We have had an interesting debate and it will not surprise hon. Members to hear me say that we will ask the Committee not to support the amendments. We ask for the amendment to be withdrawn, although I do not suppose that it will be.
I want to deal with the various points that have been made and then deal with a point of principle as to why we are objecting. The right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) said that, unless the amendments were accepted, the status of the second Chamber would be diminished. His colleague, the hon. Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley), made the opposite point; he did not see why the movement of a Member from this place to the other place diminished the position of this place. He is absolutely right. A Member of the other place wanting to come here does not diminish the status of the second Chamber—it has a discrete and different function—any more than a Member of this place moving to the other place, as many have done over the years, diminishes the status of this place. Those individuals are at a different stage of their life and are seeking fulfilment in public service in a different way. That is the function of the two different Chambers.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Wills
(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 c763-4 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:39:51 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615040
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615040
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615040