I agree fully that the Minister is being realistic in the circumstances, but this House, including some Members on his own Back Benches, deserves an explanation from the Leader of the Opposition about why it has held a gun to the head of the Government on Clauses 54 and 55. We understand that the Opposition want to go into this election defending the hereditary principle, and good luck to them on that, but why on earth do they want to keep out of this Bill measures that are essential to the good reputation of this House? I just do not understand. Rather than be the fall guy for the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, I think that he owes this House an explanation of why he does not want Clauses 54 and 55 in the Bill.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord McNally
(Liberal Democrat)
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_636733
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_636733
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_636733