Vol. 722 Monday No. 66 15 November 2010

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Introduction: Baroness Hollins Questions Justice: Magistrates’ and County Courts Educational Psychology Healthcare: Costs Health: Private Medical Insurance Communications Committee Membership Motion European Union Committee Membership Motion Statutory Instruments Committee Membership Motion Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL] Order of Consideration Motion Freedom of Information (Time for Compliance with Request) Regulations 2010 Motion to Approve Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Motion to Refer to Examiners G20 Statement Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform Statement Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Second Reading (1st Day) Written Statements Written Answers For column numbers see back page

£3·50 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. The bound volumes also will be sent to those Peers who similarly notify their wish to receive them. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/index/101115.html

PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES DAILY PARTS Single copies: Commons, £5; Lords £3·50 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £865; Lords £525 WEEKLY HANSARD Single copies: Commons, £12; Lords £6 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £440; Lords £255 Index: Annual subscriptions: Commons, £125; Lords, £65. LORDS VOLUME INDEX obtainable on standing order only. Details available on request. BOUND VOLUMES OF DEBATES are issued periodically during the session. Single copies: Commons, £105; Lords, £40. Standing orders will be accepted.

THE INDEX to each Bound Volume of House of Commons Debates is published separately at £9·00 and can be supplied to standing order. WEEKLY INFORMATION BULLETIN, compiled by the House of Commons, gives details of past and forthcoming business, the work of Committees and general information on legislation, etc. Single copies: £1·50. Annual subscription: £53·50. All prices are inclusive of postage.

© Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2010, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ 509 Introduction: Baroness Hollins[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Justice: Magistrates’ and County Courts 510

facilities for custody or for victims and witnesses and House of Lords poor security for professional staff and judges. Therefore, although we will look at the case for that use, the best Monday, 15 November 2010. way is to have modern, purpose-built courts that can dispense justice efficiently. On the first part of my 2.30 pm noble friend’s question, yes, we are well aware of the long-standing role of magistrates. Next year will be Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Blackburn. the 750th anniversary of magistrates in this country.

Introduction: Baroness Hollins Lord Lloyd of Berwick: My Lords, I declare an interest as a former president of the Sussex Magistrates’ 2.39 pm Association, and I am sorry to say that the magistrates’ court at Lewes is currently under threat of closure. Sheila Clare Hollins, having been created Baroness Does the Minister agree that the more work we can Hollins, of Wimbledon in the London Borough of Merton channel into the magistrates’ courts, the better? If so, and of Grenoside in the County of South Yorkshire, was why do we not now consider raising their jurisdiction introduced and took the oath, supported by Lord Rix limit from six months’ imprisonment to 12 months’ and Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws, and signed an imprisonment? undertaking to abide by the Code of Conduct. Lord McNally: My Lords, I take note of that advice. Lord Drayson took the oath. One of the objectives in the Government’s review of sentencing, which will be published shortly, is to ensure that a proper volume of work goes through the Justice: Magistrates’ and County Courts magistrates’ courts. Question

2.44 pm Lord Anderson of Swansea: Apart from the inconvenience to the public, is there not a danger that, Asked By Lord Phillips of Sudbury when justice becomes less local, justices will not be able to reflect the prevalence of certain offences in To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment their district in the sentences that they give? Is there they have made of the effects on local justice of the not also a danger that good justices will be lost to the closure of magistrates’ and county courts and of system because of the extra travelling time involved? holding such courts in multi-use buildings.

Noble Lords: Come on! Lord McNally: My Lords, to a certain extent those are concerns, and we will keep them under close review. However, we live in a more mobile age and The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord justices will be given assistance with travel costs. The McNally): I beg your pardon; I am not playing for longest journey to court—this is an extreme under the time. My Lords, the Government are committed to new proposals—will be 40 miles, and most journeys the principle of local justice. However, our court estate will be much less. I understand the concerns but they must reflect changes in population, transport and do not outweigh the fact that, as the Lord Chief communication links, technology, workload and the Justice, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, said: needs of today’s communities. These are the factors that will be in mind when judging where to locate “It is obvious that a number of courts in different parts of England and Wales no longer fulfil any sufficiently valuable courts. public purpose”.

Lord Phillips of Sudbury: My Lords, will my noble Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords— friend the Minister give a commitment that, in making final decisions on which county and magistrates’ courts will be closed, they will take into account: the fact that Noble Lords: Trumpington! local justices and local courts have been the bedrock of criminal justice in this country for many centuries, Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, why was Bow and successfully so; that the cost and inconvenience to Street magistrates’ court, home of the Bow Street public users of distant courts is considerable, and for Runners, the first court and a listed building, allowed the one-third who have to use public transport is to be sold as a hotel when, I am told, there was an unsupportable; that the magistrates’ courts reckon offer from a group of ex-police officers to buy it and that only a third of the 100-plus magistrates’ courts turn it into a museum? Is the Minister also aware that closures are justifiable: and, finally, that the better it was the only court without a blue light outside alternative would be to revert to using multi-purpose because Queen Victoria did not like it? buildings, such as town halls, which would be much cheaper? Lord McNally: I was not aware of that. I do not know whether this was undertaken by the previous Lord McNally: My Lords, the attraction of multi- Administration but the most distinguished ex-Lord purpose buildings has a superficial appeal. The problem Chancellor, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, is that many of them that might offer that up have no is nodding. He obviously did the dirty deed. One of 511 Justice: Magistrates’ and County Courts[LORDS] Educational Psychology 512

[LORD MCNALLY] Baroness Massey of Darwen: I thank the Minister the things that I have asked for in the review is that we for that semi-positive reply. Does he accept that many keep a check on which courts are listed buildings and children who have social and emotional problems what is likely to happen to them. need educational psychologists to support them and their families? Does he further accept that without the Baroness Smith of Basildon: In none of the Minister’s help of educational psychologists many of these children answers has he mentioned the victims of crime having simply will not receive the support they need? Could to attend magistrates’ courts or county courts that are he give more details about the recruitment and training some distance further from their homes than they of psychologists? What will the Government do to otherwise would. Is he aware of the number of cases insist that these educational psychologists are present that are adjourned because somebody does not turn in schools? up to court? A victim of crime may have to attend court two, three or four times before their case is Lord Hill of Oareford: I certainly accept the two heard. What assessment has the Minister made of the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Massey, financial, let alone emotional, cost of victims returning about the importance of educational psychologists to court several times to have their case heard? and the role that they play. As I explained in my first Answer, the difficulty with training is that the money Lord McNally: I think the roar of approval is very that has been given to local authorities so that they apt. It is something that we are looking at very carefully. can make a voluntary contribution to the Children’s One of the issues that I know the Lord Chancellor is Workforce Development Council is not being paid. looking at is the almost casual ease with which Only 16 local authorities have paid that money. We adjournments are agreed to. As well as good justice, clearly need a better solution than the current one to we want to see efficient and quick justice in the magistrates’ make sure that funding for training is on a secure courts. Certainly, the point that the noble Baroness footing, which it clearly is not at present. In addition refers to is one that needs to be addressed with some to that, the Green Paper, which looks more generally urgency. at the whole future of special educational needs, will look at the question of educational psychologists and, Viscount Tenby: Can the Minister indicate the for example, whether we should separate funding from Government’s response to the 10 specific recommendations assessment. That is an extremely important issue, which made by the Magistrates’ Association last month in we debated in this House a couple of weeks ago, and it the light of future plans mooted abroad by the Lord would be part of that process. Chancellor? In asking that question, I declare an interest both as a former magistrate and, in that capacity, as someone who has had to oversee the Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, is the Minister aware merger and closure of courts. of any cost-benefit analysis of the value of early assessment of children’s difficulties by properly qualified Lord McNally: My Lords, I assure the noble Lord professionals? Does he agree that there is probably an that we have been in the closest touch with the Magistrates’ opportunity cost if those professionals are not available? Association. We have listened carefully to its recommendations. I hope some of its concerns will be Lord Hill of Oareford: I very much agree with my reflected in the statement that we will make in response noble friend that there clearly must be an opportunity to these consultations before the end of the year. cost if those professionals are not available. I have not seen any cost-benefit analysis but I do not need to be convinced of the benefit and the good that educational Educational Psychology psychologists do. Question

2.53 pm Baroness Murphy: My Lords, given that 50 per cent of adult mental health problems begin in childhood, Asked By Baroness Massey of Darwen and that educational psychologists are utterly crucial To ask Her Majesty’s Government what support in identifying those and providing the children concerned they will give to educational psychology. with the right care, does the Minister agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Massey, and me—I think he was The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for agreeing with us—that leaving training to the vagaries Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): Educational psychologists of the local authority is simply not working? Can he play an extremely important role in supporting children reassure us that educational psychology will join the and young people who have special educational needs, other healthcare professions in having a training strategy and their families. that is determined by central bodies rather than being The Children’s Workforce Development Council left to the vagaries of local authorities? administers a voluntary subscription scheme for local authorities to fund the entry training of educational Lord Hill of Oareford: I am not sure that I can give psychologists to help ensure supply. This scheme has the noble Baroness the specific assurance for which become unsustainable because so many local authorities she has asked. However, I can give the assurance that are not contributing. We want to place the training of all these issues and the best sustainable system will be educational psychologists on a more secure footing in considered by my honourable friend Sarah Teather as the context of the forthcoming Green Paper on SEN. part of the Green Paper consideration. There are a 513 Educational Psychology[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Healthcare: Costs 514 number of ways in which one can approach this matter The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, and I know that she will be keen to give it the fullest Department of Health (Earl Howe): My Lords, the possible consideration. Government have guaranteed that health spending will increase in real terms in each year of the Parliament. However, in order to meet rapidly rising demands Lord Willis of Knaresborough: My Lords, does my while improving quality, substantial improvements in noble friend agree that it is not simply the training of economy and efficiency will be required across all educational psychologists that is a problem but the areas of health spending. This response is best led by number available, given that so much of their time is the NHS locally, while the centre will focus on reforming spent purely on annual statements? Will he give the the health service to create a long-term sustainable House an assurance that when his right honourable NHS. friend—sorry, he is my right honourable friend as well—devolves all budgets to individual schools, the funding for educational psychologists and their training Lord Taylor of Warwick: My Lords, I thank the will come from a separate pot rather than from individual Minister for his reply. Does he agree with me that school budgets? putting more funding now into research into terrible conditions such as dementia, in which I include Alzheimer’s disease—for which there is no cure—will Lord Hill of Oareford: As I am sure my noble friend ultimately bring down healthcare costs? We must find knows, currently educational psychologists are funded a cure, and I ask the Minister to commit more research separately and the relevant money does not come from funding to the terrible condition of dementia. schools’ budgets. I accept his point that it is important not just to get the training right, although that is Earl Howe: My Lords, my noble friend is quite important, but that one has to look at the numbers as right to identify dementia as a particular cost pressure well. The advice we have received from the CWDC is over the next few years. The coalition Government that the numbers seem to be appropriate, but I agree signalled in their programme our intention to prioritise that one needs to keep that very much under review. funding for dementia research. The spending review confirmed that and committed to real-terms increases Baroness Crawley: My Lords, in anti-bullying week, in spending on health research. This investment is can the Minister say what the future prospects are for indeed essential if we are to increase the quality, educational psychologists to carry on their work not productivity and cost-effectiveness of the NHS. only with vulnerable children but with their families and school professionals if the Educational Psychology Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: My Lords, I return to a Service has such a question mark over it? Can he also question which I posed previously to the Minister and say what contact he has had with local authorities and which remains unanswered. Does he not agree that if schools on this issue? patients in the health service knew what the costs of their treatment, care and drugs were, as they do in the private sector, this would create a downward pressure, Lord Hill of Oareford: I certainly agree with the which would reduce costs overall? noble Baroness that educational psychologists play an extremely important role, not least in the context of anti-bullying. My honourable friend Sarah Teather, Earl Howe: My Lords, I know that this is a question the Minister for Children and Families, has had a to which the noble Lord and other noble Lords regularly whole series of meetings with local authorities about return, and it has a superficial attraction. The problem these important issues. The department generally has with it, I am advised, is that patients who are informed been talking to a range of local authorities about the of the cost of their treatment—some patients, at any future arrangements for special needs education. I rate—take that as a deterrent to accepting the treatment agree that it is vital to get those right. I certainly give in the first place. That is something we need to avoid. her the undertaking that we will continue to keep a Nevertheless, there is an underlying point here; there is very close eye on it. We need to ensure that there are a need to provide better information to patients about enough educational psychologists and that they are their treatment so that they can take ownership of properly trained. I do not accept that there is a serious their state of health. question mark over the future, but I do accept that we have a short-term issue about training and getting the Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: My Lords, what funding from local authorities, which we have to address. consideration are the Government giving to seven-day working in the NHS, including renegotiating Agenda for Change, to make better use of the NHS’s equipment, Healthcare: Costs promote early diagnosis and decrease morbidity from complications of treatment that is not overseen by senior Question staff—particularly over weekends and bank holidays?

