Parliamentary Standards Bill

My Lords, I shall speak briefly. There is a good article in the Times today that makes the case for public policy being evidence-based. It is clearly a very powerful case. My concern is that the Bill would not fall into that category. It has been justified by the argument that the public are outraged and demand action. I do not dissent from that view, but we have been presented with no evidence that the Bill constitutes the action that the public demand. My concern is that it has been rushed through in order to assuage public concern and may not be that well directed at achieving that. We were told that the offence that we were discussing on Report sends a clear signal to MPs. My concern is that it may be used simply to send a signal to constituents that something has been done. I am not at all clear about whether this is the action that should have been taken. It would have been better if we had had the time to discuss the Bill in some depth, so I reiterate my criticism of the process because we cannot discuss the substance without having the time to do so and to make sure that we are proceeding on the basis of clear evidence. Having said that, I get to my feet really to pay tribute to the Leader of the House, who has done an extraordinarily good job in responding to the concerns of the House. She has been receptive, has listened to what has been said and has operated as the Leader of the House, for which she deserves enormous credit. Although I am still very critical of the Bill, it is a less bad Bill as a result of what has been done in your Lordships’ House. The noble Baroness has facilitated that enormously, so we should place on record all the hard work that she has done on the Bill on behalf of the House.