My Lords, so far as I am concerned, the hereditaries may well remain by different arrangements when the Cranborne deal comes to an end.
The first of the four aspects of pre-emption is the exercise of the royal prerogative on the grant of life peerages under Clause 1(1) which are not for life. There is no time to go into it, really, but what about affinity with the monarch? That has at all costs to be retained, albeit reset constitutionally from time to time. Nobody seems to say anything about it.
The next pre-emption is foreclosure on the Cranborne deal. During the passage of the then Bill in March and May 1999, and again in March 2007, it was accepted by the Government that the deal was to end at stage 2 reform. I have the quotations, but there is not time for them. Whatever anyone else may think, there is no doubt that the Government are still the Government. They are committed to what they have agreed.
The third element of pre-emption is the wanton disregard—
House of Lords Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Friday, 20 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on House of Lords Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c510-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:04:08 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412978
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412978
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412978