No; the hon. and learned Gentleman asked me a question, and I am giving him an answer.
Moreover, it must be true—the noble Lord Steel, who as far as I know believes in an appointed Chamber, has made the same point—that the principal arrangement in respect of which the original commitment was given concerned the 90 hereditary peers who were retained. The by-elections came later. Yes, we confirmed them, but the original deal was in respect of those 90 peers. Now we have the completely absurd, risible system of by-elections, which cannot continue.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jack Straw
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 January 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
504 c695 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 09:57:19 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614828