Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

Clearly, it is theoretically possible that there could be an enormously wealthy bishop who was escaping large amounts of taxation in this way, but I am not aware of any in that position. It is important to look at the facts to see why we have taken this view; obviously, all these matters are proportionate. Bishops in the House of Lords do not accept a peerage—they assume the position as a result of their profession as a bishop in the Church of England. If there were to be such a bishop who was non-domiciled and not ordinarily resident and who had these advantageous tax arrangements, then under these new clauses, they would, if they were not exempt, have to cease their profession, because the only way that they could cease to be a Member of the House of Lords would be to stop being a bishop. I understand the hon. Gentleman's theoretical concern, but I remind him that the Labour party is committed, in the next term of a Labour Government, to moving to a wholly elected second Chamber; in that context, this issue does not arise. I ask him to reflect on my remarks about what might be considered to be a disproportionate response to a situation in the distant future that is very unlikely to materialise. However, I am happy to consider any further representations that he may wish to make on this particular point. The new clauses will come into force when the Bill receives Royal Assent so that they may apply to the next Parliament. As such, amendment 132 makes the necessary amendments to part 9 of the Bill. Amendment 134 is a technical amendment to the long title of the Bill to reflect the addition of the new clauses. These amendments to the Bill clearly demonstrate that we are able to respond to the legitimate concerns of the public and that we are willing and able in this instance to put our own house in order. As such, I very much hope that all right hon. and hon. Members will be able to accept them.