3pm Earl Howe: My Lords, creating a seven-day service Asked By Lord Taylor of Warwick is a particular concern of mine, and the noble Baroness is quite right to raise it, particularly given her long To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions experience in the health service. As for Agenda for they are taking to control rises in health care costs. Change, any alterations to existing terms and conditions, 515 Healthcare: Costs[LORDS] Health: Private Medical Insurance 516

[EARL HOWE] Might it not be that if there were tighter control over such as the unsocial hours payment or sick pay, would the dissemination of pills and medicines, particularly need to be negotiated in partnership with NHS Employers in outpatient departments, there could be important and trade unions, through the NHS Staff Council. savings?

Lord Alderdice: My Lords, I know it is extremely difficult, but has my noble friend had the opportunity Earl Howe: My Lords, my noble friend is right that to explore how much of the increase in health service drugs and medicines account for a sizeable proportion costs in recent years has come about because of the of the NHS bill. Successive rounds of the pharmaceutical increase in administration and management costs? I price regulation scheme, combined with what we call refer not simply to the salaries of administrators and the category M scheme for generic drugs, have held managers but to the administration for the administrators, down the cost of drugs to the NHS very successfully and to the amount of time that clinical and professional over the years. However, this is an area to which we are staff must spend in servicing the requirements put on devoting a great deal of attention, not least in our them by administrators and management. plans for value-based pricing in the longer term.

Earl Howe: My noble friend is right to pinpoint this area. If my memory serves me correctly, the average Health: Private Medical Insurance annual increase in management and administration Question costs over the past 10 years has been 6.2 per cent per year, which is by far and away higher than the increase 3.08 pm in costs in clinical areas, for example. That is why we are determined to reduce the administrative cost of Asked By Lord Walton of Detchant running the NHS, and we are in the process of planning for exactly that. To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the imposition of fixed fee schedules and restricted hospital and consultant networks for the provision Baroness Wall of New Barnet: Does the noble Earl of services to private medical insurance subscribers, agree that that is an opportunity for us to look at as now practised by the two principal insurers in saving costs in the health service by ensuring that we this field, is in the public interest. think of methods to persuade people to attend their day clinics? The cost of people not attending—DNA, as it is called in the health service—is huge, particularly Lord Walton of Detchant: My Lords, I beg leave to in day surgery. ask the Question standing in my name on me Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest as a policyholder Earl Howe: The noble Baroness is quite right, and I with AXA PPP. am well aware that she speaks from personal experience. Many hospital trusts, and indeed GPs’ surgeries where applicable, have devised inventive ways of reminding The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord patients of their appointments, either on the day or on Sassoon): My Lords, private medical insurers are entitled the day before, perhaps by text. Good practice in this to offer policies on a variety of terms and offering area is something that we need to focus on. different levels of benefit. The Financial Services Authority’s Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook Lord Kakkar: My Lords, clinical leadership is critical does not prevent insurers restricting choice of healthcare if we are to secure the greatest benefit for patients provider. However, it does require that the insurer from NHS spending and the appropriate use of resources. provides information on any such restrictions. Provided What strategies do Her Majesty’s Government have that policyholders are covered as they expect in the for developing clinical leadership in the NHS? I declare event of a claim, this is to the benefit of consumers as an interest as patron of UCL Partners’ NHS staff cost control serves to keep premiums at an affordable college. level.

Earl Howe: Again, my Lords, the noble Lord is Lord Walton of Detchant: I thank the Minister for absolutely right to focus on clinical leadership, which that reply. Is he aware that the Office of Fair Trading is will be critical if we are to deliver the improvements in receiving a large number of complaints from individuals the quality of care that we wish to see, and also to roll who believed that they had fully comprehensive healthcare out the vision laid out in the Government’s White insurance with organisations such as BUPA and PPP Paper. The Department has a number of initiatives but are now finding in many instances that their under way, as do deaneries in strategic health authority recovery is only partial, that they are restricted in the areas around the country, to promote clinical leadership. choice of consultant to whom they may be referred, There are also active programmes in acute trusts. despite their GP’s advice, and also that they are not Without good clinical leadership, the programme cannot allowed to go to certain hospitals? Is this not contrary proceed as we all hope and wish. to the policy that should be carried out, and is the Minister aware that last week my noble friend Lord Lord Eden of Winton: My Lords, can my noble Crisp said that private healthcare insurance was becoming friend say what proportion of total National Health a lottery, and that the Financial Services Authority Service costs is represented by drugs and medicines? should examine the matter in the light of these complaints? 517 Health: Private Medical Insurance[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Arrangement of Business 518

Lord Sassoon: My Lords, private medical insurance have been let down by their policies do not share that policies are held by some 6 million people. I am view? As the noble Lord, Lord Crisp, pointed out last grateful to the noble Lord, who is a very distinguished week, this problem seems to be more general than just member of the profession, for drawing attention to one or two people not reading their instructions properly. this matter because it is clearly important for those Could the Minister possibly go back to the FSA and 6 million people and for the country as a whole that ask it to look at this problem again in the light of the this is a well functioning market. However, that market concerns that have been raised about it in recent is the business of the policyholders, the insurance months? companies and the doctors. The FSA’s role is to make sure that essentially policyholders are sold policies on Lord Sassoon: I thank my noble friend for raising terms that are fully disclosed to them and that those that point. Of course I am happy to convey to the FSA terms are upheld. In June this year, the FSA carried the points that have been raised this afternoon. out a review of the conduct of business rules and found no evidence of risk of consumer detriment in Lord Eatwell: My Lords, the noble Lord has taken the PMI market which could be addressed by changing a remarkably complacent view in his answers about its regulatory approach. However, I am sure that the the position of policyholders. Surely the FSA’s FSA, like the OFT, hears complaints coming in. responsibility to ensure that financial institutions treat their customers fairly requires that this matter be Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes: My Lords, is my noble investigated and that better information be given to friend aware that quite often medical insurance companies policyholders about the limitations of their cover. require a direct debit payment and that it is only after the direct debit payment has been made that they Lord Sassoon: My Lords, I think I have responded inform the person that certain things which they thought to the noble Lord’s points in the answers that I have were going to continue to be covered no longer are? given to a number of questions.

Lord Sassoon: My Lords, I do not pretend to be an Lord Crickhowell: My Lords, I declare a similar expert on the precise ways in which medical insurers interest to that of the noble Lord, Lord Walton. Is not carry out every aspect of their business, but clearly, as the trouble the fact that the terms, which many of the I said, it is critical that people understand what policies 6 million knew they had, understood they had and they are buying and that the policy terms are met. have had over many years, are often changed so that That is the critical interest of the Financial Services people can no longer go to the doctors and hospitals Authority in this matter. recommended by their GPs, but have to go to ones nominated by the company? People cannot deal with that situation because, when they took out the policy, Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: My Lords, would they had the cover that they required. In many cases, the Minister care to comment on the complaints from they no longer are offered the cover they thought they National Health Service consultants that, when there had and had reason to expect that they had. is a failure by the private healthcare system, patients are put into the National Health Service in front of other people? Would he also care to comment on my Lord Sassoon: My Lords, as I have said, it is absolutely view that there is no comprehensive healthcare policy the focus of the FSA and the conduct of business rules through private insurance and that everyone in the that people who buy private medical insurance, just as country is dependent on the NHS? they buy household or any other insurance, are properly sold and have explained to them the terms of the policy and that the terms of the policy are carried through. Lord Sassoon: My Lords, I am happy to confirm Normally, these are annual policies and the terms of the really critical point, which is that the National policies in this area, just as in other areas of insurance Health Service is available to the population as a that no doubt we all buy, change from year to year. whole and that this is therefore an area in which the nation has access to the best-quality healthcare. If, on top of that, people wish to invest their money in Arrangement of Business private healthcare policies, it is important that those Announcement policies work effectively. However, as the noble Baroness points out, it is critical that the health service is there 3.16 pm for everyone. As she raises the question of complaints, Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, immediately it is worth pointing out that the complaints that are after the Motion in the name of the noble and learned relevant to this Question are those that go to the Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, my noble friend Financial Services Authority or the Financial Ombudsman Lord Strathclyde will repeat a Statement on the G20, Service. The latest figures that I have are for 2008. followed immediately by my noble friend Lord McNally, There were 514 complaints to the Financial Ombudsman who will repeat a Statement on legal aid and civil costs Service in that year, of which 170 were upheld, and that reform. represents one complaint upheld for every 8,000 people treated under private medical insurance. Lord Lawson of Blaby: My Lords, given the very large number of noble Lords—more than 50—who Lord Newby: My Lords, the Minister says that the wish to speak in the Second Reading debate and given FSA is content that the system is working well. However, the heavy business programme that we have today, and does he accept that many people who feel that they the relatively light business programme for tomorrow, 519 Arrangement of Business[LORDS] Arrangement of Business 520

[LORD LAWSON OF BLABY] basis: that the normal procedures should be upheld. I will my noble friend the Leader of the House consider am extremely keen that normal procedures continue the possibility of deferring these two Statements, and that this House has the opportunity properly to fascinating though I am sure they will be, until tomorrow? consider all business. That also involves the Government being able to take part in discussions whereby the Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, perhaps in normal procedures continue, and we have obviously the first instance, I might respond. My noble friend been involved in doing just that on a constructive basis. makes a constructive and interesting suggestion. I The noble Lord, Lord Grocott, refers to the fact would be happy to discuss in the usual channels that it is unusual for Statements to be deferred. That is postponing those Statements until tomorrow while the not quite true, but I know that we can trade statistics debate on the Motion of the noble and learned Lord, between each other. A couple of weeks ago, the Opposition Lord Falconer, continues. themselves asked that a Statement should be deferred by a day—very constructively—because it was not Lord Grocott: My Lords, I have great respect for the time-limited, and I had every expectation that they noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, and I know that she will might wish to do the same on this occasion. The G20 do her best to accommodate the House, if at all debate would be as substantive and important to this possible—I know only too well how difficult it is to House tomorrow as it is today. Clearly, the Opposition schedule business. Given that the earliest we can start have decided to take a different view and wish to delay the Second Reading debate is six o’clock today—it is the start of the Second Reading debate today. more likely to be later than that; given that it would be As I mentioned at the beginning, I am very much most unusual to delay Statements, particularly the open to discussions through the usual channels. I important one from the Prime Minister—I cannot heard what the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, said. I am remember it happening more than once or twice in the willing to take up discussions across the whole range past and it will be completely out of date by tomorrow of timing today, but it is the normal procedure that and it is bad enough having it today; and given that where we have a speakers list as it was on Wednesday, tomorrow’s business is incredibly light and will finish Thursday, Friday and at the weekend, there should be by six o’clock tomorrow—it is a debate on an interim one day for Second Reading. I should remind the report from the Leader’s Group on Members leaving House that it is my duty and that of the usual channels the House, which we have been discussing on and off to organise the business of the House on behalf of all for nine years—surely the Second Reading debate could Back-Bench interests. That means providing certainty be split, three hours today and three hours tomorrow, as to timing in advance, so that all noble Lords may at no inconvenience to anyone, as far as I can discern. I make a disposition of their outside work and other do not expect an instant reply as the noble Baroness commitments to be here. Therefore, when a request is will obviously have to discuss it with other people. To made at a late stage today, it would clearly be improper me that seems to be a common-sense solution. of me to agree that the Second Reading should somehow Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, my noble be changed when others have already made the friend Lord Grocott has made an eminently sensible commitment to be here today to take part in and suggestion and, as Chief Whip on this side, I am more conclude Second Reading. than happy to enter into discussion on his sensible Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I thought I proposal. heard the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, suggest that Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, I am intrigued we may have discussions, and I hope that they can be by the estimate of the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, on constructive, but I think that it goes broader than just the length of business for today and tomorrow. I know discussing the issue of the Statements. I understand that the more than 20 Members who have signed up to entirely what the noble Baroness is saying, and I share speak in tomorrow’s debate consider the future of the her concern to stick to first principles in the organisation membership of this House to be a very serious matter, of business, but events overtake circumstances and as I do, and are therefore very concerned that they we need some flexibility. It is flexibility that the House should not be disrupted. is seeking here, and I hope that we can proceed on that basis. I am also intrigued that the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, refers to the fact that Second Reading is not The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I ask the noble expected to start today until six o’clock or later. No doubt, Baroness, when she is considering this matter, to bear the Opposition have a greater idea about how long in mind that the Companion also states that the House their debate on the Motion of the noble and learned normally rises at 10 o’clock, and that the House has Lord, Lord Falconer, will persist. I do not know. It is risen at later than 10 o’clock on a number of occasions not time limited. Clearly, if it is a straightforward already this year. matter to resolve, it should take markedly shorter than that. Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, as ever, the It is the expectation of this House that Second noble Countess is careful and proper in the way that Readings where there are about 50 speakers commonly she refers to procedure of the House, on which she is are scheduled for one day only. The former Captain of authoritative. I have of course looked at the Companion, the Gentlemen-at-Arms, the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, as the noble Countess would expect. It states: was very much aware of that. He was still Captain of “It is a firm convention that the House normally rises by the Gentlemen-at-Arms when I became Opposition about 10 p.m. on Mondays to Wednesdays, by about 7 p.m. on Chief Whip, and we worked closely together on that Thursdays, and by about 3 p.m. on Fridays. The time of meeting 521 Arrangement of Business[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 522 of the House can be varied to meet the convenience of the House. Freedom of Information (Time for In exceptional circumstances the House has met on Saturday and on Sunday”— Compliance with Request) Regulations which I do not propose. 2010 I was of course keen to ensure that my memory was Motion to Approve more accurate than perhaps it might be without having looked at the statistics. The noble Lord, Lord Grocott, 3.25 pm will not be surprised that I looked at the position when Moved By Lord McNally I became Opposition Chief Whip, when he was the Government Chief Whip. In that period, 2006-07, the That the draft regulations laid before the House House sat beyond 10 o’clock on 36 occasions; and in on 11 October be approved. the following year, 2007-08, on 53. Relevant Documents: 3rd Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, considered in Grand Committee on 8 November. Communications Committee Motion agreed. Membership Motion

3.24 pm Parliamentary Voting System and Moved By The Chairman of Committees Constituencies Bill Motion to refer to the Examiners That Lord Stevenson of Balmacara be appointed a member of the Select Committee. 3.25 pm Moved By Lord Falconer of Thoroton Motion agreed. To move that the Bill be referred to the Examiners.

