I wish to comment briefly on the remarks made by the noble and learned Lord. He touches on some extremely important points. Just how permissible it is for us to comment on arrangements proposed for the other House, I am not sure, but I would suggest that the two points that he has made are different in character. The first suggests that Members should be paid a taxable salary. That is probably key to part of the solution to the problems of the other place. Indeed, the noble and learned Lord may have noticed that the Prime Minister himself made a suggestion of this kind not all that long ago.
In the second part of the amendment, the noble and learned Lord refers to, ""reasonable needs … to maintain homes near Westminster and in or near their constituencies"."
Here we are in far more difficult territory. It is one of the reasons why the previous scheme got into such difficulties in the House of Commons. One therefore ought to separate these two ideas. While I agree strongly with the first of the noble and learned Lord’s ideas, I am very doubtful about the second.
Parliamentary Standards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bridges
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 July 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Parliamentary Standards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c1093 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:47:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577448
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577448
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577448