That is a very serious point that I have considered. Probably, one cannot be doctrinaire about it. I am inclined to answer that question in an ad hominem way. If I were the Prime Minister, I would be inclined to ask myself whether the GOAT in question was likely to make a continuing contribution after he or she ceased to be a Minister. If the answer to that was no, I would appoint the GOAT for the period for which the GOAT was likely to remain in the field, and not beyond. If, on the other hand, I thought that the GOAT was likely to make a continuing contribution to us all, I would give the GOAT a longer expectation of life.
My final point is on reappointments. Assuming that we go down the road of fixed-term peerages, which I commend to the Committee, and assuming, too, that the period is quite long, we might well find, at the end of the stated period, that the person still has a real contribution to make. I hope that in those circumstances, the person could be reappointed for a further term, albeit a further term of significantly shorter duration than the original term. That does not fall within the scope of the amendments—I do not think that it has to—but it is a proviso that I would make to the Committee.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Hailsham
(Conservative)
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 c736-7 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:36:59 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614968
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614968
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_614968