European Union Committee Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I beg to Membership Motion move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Moved By The Chairman of Committees Paper to refer this Bill to the Examiners to consider whether it is hybrid. This point arises before we move That Lord Liddle be appointed a member of the to Second Reading. Select Committee in place of Lord Paul. I should say that my noble friend Lady Royall, the shadow Leader of the House, gave notice of this point Motion agreed. to the noble Lord, Lord McNally, last Monday, when she sent him the advice of leading counsel on which we rely. That advice has been placed in the Library since Friday of last week. My noble friend Lady Statutory Instruments Committee Royall suggested that the noble Lord, Lord McNally, Membership Motion refer the matter to the Examiners straightaway. If the Moved By The Chairman of Committees Examiners say no to hybridity, there will be no delay. If, however, they conclude that the Bill is hybrid, the That Lord Kennedy of Southwark be appointed a consequences could be worked on as soon as possible member of the Joint Committee. to ensure a transparent process within the Lords’ Motion agreed, and a message was sent to the Commons. Standing Order to select exemptions to this new Bill. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, did not reply but sent my noble friend Lady Royall by return a letter that he had received from the Clerk of Public and Private Bills Budget Responsibility and National Audit in this House saying that he considered that the Bill Bill [HL] was not prima facie hybrid on the basis that it engaged Order of Consideration Motion no private interests. It is our case that the Bill is hybrid. Tabled By Lord Sassoon Before I come to that argument, perhaps I may set That it be an instruction to the Grand Committee out the consequences of such a reference today.Referring to which the Budget Responsibility and National the Bill to the Examiners, which is what the Motion Audit Bill [HL] has been committed that they consider seeks, would result in the Examiners seeking argument the Bill in the following order: from those who say the Bill is hybrid and those who say that it is not. As experts and without political bias, Clauses 1 to 3, Schedule 1, Clauses 4 to 20, they would then determine whether it is hybrid. If they Schedule 2, Clauses 21 and 22, Schedule 3, Clauses 23 conclude that the Bill is hybrid, the Standing Orders of to 26, Schedules 4 and 5, Clause 27, Schedule 6, this House require that the procedures for private Bills Clauses 28 to 31. have to be followed in part. Those include the setting up of a Select Committee of this House to hear Motion not moved. argument and evidence called by those whom the 523 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 524

[LORD FALCONER OF THOROTON] justifying particular treatment. We have concluded therefore that Committee allow to petition it on the issue of whether exceptions for these areas are justified by their particular there should be any other exceptions to the new rules geography”.—[Official Report, Commons, 27/7/10; col. 1071W.] apart from Shetland and Orkney and the Western To that answer, I say the following: first, there are Isles. The matter of exceptions would then be decided many other constituencies with just as small populations by a fair evidence-based process where the reasoning that are not being preserved and no explanation is was transparent for all to see, not by what appears to given for their exclusion; secondly, the Western Isles be the fiat of the Government without explanation. have never been so recognised before in legislation; The Bill is divided into two main parts. Part 1 thirdly, remoteness applies just as much to the many isles provides for a change to our electoral system from first of Argyllshire as it does to these two islands; fourthly, past the post to an alternative vote system and it also geography could be applied to justify communities provides for a referendum on whether to introduce such as Anglesey or the Isle of Wight being excluded. such a system. If the vote is passed in the referendum, No consistent basis is being advanced. the Minister will be obliged by the terms of the Bill to Is the Bill hybrid? The House of Lords Companion introduce the alternative vote system. Part 2 introduces to the Standing Orders defines hybrid Bills as: a whole new method for fixing the boundaries of “public bills which are considered to affect specific private or constituencies. Instead of it being a matter of judgment local interests, in a manner different from the private or local for the Boundary Commission as to the most expedient interests of other persons or bodies of the same class, thus place for the boundaries, taking into account geographical attracting the provisions of the Standing Orders applicable to and other community factors, county and ward private business”. boundaries and the likely number of constituencies Is the Bill hybrid? I submit that it is. The easiest in a constituency, under the new Bill the role of the definition of hybridity comes from the Speaker in Boundary Commission will be primarily to ensure another place in 1988 in rejecting a claim to hybridity that every constituency under 13,000 square kilometres in respect of the Education Reform Bill that was contains the same number of constituents plus or passed in 1988. He said: minus 5 per cent. Constituency boundaries will be “In considering the question of hybridity, I have to look at the allowed to pass through county and ward boundaries. terms of the Bill. Provided that the formula or description used in Numbers will be all. the Bill deals with a category or class which is relevant to the purposes of the Bill and the Bill does not expressly specify or The consequence of such an approach is certain to single out an individual or corporation within the category for be, for example, that the Isle of Wight will be divided different treatment, the Bill is not hybrid”.—[Official Report, into two and the constituency of one of the Isle of Commons, 1/12/87; col. 770.] Wight’s MPs will be joined to the mainland. Constituencies This Bill does precisely what the Speaker said in 1988; will frequently cross county boundaries. There is bound it singles out two constituencies that are not to be to be at least one constituency that crosses the boundary subject to a formula or description laid down in the between Devon and Cornwall. The two constituencies Bill. Instead, they are singled out for special treatment. that are to be excluded from this approach are the Western Isles and Orkney and Shetland. The relevant provision reads: Lord Naseby: Can the noble and learned Lord “Preserved constituencies … There shall continue to be … a inform the House what exactly has changed since the constituency named Orkney and Shetland, comprising the areas Bill left the other place? The challenge of hybridity of the Orkney Islands Council and the Shetland Islands Council”, took place in another place and the Speaker was not and, called upon to rule. All that I can say to the noble and “a constituency named Na h-Eileanan an Iar, comprising the area learned Lord is that, in the five years when I had the of Comhairle nan Eilean Siar”. privilege of being Chairman of Ways and Means, The Explanatory Notes may be helpful to some Members there was never a single instance in which the upper of the House: House challenged the lower House on hybridity. “Rule 6 provides for the two Scottish island constituencies of Na h-Eileanan an Iar (the Western Isles) and Orkney and Shetland to be preserved, and for the electorates of those two constituencies Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No ruling has been to be removed from the UK electorate and the Scottish electorate given on hybridity by the other place and I would for the purposes of calculating the UK electoral quota”. strongly urge this House not to regard itself as bound The Bill excludes those two constituencies from the by the other place, which looks at constitutional issues effect of the new approach. Note that this is not an in an entirely different way from us. The matter was exception of the normal sort where, for example, no never considered by the House of Commons. If this constituency can be above 13,000 square kilometres, House were to say, “Once the House of Commons has which applies to the whole country; this is just two not considered it, we are not to consider it”, that constituencies being taken out of the Bill. We support would be a fundamental abdication of our position. an approach that makes constituencies more equal in size, but we recognise that there should be a proper and transparent basis for determining which communities Lord Renton of Mount Harry: Will the noble and should be kept out of the Bill. The justification for learned Lord tell us whether any other areas such as the two exceptions was given by a Mr Harper, a junior those that he mentioned, including the islands off Minister, who said: Argyll, have requested that they should have the same “These constituencies have small populations and are not privilege—if that is the right word—as Shetland and easily reached from the mainland. They have already been recognised Orkney and the Western Isles? Has he received any either in legislation or in practice in previous boundary reviews as such requests? 525 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 526

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Mr Reid, who is the MP with matters of public policy whereby private rights for the relevant area, has complained bitterly, as have over large areas or over a whole class are affected. If the MPs for the Isle of Wight and for Anglesey. Far one examines, as I have done, the Bills on which this from flying off on my own on the issue, I am reflecting principle is based, it is clear that the principle is that, if the views of many people who would argue that places a Bill deals with the whole of a section or an industry, such as Anglesey, the Isle of Wight, Devon and Cornwall hybridity will not apply even if it deals with different should have special recognition for their community parts in different ways. If, however, some people are position. As I have said, the Bill does precisely what left out of the new scheme, that is a classic case of the Speaker referred to in 1987, in that it singles out hybridity. two constituencies that are not to be subject to the I give two examples on either side of the line. On formula or description laid down in the Bill but are this side is the Railways Bill 1921, which nationalised instead to be given special treatment. all the railway companies but nationalised the Great The Bill is public, but the relevant provision in the Western Railway company in a different way from the Bill will affect the specific local interests of the people others. That Bill was held not to be hybrid because it who live there in a different way from those who live dealt with the whole of the railway industry. On the elsewhere in the country. Others in the country who other side is the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries say that they should have the same right should be Act 1977, which left out one aircraft builder and was entitled to argue for it. Their specific interests are also held to be hybrid because it left someone out. On affected. I respectfully submit that the matter is pretty which side of the line does this Bill fall? I have read out clear. I urge the House not to be motivated by political the relevant provisions and the Explanatory Notes, interests but to listen to the merits of the argument. which state basically that the two constituencies are to Why is the Bill not hybrid? Three arguments have be preserved and kept out of the whole process. been advanced. It is said, first, by the Clerk of the Public and Private Bills Office that there are no private Lord Rennard: My Lords, can the noble and learned or local interests engaged here. The relevant Clerk was Lord help the House by explaining the difference kind enough to have a conversation with me this between the Bill that we are due to consider today afternoon, when I put my arguments to him and he and, say, the Scotland Bill that was introduced in put his arguments to me. Unfortunately, we were not 1998? That Bill, which was brought in by the previous able to reach agreement. I submit that he is wrong. Government and provided for the creation of the Hybridity does not apply only to cases where a person’s Scottish Parliament, also contained measures to change property rights are removed—as, for example, in the the boundaries of constituencies in Scotland, and in nationalisation Bills or the early 19th century railway particular to create separate constituencies for Orkney Bills. Hybridity also applies where the powers, for and the Shetland Islands. That Bill, introduced by a example, of a local authority are treated differently in Labour Government, was never considered to be hybrid. one part of the country from another or where the Can he explain why this Bill should be? very issue is where local authority boundaries can be drawn. Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I have cited Many in the House will remember the Charlwood the example of the Railways Act, which was a piece of and Horley Bill in 1973, which was a hybrid Bill legislation that dealt with the whole issue, whereas this concerned with whether two parishes should be in Bill does not. This Bill leaves two constituencies out. Surrey or in Sussex. No one for one minute considered Finally, as the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, has pointed that that was not a legitimate interest on which to out, it has been said that the Commons have not found hybridity. The arguments in that Bill were around, declared the Bill to be hybrid. That is true, but no vote “I would like to be in Surrey because Surrey is better was sought and no application pursued. It is for each than Sussex” or “I would like to be in Sussex because House to make its own decision, and I strongly urge Sussex is better than Surrey”. Do not tell me that that this House not to accept that, if the Commons reach is a property interest. That is an interest about where I such a conclusion, we are bound by it. That would want my politics to be conducted and who I want to be diminish the importance and independence of this my representative. The important point is that that House on constitutional issues. shows that the reference to local interests goes much wider than simply property interests. Lord McNally: My Lords, I wonder whether the Issues might arise about who should be entitled to noble and learned Lord would correct a remark he petition the committee about the terms of the constituency made at the beginning of his speech. He said that the boundary process. Should such an entitlement apply noble Baroness, Lady Royall, wrote to me and that I to individuals, or should it apply to, for example, did not reply. In fact, I consulted the Clerk at the Table the local authorities for the Isle of Wight, Cornwall who is the expert on hybridity in this House. Prompted and Devon, or to the local MPs? Those issues can be by the discussion, he wrote me a definitive letter on worked out and resolved by the committee adopting a hybridity, a copy of which I sent to the noble Baroness, workable procedure, but the key point is that the as well as placing a copy of the exchange in the hybridity process recognises as a legitimate, specific Library of the House. I certainly did not ignore the local interest the geographical unit within which you noble Baroness’s letter. elect your representatives. The second argument—this is dealt with fully in Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I withdraw the point. Mr James Goudie’s advice—is that it is said that it is The noble Lord did not write a letter to my noble not the practice to treat as hybrid those Bills that deal friend, but it was a bad point for which I apologise. I 527 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 528

