No, the hon. Gentleman has had his turn.
I support my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Alan Duncan), who moved the amendment, and I hope that the Lord Chancellor will look at it carefully and understand why we need it. The measure worked perfectly well in the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, as we were able to make sure that we constantly revisit legislation we may have concerns about.
We have rushed the Bill through. We would not need the sunset clause if we had not done so. We are now seeing clauses knocked out at the last moment, and promises made across the Floor of the House that in the other place—the unelected Chamber—changes will have to be made. That is not right. The hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) made a powerful speech, in which he talked about our taking control of the affairs of the House. What we have shown in the past two days is that we are not fit to take control of anything, because we would rather have an unelected House do our work for us—that work is relevant to us, not to them—which is absurd. The reason for the sunset clause is clear: we need to revisit the measure in time to make sure that any mistakes can be rectified.
The problem is absolutely clear. It is simply that our expenses system has been abused and is weak, but we could change it in short order. We did not need a series of major changes to our rights, responsibilities and privileges, cobbled together on the back of that requirement. What has happened, on the whim of the Prime Minister, is that we now have this extraordinary piece of legislation, which is ill-thought-through and liable to major change in another place. Surely the purpose tonight is not to be party political. The purpose—[Interruption.] People may laugh about that, but this is not party political. If the hon. Gentleman had an iota of courage—and he does not need to look at me like that, because I voted against my Government on many occasions—instead of sneering he would vote for the amendment, knowing that he voted for those who come after him to take control of this place. Surely this is the point: let us make sure that we have a chance to revisit the measure, and overturn it if necessary.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Iain Duncan Smith
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
495 c403-4 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:19:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573087
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573087
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573087