I accept the hon. and learned Gentleman's point, but if the Government are to make adequate provision, the Bill must cover more than the Opposition suggest. If Sir Christopher Kelly reports in the autumn, we will say that we need time to digest the contents and to prepare legislation. Meanwhile, many Members will scream that a general election is needed urgently. On the one hand, some hon. Members claim that we must take time to do things properly, while on the other, they scream that they want a general election urgently. They also say that they want the matter resolved before the end of the Parliament, so that it is not a problem in the general election campaign or for the new Parliament, which would have to legislate on expenses.
People cannot have it every which way, but that is what they seem to be trying to achieve in this debate. The Government are right that we need clear legislation to be ready to plug in properly to the various Kelly recommendations. That legislation needs to be fully in place and fully activated, hopefully well before a general election. All the preparatory work—not just the preparatory legislative work, but the work to set up the authority and to scope out its requirements—needs to follow the passage of the legislation, which is why that legislation needs to be in place before the recess.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mark Durkan
(Social Democratic & Labour Party)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 29 June 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c113 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:23:32 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571759
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571759
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_571759