[LORD FALCONER OF THOROTON] case. His charms unfurled, his words dripped honey, certainly did not intend to suggest that the noble Lord but somehow we all knew that he knew what we had been in any way discourteous, and indeed the knew—that the case he was arguing was built on straw. noble Baroness, Lady Royall, had not for one moment Your Lordships were never fooled then and will not be suggested that to me. I therefore apologise to the fooled today. noble Lord. The noble and learned Lord comes armed with a The practice of this House is to refer a Bill to the 28-page legal opinion from the chambers founded Examiners if the House is satisfied that it is reasonably by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg, arguable that the Bill is hybrid. That happened recently and written by Mr James Goudie QC, no less—a close in the case of the Bill that covered Exeter and Norfolk. associate of the Labour Party, I understand. After Subsequently, the Examiners held that that legislation 28 pages, it concludes that it is a fine line but it is was not hybrid. No argument was in fact advanced to arguable that the Bill may be hybrid. them that the legislation was hybrid because a court case after the vote in the House made the issue academic. I hope very much that the House will consider our Lord Clinton-Davis: The noble Lord has declared arguments on their merits rather than on the basis of an impossible standard as far as James Goudie is the previous occasion. concerned. He is a distinguished QC and I invite the noble Lord to withdraw what he said about him. I respectfully submit that this Bill is hybrid. I have dealt with the arguments advanced against, but all that I need to do is to satisfy the House that the case is Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, if it is not distinguished reasonably arguable. My argument also reflects the to be a close associate of the Labour Party, I withdraw merits of ensuring that the process to determine what it. None of my other comments was meant to remark the exceptions are is transparent rather than just dealing on Mr James Goudie’s professional capacity. I said with things by fiat. This Motion would allow a proper that he was a QC; I stand by that and the House approach to be followed in selecting those constituencies knows what that means. that are to be exceptions to the Bill. I suggest that On the question of whether it is arguable— the House should be urging for a non-political basis to this. Lord Goldsmith: I declare an interest as a QC. Is the noble Lord, for whom I have great respect, suggesting Lord Roberts of Conwy: Can the noble and learned that the opinion of Mr James Goudie QC, which we Lord explain the substantive difference between the have seen, does not represent his genuine and honest two constituencies preserved in the Bill and the other opinion on the matter? If he is not suggesting that, constituencies of the United Kingdom? then the remarks he has just made, with respect, are ill-timed and ill-placed. Lord Falconer of Thoroton: These two constituencies will never have to be connected to the mainland. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, of course I do not say Unlike the Isle of Wight or Anglesey or the islands off that; nor do I think my remarks were ill-timed or Argyll, Orkney and Shetland and the Western Isles misjudged. I was going to precisely make the case that will not have to be treated with a constituency on the Mr Goudie QC said that it was arguable that the Bill mainland because the Bill states that the numbers-driven may be hybrid. Did anyone in the House hear a lawyer approach will not be applied to them. They will for say that a case like this was not arguable? And when ever be kept separate. That is the difference. They are did the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of being treated in a completely different way from the Thoroton, fight shy of arguing it? rest of the country. As is well known and understood, I am not a Silk 3.45 pm like the noble and learned Lord or his friend Mr Goudie, but I have spent enough time in the countryside to The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord know a sow’s ear when I see it—and I see it in this Strathclyde): My Lords, I yield to no one in my Motion. On what do I rest my case? Your Lordships affection for the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer have the benefit of the crisp opinion of the Clerks of of Thoroton—apart from Lady Falconer of Thoroton, your Lordships’ House, who have confirmed the view—a I expect—but today he has disappointed me in his view they had taken even before the Bill was introduced— little piece of parliamentary mischief-making when that this Bill is not prima facie hybrid. Indeed, in the most of us had expected to be here to discuss the opinion of the Clerk of Public and Private Bills, important Second Reading of the Bill. However, late the Bill, “cannot be hybrid”. Had it been, neither the on Thursday, he raised a question not raised by the Clerks of this House nor of the other place, having 650 Members of the other place affected by the Bill— examined it for that specific purpose, would have let it namely, that it be referred to the Examiners on the pass. That letter is in the Library. grounds of hybridity. Furthermore, my noble and learned friend Lord The noble and learned Lord built up an unparalleled Mackay of Clashfern wrote in a letter copied to me, reputation in the long years of the previous Government: the Leader of the Opposition and the Convenor of the whenever there was a dud case to be put or a hopeless Crossbench Peers: position to be defended, the cry went up from his old “A hybrid Bill is a public Bill which affects a particular private flatmate, then in No. 10, “Send for Charlie”. Whatever interest in a manner different from the private interests of other it was, up he popped at this Dispatch Box to put the persons or bodies of the same category”. 529 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 530

On that, I am sure that we all agree. He went on to other place—the place affected by the Bill. The Motion write this short line: is a political tactic designed to delay a Bill concerning “I can see no ground on which it could be argued that this is a elections to the House of Commons, which the Commons, hybrid Bill”. after long and careful examination on the Floor of So what are the facts of the matter? No one’s right their House, have agreed. to vote is affected. No one’s right to vote is withdrawn. Frankly, the Labour Party in this House has to No one’s right to representation is diminished. All that decide what sort of Opposition it wants to be. Does it the Bill seeks to do is to ensure that constituency sizes want to engage with the great issues that led to its are more equal and that each voter’s voice is more ejection from power and the loss of 100 seats in the equal. Underneath all the legal argumentation, what other place, or does it want to use the kinds of procedural shines out from the noble and learned Lord is that ploys, wheezes and games that we see today? Does it equalising constituency sizes upsets the Labour Party. want to engage in the proper work of this House in We all know that Labour has long benefited from this scrutinising and revising legislation line by line, or system. No one talked about hybridity then and we all does it want to manufacture time-wasting debates? know why, don’t we? It seems that the Labour Party is More than 50 speakers are waiting to speak on the upset that those unique communities in the Western Second Reading. There is an important issue here. We Isles, Orkney and Shetland are protected under this Bill. saw it last week in the vote on the referral of the Public Bodies Bill and we see it today. This House can debate Lord Tyler: Can my noble friend confirm that, procedure or it can debate substance. There is a great whenever any legislation has referred to the Orkney liberty in our procedures and we all want that to be and Shetland constituency, although that constituency preserved, but I hope that the noble Baroness the has never been considered to be part of the United Leader of the Opposition and the noble and learned Kingdom as a conventional constituency, the legislation Lord do not intend to try to take this House the way has never been treated as hybrid? of the other place, where hours are spent debating procedure and many clauses of Bills are never discussed. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, not only is my noble friend, like my noble friend Lord Rennard, right, but Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, in respect this relates to a Bill on which the former Lord Chancellor of the Second Reading of the Public Bodies Bill, the advised. The Scotland Act 1998—legislation of a Labour House as a whole was debating a matter of extremely Government—made provision for Orkney and Shetland important constitutional relevance. That is why my each to be a separate constituency in the Scottish noble friend Lord Hunt of Kings Heath put down the Parliament and not to be part of any future Boundary Motion that he did. As with today, it was nothing to Commission review. The noble and learned Lord raised do with wasting this House’s time; we were trying to no question of hybridity then. In addition, the same ensure that we acted properly in holding the Government legislation— to account.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Perhaps the noble Lord Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, years have gone by could move his guns towards the argument. The reason when we have not discussed these issues, either of for that is that the Scotland Bill dealt with the whole of hybridity or special Select Committees. It seems Scotland. This Bill excludes two bits from it. Answer extraordinary that within six months of the Labour that, please. Party going into opposition we have had to debate them on three separate occasions. I do not think that Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, there was no private anyone in this place outside a few zealots in Labour’s interest affected in 1998 and there is no private interest back room wants to see the kind of opposition and affected today. If the noble and learned Lord really government politics that we have seen develop over the wants to remove the protection that we have put into course of the past few months. the Bill, let him make Labour’s case in Stornoway, Lerwick and Kirkwall, but he should not waste the Lord Stoddart of Swindon: I wonder whether the time of this House with these tactics. Leader of the House has made an assessment of how long the Examiners would take. Is it weeks or months Lord Falconer of Thoroton: We make it clear that we or days? support those two being exceptions. The question is whether other people should be entitled to argue for Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, that would be up to being exceptions as well. That is the point that the the Examiners, but, based on the precedent set earlier noble Lord needs to deal with. this summer, it would be between a week and 10 days. Everybody knows that this Bill is on a tight timetable, Lord Strathclyde: Not at all, my Lords. I have which is precisely why we are discussing this Motion brought two qualitative arguments—those of the Clerks today. Six years ago, the noble and learned Lord, Lord of the House of Lords and those of my noble and Lloyd of Berwick, submitted from the Cross Benches learned friend the former Lord Chancellor, who have that the Constitutional Reform Bill, a Bill profoundly said that there is absolutely no question to answer. affecting this House, which ended centuries of this Why has this popped up now? No one raised hybridity House’s judicial role, be referred to a Select Committee. in the other place—the place affected by the Bill. No The noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, one challenged the legal drafting of the Bill in the condemned that as political mischief-making and strongly 531 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 532

[LORD STRATHCLYDE] Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Private or local. urged the House to resist it. Now on a Bill that has nothing to do with this House at all and has been Lord Strathclyde: Private or local; I am very happy approved by another place— with that as well. It is whether it affects it in a manner different from the private interest of other persons or Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The noble Lord is absolutely bodies of the same category. In the opinion of the right, but he will also know that once the Bill was noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, referred to a Select Committee by the noble and and many others the right to vote is a public right and learned Lord’s Motion it was made so much better, the manner and place in which it may be exercised are and I publicly said that. I recanted, but what has not private interests. It is on that basis that I agree with happened to him? He supported that Motion. my noble and learned friend and with the Clerks of the House of Lords that there are no grounds on which it could be argued that this is a Private Bill. Lord Strathclyde: But on that occasion, the noble and learned Lord did not have the support of the Lord Grocott: My Lords, I listened to the Leader of Clerks or my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay the House many times when he was Leader of the of Clashfern. The point is that today he comes forward Opposition and was often almost seduced by his oratory. as the political mischief-maker in chief, hoping to use However, that was not the case on this occasion and the strength of his party’s vote as the biggest party in I do not think that it was a speech that he will be this House to delay your Lordships’ consideration of entirely thrilled about, because it was based almost this important Bill. entirely on suggesting that my noble and learned friend’s The Clerks of this House are clear that this Bill is argument was spurious, shallow, pointless and simply not prima facie hybrid and “cannot be hybrid”. I and avowedly party-political. The noble Lord is nodding, submit that if the noble and learned Lord and his so he is obviously confirming that. I want to comment friends do not have the good sense to stop this charade, initially on two points that he made, which are important withdraw this Motion and let us all get on with the considerations for the rest of us during this debate. Bill, your Lordships should put a stop to this outbreak The noble Lord said that we know “that this Bill is of party-political mischief-making with our procedures on a tight timetable”. In other words, it has been and do so decisively. guillotined quite severely in the Commons; that; of course, is what he hopes to be able to achieve in the Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Again, I point out to Lords. I simply ask him: who is responsible for this the House that yes, we are proud to be the biggest Bill being on a tight timetable? The Government have party at this moment in this House, but the coalition made that decision in the full light of all the information. Benches have a greater majority than we have as a It is also, presumably, the reason why the Government single party. I just wanted the House to be aware of say that it was not even possible to have pre-legislative that. scrutiny on this huge constitutional Bill—one which I think the party leader of the noble Lord, Lord McNally, has described as being part of the most important Lord Campbell of Alloway: Is the noble Baroness reforms since 1832, with characteristic understatement. aware that the Examiners to whom this Bill is to be Your Lordships need not worry; I am coming to sent are the Clerk of the Parliaments here and the hybridity. I am sure that the noble Lord will deal with Clerk of the other place? that as seriously as I am dealing with the comments that he has been making. Noble Lords: Order! The noble Lord enunciated what I thought a unique constitutional principle—at least as far as I have heard Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I in this House; it was an astonishing one to come wonder if I could take a little heat out of what has just from the Leader of the House—in which it is not this been said. Will the noble Lord address the point raised House’s business to consider issues which have not by my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of been voted on or considered in the other place. He has Thoroton and give his own reasoned argument why commented on it enough times to make me realise that other constituencies should not be allowed to make this means that large swathes of business under this the argument that would take them to the position of coalition Government will not be possible for us to the Western Isles and Orkney and Shetland? I am not discuss, because he knows perfectly well that in the arguing about the two exclusions; I am asking why other place large sections of business are frequently nobody else has the privilege of making that argument, not discussed and not voted upon. That is due to as we have heard that the Isle of Wight would wish to timetabling, which obviously took place under the make it. What is the reasoned argument against that previous Government as it does under this one. But form of hybridity? please let us not pretend that he is making a serious constitutional argument that we must not consider it ourselves because it has not been considered by the 4pm other place. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the question before us I come to a severely practical point on the issue of is whether there is a case for the Bill to be hybrid and hybridity, which was partly touched upon in an earlier whether it affects a particular private interest in a exchange. No one could seriously argue that this particular manner different— clause of this particular schedule did not have 533 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 534 characteristics of hybridity: “Preserved constituencies” issue. I have listened with great care to what the noble is all it says. It then lists two constituencies with no and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, has said. I accept explanation whatsoever of why they are preserved. I that the threshold is a low one, a point that I made on put this as a procedural point to the Leader of the the previous occasion, but an elector’s interest in voting House; I would have thought that there is clearly no is not a private interest in the sense described in the reason on earth why any other constituency that wants Standing Orders. There can therefore be no question to be added to the preserved list should not be able to of treating one private interest differently from another. make out a case for doing so. There are 648 parliamentary I am saying, only in a roundabout way, exactly what I constituencies not covered in the preserved list. I shall believe the Clerk of the Public Bill Office has himself certainly be trying to persuade this House that Telford said in the letter that has been mentioned. is a constituency that should not be interfered with. It Before I am asked, I shall say that I have not read— is a fast-growing town in the West Midlands, whose population changes much more rapidly than other constituencies. I put only that point to him. I will not Lord Harris of Haringey: My Lords— develop the argument now—it would not be to the specific point of hybridity—other than to point out Lord Lloyd of Berwick: I am about to be asked, I that these amendments, should they be tabled, could think. not possibly be grouped because the nature of the hybridity means that each case is individual and is Lord Harris of Haringey: I am grateful to the noble unrelated to all the other constituencies. That is the Lord for giving way. Is it not the case that the act of basis on which these two constituencies are put down. voting is an individual one, yes, but as an elector you If, for the sake of argument, many amendments want wherever possible to be with a community of were tabled making the case for individual constituencies, others? Surely the point about constituencies is that it could not then be sustained, even if you concede they are about communities. If you break up communities that this clause is hybrid, that it was only a small part that are naturally together, that has severe consequences of the Bill, as some of the proponents of this not for the interests of all the individuals who make up being a hybrid Bill are advancing. If, during the passage that electorate. of the Bill through this House, other constituencies were added to the “exempt” clause, it would become a Lord Lloyd of Berwick: Of course communities much bigger part of the Bill. I put it to the noble Lord matter. I yield to no one on that view but we are the Leader of the House that these are serious questions; talking here about the specific question of whether the the case is certainly serious so far as I am advancing it. right to elect is itself a private interest, as described in There is hardly a constituency in Britain that could the Standing Orders. not put its case on the basis of its boundaries, its communities and their relationship of the communities to each other. Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The argument I am making, which is based on the Charlwood and Horley In passing, we have to acknowledge that all local Bill from 1973, is that the interest lies in the group with contribution to this by way of public inquiry, which which you vote. The argument over the Charlwood has always been the case in the past, is being bypassed and Horley Bill was about whether you should be in too; as the noble Lord the Leader of the House has Surrey or Sussex. It was not about an individual right told us, the Bill is under a very tight schedule. I to vote; it was about who you were grouped with. I acknowledge that there are different opinions on this, earnestly ask the noble and learned Lord to consider but it is not worthy simply to use the characteristics of his view on the Charlwood and Horley Bill and why I normal parliamentary banter, which I enjoy as much am not right in what I am saying. He is putting the as anyone else, in responding to a very serious Motion argument back to me in a way that is not how I am that my noble and learned friend has tabled which, putting it to him. on the noble Lord’s own admission, will delay the Bill, if that is what it does, by only a week and half. On a matter of such constitutional importance—the Lord Lloyd of Berwick: Of course I am; that is my Government’s words, not mine, although on this occasion purpose. I am putting it in the way it should be put. To I agree with them—should we really not be able to my mind, whatever group the individual may be in, it delay the Bill by that time in order to establish where remains his individual right. That is not a private right there is clear and serious doubt, although the noble as described in the Standing Orders. Lord will no doubt be able to persuade enough people to his point of view? We should at least have the Lord Beecham: Will the noble and learned Lord opportunity of dealing with that question in the proper turn to the question of locality? What does “locality” way by referring it in the way that my noble and mean if not what my noble and learned friend Lord learned friend Lord Falconer is suggesting. Falconer of Thoroton and my noble friend Lord Harris referred to? Lord Lloyd of Berwick: In a brief intervention some months ago, I acquired an entirely undeserved and Lord Lloyd of Berwick: I am still on the question of unsought reputation for being an expert on hybridity. whether the right to elect is a private right. That is the On that occasion, though, I detected what I thought to question. Unless it is, these so-called private rights are be a serious issue that needed to be considered in the not private rights within the meaning of the Standing way described. On this occasion, I can detect no such Orders. 535 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 536

