain. That is important. That is clear. Let me try to clarify something else. The Government's White Paper said that local authorities would not be able to provide new schools. The Prime Minister made a concession and said that they could, but that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills would have a veto. Will he confirm that, as the Bill goes through the House, that veto will remain in the Bill?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
It has to remain for this reason. We have made this clear all the way through. The change was made because we listened to the Local Government Association, which includes Conservative as well as Labour members, which said that, if the driving force behind this is parental choice and parents want a new community school, it seems a bit much to prevent local authorities from being in the competition to provide a new school. However, let me emphasise that, if a local authority proposes a new community school, it is not then the deciding authority. That decision is made by the adjudicator. Of course, the Secretary of State has to have the power to ensure that it is in accordance with parental choice.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Good, so the veto remains in the Bill. Given that the Prime Minister has our support, he does not have to make any further concessions to the rebels, so will he make it clear that the Bill will not be weakened any further?
Good, so the veto remains in the Bill. Given that the Prime Minister has our support, he does not have to make any further concessions to the rebels, so will he make it clear that the Bill will not be weakened any further?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
Yes, I do make that clear, but let me say to the right hon. Gentleman that I do not know whether he agrees with what we have done, with local authorities being able to propose community schools. If he does—both Conservative and Labour members of the Local Government Association have said that that should happen—that is a point of agreement between us. Also, as far as I am aware, he now supports us on selection and agrees that we should put in safeguards against selection. So we now have a very happy consensus between us and I look forward to seeing him in the Lobbies.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
May I join the Prime Minister in expressing our sympathy for the families of the two British soldiers who died in Iraq yesterday? They died serving our country, and we should honour their memory. I also agree with what the Prime Minister said about Mr. Speaker, and wish him a speedy return.
On a happier note, may I thank the Prime Minister for the flowers that he sent to my family? He may not know that I received flowers from both No. 10 and No. 11. I am delighted to be the first man in history to get bunched by both our Prime Ministers.
Yesterday the Government published their Education and Inspections Bill. The phrase ““trust schools””, which appeared throughout the White Paper, has now disappeared. Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is renaming those schools ““foundation schools,”” and that they will have all the same freedoms?
May I join the Prime Minister in expressing our sympathy for the families of the two British soldiers who died in Iraq yesterday? They died serving our country, and we should honour their memory. I also agree with what the Prime Minister said about Mr. Speaker, and wish him a speedy return.
On a happier note, may I thank the Prime Minister for the flowers that he sent to my family? He may not know that I received flowers from both No. 10 and No. 11. I am delighted to be the first man in history to get bunched by both our Prime Ministers.
Yesterday the Government published their Education and Inspections Bill. The phrase ““trust schools””, which appeared throughout the White Paper, has now disappeared. Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is renaming those schools ““foundation schools,”” and that they will have all the same freedoms?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
Let me first congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the birth of his child, wish him and his family well, and say thank you to him for his thanks to me for the flowers? I am glad that the Chancellor was immensely generous in sending him flowers as well. Whether he will be as generous in the Budget I do not know. I certainly hope that that is the limit of his generosity to the right hon. Gentleman. We do not for legal reasons need to mention the words ““trust school””. It is exactly the same for specialist schools, which are not mentioned in legislation either. However, the trust schools will have exactly the freedoms that we have set out in the legislation and those freedoms will allow schools by a simple vote of their governing body to become self-governing trust schools.
Subjects
Education; Foundation schools; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c249-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I love it—[Interruption.]
I love getting a lecture in consistency from a Prime Minister who spent all week in reverse gear. Perhaps he could have a word with the Chancellor, who has just endorsed a book that says Iraq was an unjust war. Is it not time that the Prime Minister faced down the rebels and did the right thing for teachers, parents and pupils? Why is he trying to appease those who do not want reform when he could be working with those who want it?
I love it—[Interruption.]
I love getting a lecture in consistency from a Prime Minister who spent all week in reverse gear. Perhaps he could have a word with the Chancellor, who has just endorsed a book that says Iraq was an unjust war. Is it not time that the Prime Minister faced down the rebels and did the right thing for teachers, parents and pupils? Why is he trying to appease those who do not want reform when he could be working with those who want it?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
8 February 2006
I do not know about me facing anything down, but it is about time that the right hon. Gentleman faced the same way for more than a day at a time. The fact of the matter is that we will have those freedoms in schools but, yes, we will ensure that they cannot go back to academic selection. I thought that we both agreed on that. I hope that he will do that now, as well as reversing the following Conservative policies: the patient's passport; the foundation hospitals; the asylum quotas; section 28; the licensing laws—does he remember those?—and opposition to antisocial behaviour. I hope that in respect of all those, and more, he will reverse the Conservative position, but in particular tell us now how much he regrets voting against the extra investment for schools and hospitals. Once he has completed those U-turns, we will know where he stands—but he will not stand with any credibility anywhere. [Interruption].
Subjects
Education; Reform
Date
8 February 2006
Reference
442 c872
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I love it. One minute we have big concessions to win over Back Benchers; the next minute we have no changes at all. Instead of flip-flopping, why cannot the right hon. Gentleman get out and sell the reforms? [Interruption.]
Whatever happened to the right hon. Gentleman leading his party, not following it? Whatever happened to no reverse gear? Whatever happened to the historic turning point? If he keeps turning, it is not going to be very historic.
Given that the right hon. Gentleman has Opposition support, will he make it clear: no more concessions?
I love it. One minute we have big concessions to win over Back Benchers; the next minute we have no changes at all. Instead of flip-flopping, why cannot the right hon. Gentleman get out and sell the reforms? [Interruption.]
Whatever happened to the right hon. Gentleman leading his party, not following it? Whatever happened to no reverse gear? Whatever happened to the historic turning point? If he keeps turning, it is not going to be very historic.
Given that the right hon. Gentleman has Opposition support, will he make it clear: no more concessions?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
8 February 2006
I see that the right hon. Gentleman has raised the issue of flip-flopping. I have with me a leaflet that has just been put out in the Dunfermline and West Fife by-election with a letter from one David Cameron. It says:"““I'm a liberal Conservative.””"
It also says:"““Issues that once divided Conservatives from Liberal Democrats are now issues where we both agree””—"
like Iraq. Is that the same man who two weeks ago told The Daily Telegraph:"““I am, and always have been, a Conservative to the core of my being””?"
One week ago, he was the heir to new Labour; today he is a Liberal Conservative. No wonder he is against identity cards.
Subjects
Education; Higher education; Reform
Date
8 February 2006
Reference
442 c871-2
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons