Before I deal with the substance of the amendments, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wonder whether I would be allowed to put on record my deep shock and sorrow at the death of Lord Kingsland, of which I learned yesterday. I have recently had a great deal to do with Lord Kingsland, although I did not know him particularly well before that. I talked to him only last Thursday in the context of the Parliamentary Standards Bill. I know that I speak for all Labour Members in saying that everybody who dealt with him found him utterly delightful, courteous, and firm in his opinions but ready to concede that others have opinions. I would like to send my deepest condolences to his family and friends, and to his party.
The amendments arise from those moved by Lord Campbell-Savours in the other place during a well-attended debate on 15 June. At that time—I had expressed this view in this House—the Government advised the other place to vote against amendments that would have had the effect of making donations impermissible unless the donors met standard conditions for a permissible donation and, in addition, were ordinarily resident and domiciled within the United Kingdom. My noble Friend Lord Bach spoke, at Hansard column 914, about the Government's serious concerns about the amendments on what he described as "principled, practical and legal grounds", and set out the position of the Government. It is no great secret that that has indeed been the Government's position.
No one, least of all myself, has a difficulty with the idea that those who make donations to political parties, like those who participate more widely, should have a clear and practical connection with our democracy, not just a technical one. The issue is not one of sentiment but about the matters to which my noble Friend referred in the other place.
As my right hon. Friend the Minister of State said a short while ago, we in this House have to take account of sentiment here, among all parties and on the Back Benches as well as the Front Benches, as well as sentiment in the other place. That does not mean that we simply accept every amendment that is moved, but two things were striking when the matter came before the other place. One was the extent of the alliance that led to the amendments tabled by Lord Campbell-Savours going through, and the other was the difficulty that both the Conservative and Labour Front-Bench teams, if I may say so, found in encouraging otherwise loyal party supporters into the Lobby.
There has subsequently been a lot of discussion, and I understand the concern of the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude) about the short time in which the amendments were tabled. We sought to consider actively whether there was any basis on which we could accept the principle behind the Lords amendments. However, in producing our amendments we had to acknowledge that although Lord Campbell-Savours did his best with his amendments, which are found in Lords amendments 11 and 12 and in clause 9 of the Bill as it came out of the other place, they were completely technically unworkable and complicated. I think that Lord Campbell-Savours and his supporters in this place accept that.
Political Parties and Elections Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jack Straw
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 13 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Political Parties and Elections Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
496 c58-9 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:00:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577043
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577043
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577043