Lord Howarth of Newport: Does the noble and one has clearly shown that a distinction is clearly learned Lord accept that the determination of the size drawn. There are 600 constituencies—assuming that of a constituency affects not only the right to vote but, 50 are lopped off—598 of which are dealt with in one subsequently, the nature of the relationship between way and two in another. constituents and their Member of Parliament? In the The first question—what is a local interest?—is not case of Orkney and Shetland, where there would be a question of a private interest. Local interest is defined only 37,000, and that of the Western Isles, where there in the Companion and, as I say, is taken verbatim from are only 22,000, would their local and private rights page 556 of Erskine May. There is no definition. In not be differently treated by a Bill which otherwise my submission, a local interest—if I am wrong in this, created constituencies of 76,000, plus or minus 5 per I will gladly come to the stool of penitence—is not a cent? Would it not mean that the relationship between proprietary interest; it is an interest involving persons the Member of Parliament and his or her constituents living in a locality as persons living in that locality. If I in these two constituencies was fundamentally different am wrong, it means that even though people living in from that of the Member of Parliament to his constituents the Orkneys or in the Western Isles are in a locality, elsewhere? Does that not therefore indicate that local nevertheless their locality status does not count. I and private interests are differently treated by the Bill? believe, with very great respect, that the matter is as In that case, have we not passed the low threshold? I simple, clear and narrow as that. remind the House of what the Speaker said in the 1962-63 Session: Lord Goldsmith: My Lords, I am not sure that it is “I accept the true position to be this, that if it be possible for necessary for your Lordships’ House even to go as far the view to be taken that this Bill is a Hybrid Bill it ought to go to as that. I invite your Lordships’ attention back to the the examiners. There must not be a doubt about it”.—[Official Motion of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, Report, Commons, 10/12/62; col. 45.] on whether the Bill should be referred to the Examiners, Have we not cleared the low threshold? not whether it is hybrid. It is a very long time since this House has sat as a court determining difficult questions. Lord Lloyd of Berwick: I have already dealt with the The whole point of referring a Bill to the Examiners is threshold point. I accept and have always accepted for them to decide independently whether it is hybrid. that the threshold is low, but in this instance I suggest I should declare an interest as a member of the respectfully to the House that the threshold has not Select Committee on the Constitution. I have my been crossed. As to the rest of the noble and learned name down to speak in the main debate. Given that Lord’s argument, it seems to go much further than the I am taking up some of your Lordships’ time now, I simple point that I am trying to make, which has to do withdraw my name from that debate, but I underline with the meaning of “private interest” in the relevant the importance of determining what test your Lordships’ Standing Orders. On that, I find myself in complete House should use to decide this Motion. It is exactly agreement with the views expressed by the Clerk of as the noble Lord, Lord Howarth of Newport, has Public and Private Bills. I expected to be asked whether said, and as stated by the Speaker in another place I had read the opinion of the leading counsel, who when he ruled on the Local Government Bill in the appears to have expressed a different view. I have no 1962-63 Session and commented that, doubt that if I had read that opinion I would be better “if it be possible for the view to be taken that this Bill is a Hybrid informed than I am, but I am not altogether sure that I Bill, it ought to go to the examiners. There must not be a doubt would necessarily be any wiser. Certainly, doing the about it”.—[Official Report, Commons, 10/12/62; col. 45.] best that I can, it seems that the Bill is not hybrid. In the light of the discussion that has taken place, I 4.15 pm invite noble Lords to consider the views expressed by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, and the Lord Elystan-Morgan: This matter turns on a very noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, on the one hand, narrow and, indeed, very simple issue. I can put it in and those of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd, one sentence; it is a question of what is meant or not on the other, on whether it can conceivably be said meant by “a local interest”—not a private interest but that there is no doubt about it. I am sorry that the a local interest. As far as I know, this is not defined in noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, spoke in the way that he any statute or authoritatively defined in relation to the did about Mr Goudie, but in answer to my intervention definition of hybrid Bills. he accepted that he is not saying this does not represent There are two issues, both of which are very simple, the honest and genuine opinion of someone who is and I do not believe that one of them really arises. The experienced and learned in these matters. His conclusion first issue is whether there is a body that has a distinctive was that it certainly could be said that this Bill was reality in relation to the words of the Companion that hybrid. That is why, in his view and that of the noble have been taken from page 556 of Erskine May. The and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, it should go to the second question is whether, if it has that distinction, it Examiners. is dealt with differently from all the others that belong I wish to underline two further points. First, a lot to that body.I take the second question first. There clearly has been said about whether the Bill affects private is a difference in approach here in that the Western interests. The noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, is Isles and the Islands of Orkney are inviolate from any absolutely right; that is not the question. The definition prospect of change. Many of the 600 constituencies in the 23rd edition of Erskine May is that hybrid Bills that will remain may well escape unscathed, but they are public Bills that are considered to affect specific have no guarantee of being inviolate. Therefore, it private or local interests. One cannot ignore this question seems to me that, as far as the second limb is concerned, of locality. 537 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 538

Secondly and finally, I draw attention to what Let us be frank. This is a real issue that we are Mr Goudie said in his opinion at paragraph 17. That asking the House to consider, and it is easy to dismiss for me is the critical question which has been raised what lawyers say as “mere technicality” and say that before. It is not a question of whether or not these two people are trying to take advantage of points for constituencies should be subject to special treatment—for political reasons. However, there is a reason why they myself, I can well see why that should be so—but a say, “Shoot the lawyers first”; it is because they are the question of what the position is regarding other ones who tend to tell people what they do not want to constituencies. Like other noble Lords, I have received hear. But if not them, who? And if not now, when communications from people in different parts of the should we have this debate on hybridity? country—from Cornwall and the Isle of Wight—asking The House knows that hybridity can be raised at and expressing their views about being treated in a any stage in the other place and here. This House has different way. Mr Goudie says in paragraph 17, rightly received a great deal of praise for the sobriety “it is … reasonably and properly arguable that the justification and the reasoned way in which we conduct ourselves; (whatever precisely it may be) is capable of being urged as being listening courteously to each other and responding in applicable to other constituencies”. a way that is right. Is there a real issue of hybridity My understanding of the process which is taking place here? Yes, there is. What is hybridity? In essence, it is is that if the examiners agree that the Bill is hybrid, it about fairness. Should different groups and different will provide an opportunity for those other constituencies individuals be treated differently? That is what hybridity to put forward their case as to why they, too, should be does. We are asking for the House to consider whether treated in a special and favoured way. Good luck to the low threshold that everyone has spoken about has them if they succeed in that endeavour. For those been crossed. reasons, I will support the Motion. When we talk about our constitution, speed may not work to our long-term advantage. Therefore, it is Baroness Butler-Sloss: My Lords, perhaps I may important for us to think soberly. Every Bill that we make two brief points. I had not intended to speak. have spoken of in relation to constitutional importance Currently, I support the noble and learned Lord, Lord has had a White Paper, and often a Green Paper, a Lloyd of Berwick, but that is not the point I really draft Bill and consideration. This Bill comes to us want to make. We are hearing passages from the fresh, new, young and unseasoned, without an opportunity written opinion of a distinguished member of the Bar, for mature and quiet contemplation. We do have an a Queen’s Counsel, and, like me, other Members must opportunity to do that. It is a simple question: does think that that is profoundly unsatisfactory. We ought the House think that this matter should be delayed by not to be asked to vote—as we shall be—on hearing a few days to enable the Examiners to decide the little snippets. If the QC’s opinion is to be used in this matter one way or the other? House, we should all have an opportunity to read it. Lord Strathclyde: The noble and learned Baroness Lord Falconer of Thoroton: First of all, we gave a is the shadow Attorney-General. She cannot say that copy of the opinion to the noble Baroness, Lady this is a fresh, new Bill. Her party and her shadow D’Souza, and to the other side, and we placed it in the Cabinet have been studying it since June. Why have Library of the House on Friday. I apologise, but I did they taken until now to raise what she calls extremely say that in my opening remarks. I completely agree important issues? with the noble and learned Baroness—she is obviously right. However, we have made the opinion available to Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, the reason everyone. If the noble and learned Baroness would I described the Bill as fresh and new is that with every like to go to the Library and read it, and quickly come other constitutional Bill that we have had—the noble back to vote in my favour, I would be very grateful. Lord knows this—we have had the advantage of a White Paper. We have talked about draft Bills. Pre- Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, having had legislative scrutiny is something that many noble Lords the privilege of being in this House for 13 years, I say who sit opposite have spoken about. I do not want to that this debate is one in which this House, most go on any further—the short issue for us is this— unusually, should not feel one jot of pride. I have listened with great care to what has been said. I have to Lord Tyler: My Lords— say to the Leader, who knows the affection in which I hold him, that this is not his finest hour. I say that Baroness Scotland of Asthal: I will finish and give because we are faced with a subject of some importance. way in a moment, if I may. The short issue for the I have listened to the laughter and watched Members House is whether or not we think enough has been with a deal of disappointment because this subject is raised for this matter to be put to the Examiners. not very funny. It is serious, it is important, and it needs and deserves your Lordships’ serious consideration. Lord Tyler: My Lords, the noble and learned Baroness I wish to take particular issue with the point raised will recall that she was a member of the Government by the Leader, who made reference to our debate last who brought before your Lordships’ House the week on the Public Bodies Bill. That was not a party Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, which political debate. The noble Lord will remember that it included provisions for the alternative vote but was was, in many ways, led by the former Lord Chief not given any pre-legislative scrutiny and was not the Justice, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, and subject of anything like the discussion that has taken every former law officer who spoke did so with one voice. place recently in the other place. 539 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 540

