Let me be brief in my response. On Clause 53 and the appointment of hereditary Peers, I should make it absolutely clear that we want to end the farce of hereditary by-elections as soon as possible, but the question is at what price. If we had insisted on that clause in this wash-up period, the price would have been no Bill, which it is hoped there will be by the end of tonight, and there may well have been no other Bills that the Government wanted to get through in the last few days of this Parliament. So one has to make a choice.
There is also an argument in relation to what can and cannot be debated at length in the wash-up. The noble Earl has a point there. But let there be no doubt about the fact that we are against the hereditary principle, and when we are re-elected, we will make sure that the hereditary principle goes.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 April 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c1630 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:05:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_636730
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_636730
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_636730