It is not used often, and I fear that Governments might use it to clear out the rebellious Members whom they no longer wish to be in their party, which might be an attractive option for a Whip.
Local authorities in our country offer another example. They are on strict fixed terms, which encourage parties to work together. There is a legitimate question to ask those who favour the current system at national level: why are they not therefore calling for it to be extended to local government? Why not say that the leader of a county council or London borough may call a council election whenever they feel like doing so? That is such an absurd proposition that it throws into doubt the reasons of those people who want to maintain the present system at national level.
The principle of the Bill, which I hope will be endorsed on Second Reading, is simple: that elections should happen on a regular cycle that cannot be changed by purely ministerial action. Everything else in the Bill is detail, which I would be happy to discuss in Committee. I fear that some of the details might not be popular in some parts of the House, but I will be happy to discuss them at a later stage.
Fixed Term Parliaments Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Howarth
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 16 May 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Fixed Term Parliaments Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
475 c1706 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:48:35 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_473647
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_473647
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_473647