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, noble Lords matter. I remember that when I was a lay magistrate, I will also know what happened to that Bill. There is was told not to worry about an appeal because it was a still time for discussion: we will be discussing the new safety net. We could get the Examiners to look at this Bill now. I say very clearly that this is not merely a matter and it would be clear for everyone to understand. political instrument being used for pernicious purposes, which is what has been suggested and what has made 4.30 pm me feel very disappointed in noble Lords opposite. Lord Myners: My Lords— Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, does my noble and learned friend agree that the Bill comes to Lord Elton: My Lords, I think that it is our turn. I us not only fresh but substantially unexamined in the wonder whether the Front Benches consider that we other place? Very important elements—Clauses 3 to 6 have now heard as much as we are likely to take in that and Clause 11—were entirely unexamined in Committee is relevant and that we should now divide. and on Report. Is it not incumbent on this House to make absolutely certain that we follow the correct Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I do not know whether procedure to ensure that this extremely important many of the questions were put to me or to the noble constitutional legislation is examined in the appropriate and learned Lord, but I shall be extremely brief. A manner? number of issues have been raised this afternoon. They are important issues that will be raised and dealt Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, of course with, quite rightly, in Committee—in particular, the I agree. questions of the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, concerning Telford—but they have nothing to do with the question Lord Martin of Springburn: My Lords, perhaps I of hybridity. I make two very brief points. First, the may speak briefly. The reason that this Bill should go Bill is not hybrid and, secondly, the motivation behind to the Examiners is that we have heard one former the Labour Party’s anger is one of delay on this Lord Chancellor say one thing and another former all-important coalition Bill. Lord Chancellor say another. We have heard advice from eminent QCs. When I was Speaker, I got advice Lord Barnett: Will the noble Lord give way for a from eminent QCs and sometimes it was not too good. moment? As I understand it, it is only a matter of Quotations have been made about previous Speakers timing. The Bill is important and the timing is tight. giving rulings on hybridity. However, a Speaker would He told us that it would take 10 days if it went to an most certainly have taken advice from his Clerks, and independent examiner. How long does he think it Speaker’s counsel would also have been present. Therefore, would take if 400 constituency amendments were tabled a procedural expert and legal expert would have been in Committee? present before the Speaker went to the House. I do not really want to get into arguments about Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, if the Examiners decided special cases around the country, although I support that the Bill was not hybrid, that still could not stop the case for the Orkneys, the Shetlands and the Western 400 constituency amendments being tabled. Isles being special. Anyone who knows Members of Parliament who have represented those constituencies—as Lord Myners: My Lords, it seems to me— some here previously did, the law officer being one of them—will know that sometimes the distance that MPs have to travel in doing their duty is such that they Noble Lords: Order! have to stay overnight in Glasgow before going on to their constituencies. This is not just an argument about Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I think that the mood of people being allowed to vote; we are going beyond the House is that we should move to a vote on this that—the electorate should also have access to their matter, but perhaps I may deal with two points. It was Members of Parliament. There are other constituencies disappointing that the Minister did not choose to with difficulties similar to those of the Western Isles answer them. I know that if I had been a Minister, I and the Orkneys. I know the geography of Scotland would have been provided with material that would but this is not just about Scotland. I also understand have answered the points, and it was disappointing the argument that has been put forward about the Isle that what he sought to do was political burlesque. of Wight and I sympathise with that case. However, it I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord is also true that, on leaving Glasgow airport, I could Lloyd of Berwick, for being the only person who gave be in my constituency within half an hour, whereas the a reasoned argument about why I was wrong. With MP for Argyll and Bute would take a two-hour journey the greatest respect to the noble and learned Lord, I to get to his constituency. Getting to the famous island submit that he is wrong because he has failed to deal of Islay would involve taking a ferry, which would also with the Charlwood case, in which the issue which take hours, and two ferries are required to get to Mull contributed to making it hybrid was two parishes and Iona. saying, “We want to be in this county, governed by Although I did not intend to do so, I am beginning them and not in that county”. That was accepting the to put cases for special consideration because there are principle that localities are really interested and that it very difficult circumstances in which MPs have to is a local issue as to which group they elect to local operate because of the location of their constituencies. authorities and local councils. That was important It would do no harm for the Examiners to look at the in relation to it. I respectfully say to the noble and 541 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 542 learned Lord, whom I respect greatly in every single Boyce, L. Hunt of Chesterton, L. respect, that he has had no opportunity to read either Boyd of Duncansby, L. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. the opinion or what was said in relation to the Bill that Bradley, L. Irvine of Lairg, L. I refer to, which is my fault rather than his. The Brennan, L. Janner of Braunstone, L. Brett, L. Jones, L. threshold is whether or not there is an argument about Brooke of Alverthorpe, L. Jones of Whitchurch, B. it. No one other than the noble and learned Lord said Brookeborough, V. Jordan, L. that it was not arguable. I had the support of the Brookman, L. Judd, L. former Attorney-General— Brooks of Tremorfa, L. Kennedy of Southwark, L. Browne of Belmont, L. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. Campbell-Savours, L. King of West Bromwich, L. Lord Alderdice: My Lords, the noble and learned Chester, Bp. Kingsmill, B. Lord must understand that many of us did not choose Christopher, L. Kinnock, L. to make the argument, not because we do not feel Clancarty, E. Kinnock of Holyhead, B. strongly about it or do not have a very clear and Clark of Windermere, L. Kirkhill, L. argued case in our minds, but because we did not want Clarke of Hampstead, L. Knight of Weymouth, L. Clinton-Davis, L. Lea of Crondall, L. to disadvantage the House in moving on to the Second Cobbold, L. Leitch, L. Reading debate. Corbett of Castle Vale, L. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. The noble and learned Lord must not mislead the Craig of Radley, L. Liddle, L. Crawley, B. Lipsey, L. House on this point, particularly when he talks about Davies of Coity, L. Lofthouse of Pontefract, L. locality. The reality is that locality applies to every Davies of Oldham, L. McAvoy, L. single constituency throughout the land. The point Davies of Stamford, L. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, made by the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, is that if the Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde, L. Examiners start to meet, there is no reason why every B. McDonagh, B. single constituency might not come forward. It is not Dixon, L. Macdonald of Tradeston, L. Donaghy, B. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. necessarily a matter of a week or 10 days at all. The Donoughue, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. question of locality is properly considered by the Drake, B. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, Boundary Commission when every constituency can Drayson, L. L. look at local interest; it is not on a political motion Dubs, L. McKenzie of Luton, L. about hybridity. Eames, L. Mandelson, L. Eatwell, L. Martin of Springburn, L. Elystan-Morgan, L. Massey of Darwen, B. Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I apologise to the noble Evans of Parkside, L. Mawson, L. Lord, Lord Alderdice, for not knowing what his arguments Evans of Temple Guiting, L. Maxton, L. were, but as he did not express them and I am not able Evans of Watford, L. Meacher, B. Falconer of Thoroton, L. Mitchell, L. to mind read, I could not deal with them. The Boundary Falkender, B. Moonie, L. Commission will not deal with the Western Isles and Falkland, V. Morgan, L. Orkney and Shetland because the effect of the Bill—this Farrington of Ribbleton, B. Morgan of Drefelin, B. is my point—has been kept completely separate and Faulkner of Worcester, L. Morris of Aberavon, L. out of the arrangements; therefore, their locality has Foster of Bishop Auckland, L. Morris of Manchester, L. Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Morris of Yardley, B. been protected and no one else’s has. I ask noble Gale, B. Morrow, L. Lords to consider whether there is an argument about Gavron, L. Moser, L. hybridity in this case. I say to those behind me as well Giddens, L. Myners, L. as those in front of me, please address this as an issue Gilbert, L. Nye, B. on which this House has a good reputation. I beg leave Golding, B. O’Loan, B. Goldsmith, L. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. to seek the opinion of the House. Gordon of Strathblane, L. O’Neill of Clackmannan, L. Goudie, B. Palmer, L. 4.37 pm Gould of Potternewton, B. Patel of Bradford, L. Grabiner, L. Pendry, L. Graham of Edmonton, L. Peston, L. Division on Lord Falconer of Thoroton’s Motion. Grantchester, L. Pitkeathley, B. Grenfell, L. Plant of Highfield, L. Contents 210; Not-Contents 224. Griffiths of Burry Port, L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Grocott, L. Prescott, L. Lord Falconer of Thoroton’s Motion disagreed. Harries of Pentregarth, L. Prosser, B. Harris of Haringey, L. Quin, B. Harrison, L. Radice, L. Division No. 1 Hart of Chilton, L. Rea, L. Haskel, L. Reid of Cardowan, L. CONTENTS Haskins, L. Rendell of Babergh, B. Hattersley, L. Richard, L. Adams of Craigielea, B. Bassam of Brighton, L. Haworth, L. Richardson of Calow, B. Adonis, L. [Teller] Hayter of Kentish Town, B. Rogan, L. Afshar, B. Beecham, L. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Rosser, L. Ahmed, L. Berkeley, L. Henig, B. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Allenby of Megiddo, V. Bhattacharyya, L. Hilton of Eggardon, B. St John of Bletso, L. Anderson of Swansea, L. Billingham, B. Hollick, L. Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly. Andrews, B. Bilston, L. Hollis of Heigham, B. Sandwich, E. Archer of Sandwell, L. Blackburn, Bp. Howarth of Newport, L. Sawyer, L. Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Blood, B. Howells of St Davids, B. Scotland of Asthal, B. Bach, L. Boothroyd, B. Howie of Troon, L. Sheldon, L. Barnett, L. Borrie, L. Hoyle, L. Sherlock, B. 543 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Arrangement of Business 544

Simon, V. Turner of Camden, B. Lindsay, E. Rotherwick, L. Smith of Basildon, B. Wall of New Barnet, B. Listowel, E. Ryder of Wensum, L. Snape, L. Warner, L. Liverpool, E. Saatchi, L. Soley, L. Warnock, B. Lloyd of Berwick, L. St John of Fawsley, L. Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Warwick of Undercliffe, B. Lucas, L. Sassoon, L. Stoddart of Swindon, L. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Luce, L. Scott of Foscote, L. Stone of Blackheath, L. Luke, L. Waverley, V. Scott of Needham Market, B. Strabolgi, L. Lyell, L. Wedderburn of Charlton, L. Seccombe, B. Symons of Vernham Dean, B. McColl of Dulwich, L. Selborne, E. Taylor of Blackburn, L. Wheeler, B. Macdonald of River Glaven, Selsdon, L. Taylor of Bolton, B. Whitaker, B. L. Sharp of Guildford, B. Temple-Morris, L. Whitty, L. MacGregor of Pulham Thornton, B. Wilkins, B. Market, L. Sharples, B. Tomlinson, L. Williams of Elvel, L. Maclennan of Rogart, L. Shaw of Northstead, L. Touhig, L. Wills, L. McNally, L. Shephard of Northwold, B. Triesman, L. Woolmer of Leeds, L. Maddock, B. Shipley, L. Tunnicliffe, L. [Teller] Young of Hornsey, B. Maples, L. Shrewsbury, E. Turnberg, L. Young of Norwood Green, L. Mar, C. Shutt of Greetland, L. [Teller] Mar and Kellie, E. Skelmersdale, L. Marland, L. Slim, V. NOT CONTENTS Marlesford, L. Smith of Clifton, L. Aberdare, L. Dixon-Smith, L. Mayhew of Twysden, L. Spicer, L. Addington, L. D’Souza, B. Miller of Hendon, B. Strathclyde, L. Alderdice, L. Dykes, L. Montagu of Beaulieu, L. Swinfen, L. Allan of Hallam, L. Eaton, B. Montrose, D. Tanlaw, L. Alton of Liverpool, L. Eccles, V. Moore of Lower Marsh, L. Taverne, L. Anelay of St Johns, B. [Teller] Eccles of Moulton, B. Morris of Bolton, B. Taylor of Holbeach, L. Armstrong of Ilminster, L. Eden of Winton, L. Moynihan, L. Taylor of Warwick, L. Ashcroft, L. Elton, L. Murphy, B. Tenby, V. Astor of Hever, L. Erroll, E. Naseby, L. Teverson, L. Attlee, E. Falkner of Margravine, B. Neuberger, B. Thomas of Gresford, L. Avebury, L. Faulks, L. Newby, L. Thomas of Walliswood, B. Baker of Dorking, L. Fearn, L. Newton of Braintree, L. Thomas of Winchester, B. Ballyedmond, L. Feldman, L. Noakes, B. Tonge, B. Barker, B. Fellowes, L. Northover, B. Tope, L. Bates, L. Finlay of Llandaff, B. Norton of Louth, L. Tordoff, L. Bell, L. Fookes, B. Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, L. Trefgarne, L. Benjamin, B. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. O’Cathain, B. Trimble, L. Best, L. Fowler, L. Oppenheim-Barnes, B. Trumpington, B. Black of Brentwood, L. Freeman, L. Ouseley, L. Tugendhat, L. Blackwell, L. Freud, L. Parminter, B. Turnbull, L. Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury, Garden of Frognal, B. Patten of Barnes, L. Tyler, L. B. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Perry of Southwark, B. Ullswater, V. Boswell of Aynho, L. Gardner of Parkes, B. Phillips of Sudbury, L. Valentine, B. Bowness, L. Geddes, L. Plumb, L. Verma, B. Bradshaw, L. German, L. Popat, L. Waddington, L. Bridgeman, V. Goodlad, L. Powell of Bayswater, L. Wakeham, L. Brittan of Spennithorne, L. Goschen, V. Ramsbotham, L. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, Greaves, L. Rawlings, B. Wallace of Tankerness, L. L. Hamwee, B. Razzall, L. Walmsley, B. Brougham and Vaux, L. Hanham, B. Reay, L. Walpole, L. Browning, B. Harris of Richmond, B. Rees-Mogg, L. Walton of Detchant, L. Burns, L. Henley, L. Rennard, L. Watson of Richmond, L. Buscombe, B. Hill of Oareford, L. Renton of Mount Harry, L. Wei, L. Butler of Brockwell, L. Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, Ritchie of Brompton, B. Wilcox, B. Butler-Sloss, B. L. Roberts of Conwy, L. Williamson of Horton, L. Caithness, E. Home, E. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Wright of Richmond, L. Campbell of Alloway, L. Hooper, B. Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L. Younger of Leckie, V. Carlile of Berriew, L. Howe, E. Carrington, L. Howell of Guildford, L. Cathcart, E. Hunt of Wirral, L. Arrangement of Business Chidgey, L. Hurd of Westwell, L. Announcement Chorley, L. Hussein-Ece, B. Clement-Jones, L. Inge, L. 4.53 pm Coe, L. Inglewood, L. Colwyn, L. Jenkin of Roding, L. Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, with the Condon, L. Jones of Cheltenham, L. leave of the House I would like to make a brief Cope of Berkeley, L. Kakkar, L. business statement. All those present will be aware Cotter, L. Kerr of Kinlochard, L. Courtown, E. Kimball, L. that earlier on there was an exchange of views about Coussins, B. King of Bridgwater, L. proceedings today. I made it clear that my first duty, as Craigavon, V. Kirkwood of Kirkhope, L. with all other usual channels, is to take into consideration Crickhowell, L. Laming, L. the needs of all Back-Benchers. Even though those Cumberlege, B. Lamont of Lerwick, L. outside this House, who know less about our proceedings, De Mauley, L. Lawson of Blaby, L. Deben, L. Leach of Fairford, L. might point out that the vast majority of speakers Denham, L. Lee of Trafford, L. today are from the opposition Benches, my duty is, Dholakia, L. Lester of Herne Hill, L. and always will be, to treat all Back-Benchers equally. 545 Arrangement of Business[15 NOVEMBER 2010] G20 546

