Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

Thank you, Sir Michael. I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for that suggestion, which would very much aid the dispatch of business. I will, if I may, carry straight on and speak to clause 31 and the schedule. The significant characteristic of the expulsion resolution is that, by definition, it is not automatic: it requires the exercise of discretion by the House. This may take place, for example, if a Member has been convicted of and sentenced for a relatively serious criminal offence but one that did not attract a sentence of 12 months or more and therefore did not meet the condition for automatic disqualification—for example, a case of fraud where the sentence handed out is less than 12 months but the nature of the misconduct may be construed as incompatible with the unique position of trust that is occupied by Members of the House. The mechanism to effect the loss of a membership is identical to that for automatic disqualification; in other words, it is the loss of the entitlement to the writ of summons and a provision that any writ of summons that had already been issued is ineffective. Clause 30 provides the power of removal for Members who wish to relinquish their membership by exercising the right provided under clause 32. The mechanism for removal is the same as the discipline provisions, and this accounts for all the removal powers being grouped in this clause. There should be no assumption—I want to make this absolutely clear—that the removal provision for resignation exists primarily to allow Members who have committed misconduct to do the honourable thing, as it were. There are many perfectly honourable reasons for Members wishing to resign—