I have listened very carefully to the noble Lord, Lord True. His speech was probably the most substantial criticism so far of the Bill—which I support. Does he notice the apparent contradiction at the centre of his arguments? Up until now, the main argument against the Bill is the independence and independent authority of the hereditaries. In his closing remarks, the noble Lord made the opposite argument: the reduction in hereditaries was important because it affected the party-political balance, as the hereditaries had an overwhelming party-political role in the numbers of the Conservative Party. Does he see the apparent conflict in those two arguments?
House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) (Abolition of By-Elections) Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Reid of Cardowan
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Friday, 23 March 2018.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) (Abolition of By-Elections) Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
790 c561 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2020-04-28 13:52:36 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-03-23/18032336000143
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-03-23/18032336000143
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-03-23/18032336000143