Following further constructive discussions between because of the measures we have taken that is no the usual channels, we have come to the view that it longer the case. Countries with larger deficits need to may be for the convenience of the House if we proceed act on them and to do so now. This is absolutely vital with the two Oral Statements today before starting the for the confidence and stability we need for businesses Second Reading of the Parliamentary Voting System to invest once again. and Constituencies Bill. The Second Reading will then That was exactly the view of the G20. In Seoul, we be adjourned tonight after the contribution by my agreed that, noble friend Lord Teverson and will be resumed tomorrow ‘the failure to implement consolidation … would undermine after the debate on the interim report from the Leader’s confidence and growth’, Group on Members leaving the House. That means and we agreed to, that we will recommence tomorrow’s debate with the contribution from the noble Baroness, Lady Henig. ‘formulate and implement clear, credible, ambitious and growth- This approach has the agreement of the usual channels, friendly fiscal consolidation plans’. and I hope that the whole House will support it. There can be no clearer statement of our collective intent than this. Big deficits are dangerous. We simply have to deal with them. G20 Secondly, on trade, as the world comes out of Statement recession with some countries moving more slowly and others, including the new emerging powers, forging 4.54 pm ahead, there are inevitable pressures in some quarters The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord for protectionism. The G20 has been a vital forum in Strathclyde): My Lords, perhaps this would be a fighting to keep markets open. Increasing trade is the convenient moment to repeat a Statement made in biggest boost and the biggest stimulus we could give to another place by my right honourable friend the Prime the world economy. It does not cost any money. It is Minister earlier today. The Statement is as follows: not a zero-sum game. It creates wealth and jobs. So, “With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make against a background of rising protectionist pressures, a Statement on my visit to China and the G20 summit the G20 reaffirmed its determination to learn the in Korea. First, I am sure that the whole House would lessons of the past and avoid the trade barriers and want to join with me in welcoming the liberation, at beggar-my-neighbour policies that wrecked the economy last, of Aung San Suu Kyi. Her tenacity and courage in the 1930s. It refreshed its commitment, in the face of injustice has been truly inspiring. I spoke ‘to keeping markets open and liberalizing trade and investment as to her this morning to pass on the congratulations of a means to promote economic progress for all’, everyone in this country on her release and on her and it pledged to, remarkable stand on democracy and human rights. ‘roll back any new protectionist measures that may have arisen’. We must now work to ensure that her release is followed On the Doha round let me say this: it is incredibly by freedom for more than 2,000 other political prisoners frustrating that this trade round is almost 10 years old and that this becomes the first step towards the people and that world leaders say again and again that it is in Burma being able to choose the person they want to going to be completed. Yet the situation still remains run their country. stalled. The longer it has gone on, the more difficult it In China and Korea, my main focus was on jobs has got, because the world economy has changed so and growth. In China, I led one of the biggest and fast that the deal has become outdated. Both developed most high-powered British delegations ever. This helped and developing countries are looking for more from to win new business for Britain worth billions of the round. pounds, involving businesses all over the UK and I do not want to raise hopes artificially but I do cities across China. We strengthened our ties on trade, think that some real progress has been made. Vitally, education and culture, all the while raising our concerns the language of the communiqué says: with China on issues like human rights where we have ‘2011 is a critical window of opportunity’; differences of view. that our engagement to secure a deal, In Seoul, Britain had four priorities: first, to continue to win recognition for the importance of fiscal ‘must intensify and expand … to complete the end game’, consolidation, with those countries with the greatest of the negotiations; and that, as I proposed at the deficits taking the fastest action; secondly, to get a Toronto summit, we have to make the deal bigger by clear commitment from all countries to fight protectionism having a wide ‘across the board’ negotiation. What and take the steps necessary to boost global trade; changed at this summit was that the US said that if a thirdly, to help move development issues up the G20 good and fair deal comes forward, it will take it to agenda; and, fourthly, to address the global imbalances Congress. All of us instructed our trade negotiators to which were at the root of the global financial crisis put more on the table so a deal can be done. I am and which still hold back growth in the world economy. determined that Britain should do everything it can to We made important progress on all four. push this forwards. That is why I have asked Leon Let me take each in turn. First, on fiscal consolidation, Brittan to continue helping to co-ordinate our trade it is now perfectly clear what the consequences are if policies, an effort in which he will be joined by our new you ignore the dangers of deficits. You see markets Trade Minister, Stephen Green, from January. questioning your economy, interest rates rising, confidence Thirdly, on development, it is right that the G20 is falling and the economy back in the danger zone. That now playing a bigger role on this issue. As well as the is where Britain was only a few months ago, but richest nations, the new emerging powers have a great 547 G20[LORDS] G20 548

[LORD STRATHCLYDE] more effective oversight and supervision of globally role to play in helping some of the poorest. There is important institutions. The last Basel accord on capital a real recognition about the importance of trade, ratios, Basel II, took nine years. With the G20 behind infrastructure and finance in the Seoul agreement, and it, Basel III has been done in 18 months. I also raised the importance of continuing our aid Reform of the IMF to make it more representative programmes. Britain is keeping its promises on aid, of the global economy has been discussed for years. and I pressed others to do the same. The G20 has finally got the deal done. On climate On the trade agenda, together with South Africa, change, President Calderon briefed the G20 on the Ethiopia and Malawi, who were there to represent plans for Cancun, and we received a report from the Africa, Britain mobilised the G20 behind, UN Secretary-General’s High-level Advisory Group ‘the vision of a free trade area’, on Climate Change Financing. We reaffirmed our for Africa. This was a fundamental pillar of a new approach resolute commitment to fight climate change and agreed to supporting economic growth and development in that we would, Africa set out in the Seoul consensus. Only 10 per cent ‘spare no effort to reach a balanced and successful outcome in of Africa’s trade is within the continent of Africa, so Cancun’. knocking down the trade walls between African countries This summit delivered important progress in managing will help to unleash economic growth. It is not just the tensions that are present in the global economy. In that we want Africa to be less dependent on aid; we my visits to China and the G20 summit we protected want Africa to be a source of growth and new jobs for and promoted our national interests. We have taken the world, including for Britain. vital steps towards the strong, balanced and sustainable Fourthly, uneven growth and widening imbalances global growth we need. We secured recognition for are fuelling the temptation to diverge from global acting on the deficit, support for more action on trade solutions into unco-ordinated actions and, according and development, and agreement on working to rectify to the IMF, those balances are forecast to get worse, the imbalances that threaten global economic stability. not better. Alongside protectionist pressures, we have Ultimately, this will win more jobs and growth for seen the signs of so-called ‘currency wars’. The G20 Britain. I commend the Statement to the House”. agreed the Seoul action plan. This includes agreeing to My Lords, that concludes the Statement. move, ‘towards more market determined exchange rate systems’, 5.05 pm and to refrain from the ‘competitive devaluation of currencies’. But the issue of trade imbalances goes Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I thank the beyond currencies. Just as countries with big budget Leader of the House for repeating the Statement on deficits must cut public spending, which is right for the G20 made by the Prime Minister. We endorse them and right for the world economy, so countries wholeheartedly the congratulations that the Prime with big trade deficits need to save more, consume less Minister has passed to the remarkable lady, Aung San and export more. If that is not accompanied by higher Suu Kyi. However, we also agree that as we celebrate consumption by surplus countries, world growth will her freedom, there is still a long journey before there be lower and protectionist pressures higher, and we will be a free and democratic Burma. I also welcome will repeat the mistakes of the past. It is as simple the release of Paul and Rachel Chandler. as that. On the G20, I welcome the South Korean By acting together we can maximise world growth Government’s success in keeping development on the and cut world unemployment. This is not some obscure G20 agenda. Development aid is not only important economic issue; it is about jobs. Trade imbalances for the lives it saves; it also makes an important have led to an imbalance of funds: a wall of money in contribution to global growth. I also welcome the fact the east and a wall of debt in the West. This was part that the Prime Minister pressed the G8 countries that of the problem that helped pump up some of the were there in Seoul to keep their promises on aid. bubbles which led to the crash that affected us all. As On climate change, can the Leader of the House tell part of the Seoul action plan, we agreed that we us how the promises made at Seoul will be turned into would, action at Cancun? ‘pursue the full range of policies to reduce excessive external On banks, we welcome the continuation of work to imbalances and maintain current account imbalances at sustainable reform the financial regulatory framework set in motion levels’. at previous G20 meetings. The increased stringency of We also agreed that this should include assessing the Basel Committee’s capital requirements is a welcome imbalances, step in making banks across the world more stable. ‘against indicative guidelines to be agreed by our finance Ministers However, further work is needed to implement these and central bank governors’. reforms. We recognise that this is difficult. Can the The issue of imbalances is never going to be solved Leader of the House tell us what he believes is the way overnight, but the key thing is this: it is being discussed to balance the need for financial stability with the in a proper, multilateral way, with some progress being economic recovery? made. On growth, we all know that for the UK global The summit also delivered important progress on growth is always important—we are a trading nation. deepening co-operation on financial regulation and Jobs in this country depend on strong exports, which the reform of global institutions. We agreed the core in turn depend on a growing global economy. Does the elements of a new financial regulatory framework, Leader of the House acknowledge that dependence is including bank capital and liquidity standards, and even greater because of the decisions that his Government 549 G20[15 NOVEMBER 2010] G20 550 have taken on the economy here at home? Cutting welcome her remarks about Aung San Suu Kyi and public spending and increasing VAT will dampen domestic about development at the summit, which is to the demands and hit jobs. The Office for Budget Responsibility advantage of us all, including those countries that are has shown that because of the cuts he is making, most affected. Britain must increase exports by more than £100 billion I particularly cannot agree that the Prime Minister to sustain jobs and growth. How can that happen if showed no leadership. Of course he showed leadership. our export markets are failing to grow? Do the On many of the achievements, which were common to Government recognise that the global economy on many of those who attended the summit, we should all which we are now even more reliant is fragile? be extremely glad that they were agreed. There is a That is why this G20 was so important. The most pledge to continue co-ordinated efforts to generate recent figures show that growth in our largest export strong, sustainable and balanced growth, with an action market—Europe—has halved and that the US is still plan setting out the policy actions that are needed to facing high unemployment and slow growth. Does the move closer to this objective. There are comprehensive Leader of the House acknowledge that with growing quota and governance reforms to the IMF, instruments disagreements between major economies about currencies to strengthen global financial safety nets and so on. and trade restrictions, co-ordinated action through My right honourable friend the Prime Minister said the G20 is more important than ever? that the meeting would not be an heroic summit, and I suggest, therefore, that the G20 was a missed it was not. The summit was meeting not against a opportunity. No one expected the problems to be background of crisis but against the background that solved overnight, but there was no co-ordinated action the world needs to unite over growth, which is what I to support jobs and growth worldwide; little progress believe it did. on reaching agreement on currencies, particularly between The noble Baroness asked about climate change. China and the US; little assurance by way of anything The summit reaffirmed the commitment to negotiations practical to prevent a resurgence of protectionism under the UNFCCC and to a successful and balanced over the next few years, but I hear what the noble Lord result in Cancun. We very much welcome the work of said on that issue; and no action to restart the Doha the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Advisory Group round of trade negotiations, however difficult that on Climate Change Financing, whose report was published may have been. at the beginning of November. We agree that its This was the fifth G20 summit since the global recommendations should now be considered by Finance financial crisis hit in 2008. During that time the UK Ministers. In the summit, we also recognised the ongoing provided leadership for co-ordinated global action. importance of green recovery and green growth. Leaders Can the Leader of the House tell us why the Prime committed themselves to stimulating investment in Minister failed to offer that leadership in the run-up to clean energy technology, to energy and resource efficiency Seoul, and at Seoul itself, at such a crucial time for and to developing long-term energy strands. jobs in this country and for the global economy? Of course the key to all this is growth. The noble Baroness and I will, I suspect, have to agree to disagree Now that the summit is over, the questions that about the medicine that this economy has had to take remain are: what was the Prime Minister’ strategy; and the reasons for taking it. She prayed in aid the what was he aiming to achieve; did he have any proposals Office for Budget Responsibility, yet it says that for jobs and growth, and if so what were they? We are unemployment in this country will fall next year and told in the media that tonight, in a speech at the Lord every year after that and that employment will increase Mayor’s banquet, the Prime Minister will talk about, by around 1.4 million over the next five years. The “a Britain at the centre of all the big discussions. Producing the OBR forecasts that public sector employment will fall, ideas”. as it would have done under the previous Government, What were the Prime Minister’s ideas for the G20 and but by less than if we had not frozen pay and stopped what did he say in those discussions? Is it not the case the jobs tax. We will strengthen the economy by that, because the Prime Minister has refused to take stimulating enterprise and jobs, by taking 880,000 people action on jobs and growth in Britain, he would find it out of tax altogether, by having a £1 billion regional difficult to lead in the debate about jobs and growth growth fund and the green investment bank, by cutting internationally? Is it not true that, because the Government corporation tax and the small profits rate, by reducing refuse to recognise that the economic crisis was global, new businesses’ national insurance in certain areas they find it difficult to engage with international efforts and by cutting red tape. We believe that this is the to tackle it? right policy to provide for the long-term growth, No one expected the summit to be straightforward prosperity and employment prospects that this country and it was not. It saddens me, however, to think that needs. rather than showing strong global leadership—strong leadership in the search for global solutions to global problems—we in Britain looked as though we were on 5.14 pm the sidelines. Lord Dholakia: My Lords, we very much welcome the Prime Minister’s statement about the release of 5.10 pm Aung San Suu Kyi, the lone figure who suffered so much at the hands of the military rulers in Burma. We Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, not surprisingly, I are thankful for her release, but we must ensure that cannot agree with everything that the noble Baroness the ASEAN countries do not recognise the recent the Leader of the Opposition said, but I certainly elections in that country, which were a sham. Until 551 G20[LORDS] G20 552

