No, that was not the point that I was about to make.
I was going to say that we should not make the best the enemy of the good. There seems to be no one who will defend the principle behind the election of hereditary peers. No one has done so today. Every argument has been a body swerve. Furthermore, we all believe that this will be a step, albeit a modest one, towards reform. I hope that everyone accepts that keeping the hereditary by-elections would not be a provocation for further reform but simply a blockage to the further reform to which all the parties are apparently committed. If we add all that together, we can see a strong case—which was made most eloquently by the hon. Member for Chichester—in favour of this change, and not much of a case against it. With that, I commend the clause to the House.
Question put, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
The House divided: Ayes 318, Noes 142.
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 c727 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 09:57:26 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614955
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614955
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614955