[LORD DHOLAKIA] Lord Strathclyde: The noble Lord, Lord Boateng, such time as democracy and human rights prevail in brings to our debates a very particular interest and Burma, we should take a tough stand against that expertise, which are very greatly valued by this House. political regime. I know that we will hear a great deal more from him I have two questions for the Minister. First, before on this subject. He is right to say that a great deal the visit to Korea, the Prime Minister visited China. more needs to be done; he is equally right that we On matters of human rights, different opinions are have taken another step forward in the process of being expressed, but—although this was very much a providing for the long-term prosperity of the continent trade visit—was the question of the award of the of Africa. Our view, which is well known and is a Nobel Peace Prize to a person now languishing in collective view across the parties, is that trade is the prison discussed, and what was the outcome of that greatest wealth creator ever known and it is right that particular discussion? Secondly, China is constantly we should press hard to secure a strong, comprehensive undervaluing its currency while competing so heavily and balanced trade pillar within the development with the rest of the world. Is there any solution to working group’s multi-year action plan, including action that matter to ensure that the rest of the world does on duty-free, quota-free access. For Africa’s small not suffer because of how China behaves with its economies to achieve faster and sustained growth, currency? they need to be able to trade better with each other and with global markets. African political leaders are Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I thank my noble increasingly recognising the importance of regional friend for what he has just said. Of course, I echo his integration as a key objective of the African Union, words on Suu Kyi and democracy. Aung San Suu Kyi’s with a view to the eventual creation of an African detention has always been arbitrary and outrageous, economic community. I agree with the noble Lord that with its sole purpose being to exclude her from political there is still a great deal more to be done, but things life. Now that the military leadership has released her, are considerably better than where we were 10 or we urge it to continue to release other political prisoners 20 years ago. immediately and unconditionally. As to the China summit, my noble friend is right in The Lord Bishop of Chester: My Lords, it is very saying that this was a dual visit—first, to China on a good to know that the Prime Minister raised appropriately trade mission and then to the G20. Of course, the the question of human rights on his visit to China, but issues of human rights and trade are entwined. My could the noble Lord the Leader of the House give us right honourable friend the Prime Minister said that some indication of what response the Prime Minister he was committed to engaging with China on human received? rights and that he was convinced that the free circulation of ideas, the development of independent civil society Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I cannot say what the and the objective application of the rule of law are answer was because a wide range of issues was covered critical to China’s long-term prosperity and social in the discussion between my right honourable friend stability, which is equally vital to the global economy and the leadership in China, but that included an and therefore to the United Kingdom’s interests. As in-depth discussion on human rights. As I said earlier, for a discussion of the Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu no subjects were off limits. My right honourable friend Xiaobo, such issues are raised in the sense that no the Foreign Secretary said at the time of the announcement subjects between our countries are off limits as part of of the Nobel Peace Prize that the decision to award the mutual understanding and respect that exists between the prize to Liu Xiaobo, our respective leaders. “shines a spotlight on the situation of human rights defenders Lord Boateng: My Lords, the Prime Minister and worldwide”.—[Official Report, 20/10/10, Commons, col. 727W.] his team are to be congratulated on their work in Seoul with President Zuma of South Africa on promoting Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, can I ask the the initiative on intra-African trade, but will Her Majesty’s noble Lord two questions? In the first place, I applaud Government continue to press the case for a rethink of the Prime Minister for taking a large delegation to the economic partnership agreements currently being China and for his dealing with the wider aspects of promoted by the European Union in Africa, whose our relationship with China. After all, China is an contents militate against further integration among emerging superpower and we should look after it. In the regional economic groups in Africa and in many regard to trade with China, and indeed with the rest of ways make that integration more difficult? Will Her the world, our manufacturing industry has fallen as a Majesty’s Government also raise with the European proportion of GDP, from 32 per cent in 1973 to 10 per Trade Commissioner the issue of the negotiation currently cent in 2008. Are the Government going to do anything taking place with a number of African countries that to resuscitate and revive our manufacturing industry, seeks to persuade those countries to cease to protect especially in the north-west and north-east of this indigenous industries such as the leather industry? country? Without that protection for that industry and a number My second question is about the discussions at of growing industries in Africa, there is no way that Seoul on trade, particularly with emerging countries. indigenous African producers will be able to develop Is the noble Lord aware that the greatest barrier to their industries as we have developed ours. I offer trade with those countries is the CAP? Will the congratulations on the initiative, but will the noble Government do something about that? Unless it is Lord accept that there is yet more to be done if Africa reformed, people in Africa will find it particularly is to fulfil its potential? difficult to export their goods to Europe. 553 G20[15 NOVEMBER 2010] G20 554

Lord Strathclyde: The noble Lord, Lord Stoddart make us more internationally competitive, will help of Swindon, raises two good questions. On the question our businesses to export and will also increase jobs in of China and trade, he is right that the main purpose the United Kingdom. behind the visit was to demonstrate the degree of commitment that exists not only on a Government-to- Lord Prescott: My Lords, given that the Statement Government basis but on a business-to-business basis, today was about the Prime Minister’s visit to China as which is why so many people from business were well as to the G20, it is a little disappointing that it pleased to join the Prime Minister as well as a substantial says so little about climate change. I welcome the number of Ministers. That has shown our national Statement where it says that the Government’s intention commitment to developing our relationship with China, is to fight climate change and that they will, to pursuing our commercial interests and to co-operating “spare no effort to reach a balanced and successful outcome in more closely on global issues, as well as to raising the Cancun”. role of human rights in China’s development, in which That is precisely what was said at the Copenhagen this country has a vital interest. summit, which failed largely because people attempted The visit added momentum to our trade and investment to enforce a legal agreement. That is the difficulty that relationship with China, with the agreement of a new we face at the moment. Having visited China and trade target of $100 billion by 2015. The visit itself Japan in the past two weeks, I can tell the Minister delivered over 40 agreements across the whole range of that a legal agreement does not have a chance of being the bilateral relationship, from trade to low-carbon agreed at Cancun. Will the Government perhaps consider growth and cultural and education initiatives. The changing their policy and supporting the voluntary largest contract was Rolls-Royce’s contract of $1.2 billion, system embodied in the Copenhagen accord, under but others included an agreement on China’s first which nations commit themselves to cutting greenhouse securities joint venture with the Royal Bank of Scotland, gases and providing action plans? That would mean the geographical identification and registration of Scotch that we were likely to get some agreement at Cancun— whisky and an education agreement to train 1,000 new perhaps a small step for mankind—whereas failure teachers of Mandarin. All those were substantial would be a disaster. achievements, but they are just building blocks in developing the relationship. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I welcome the noble The noble Lord made a second point about trade Lord’s words and his reporting back of his own visit with emerging countries and the effect of the CAP. I to China. He is right that there are elements of the am not surprised that he should raise that question, protocols on climate change on which we have to go a which goes to the heart of the agreement that we are great deal further. As the premier economic forum, the seeking on the completion of the Doha trade round. G20 is right in recognising the importance of low-carbon One of the best pieces of news to come out of the growth in preventing climate change and creating a summit was that there was an international agreement sustainable global economy and in sending positive that all countries should take the final step towards signals ahead of Cancun, but the meeting at Cancun is reaching agreement on Doha, and that may well include the key forum for negotiation on climate change. the European Union taking a fresh look at the role of None of us should have false hopes about what is the CAP. going to happen at Cancun. Immensely difficult decisions need to be taken. It is only a few weeks away now, and we shall have to wait for the results of that to see Lord Bates: My Lords, will my noble friend confirm whether we have succeeded in our objectives. that our fiscal deficit is actually the largest in the G20 and that the fact that the G20 is endorsing the action Lord Myners: I welcome many of the Prime Minister’s now taking place to tackle that deficit is very welcome? comments, in particular those about protectionism Does he also agree that the fact that we are reducing and rolling back those areas where protectionist measures the corporation tax level to the most competitive level have already been taken. I take great encouragement within the G20 is another reason why we ought to be from the Prime Minister’s positive statements about encouraged about the direction going forward? Following the Doha round and the need to address imbalances. the huge success of the trade missions to China and On both sides of the House we accept the need for India, what plans do the Government have to send growth in global economic activity, although on this similar high-profile trade missions to Brazil and Russia? side we believe that the policies the Government are currently pursuing are alien to good growth outcomes. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, my noble friend’s last However, the Prime Minister overstates the achievement question is a good one, which I wish I had thought of in the banking industry. I express my grave concern at myself when I was discussing such matters with those the lack of real progress. The Prime Minister referred who know the answers. It is right that we should set up to Basel III being completed within 18 months. With visits to other countries. I do not know where next in all respect to the Minister, nothing has been achieved the world the Prime Minister’s eye will fall upon, but I under Basel III, which is not due to be implemented am sure that he will be as gratefully received as he has until 2018 and, in some respects, 2023. Not a single been in China and India. bank has had to increase its capital as a result of Basel My noble friend is also right about the case that we III. We have seen no material progress on the identification have made for reducing the deficit—consolidation, as and agreement of process for globally systemically it was called at the G20—and that there was universal important financial institutions. We have seen no progress agreement that this was entirely the right direction to on the agreement of a net stable funding ratio. These take. Equally, the reduction of corporation tax will are all critical to creating a more stable banking system. 555 G20[LORDS] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 556

[LORD MYNERS] “With permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to announce Is the noble Lord pleased with the progress that has today proposals for the reform of legal aid in England been made under Basel III? If so, could he identify the and Wales and proposals for the reform of civil litigation tangible things that have happened as a result of it? funding and costs in England and Wales. I have today laid before Parliament two documents, Proposals for Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I very much welcome the Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales and the early remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Myners. He Proposals for the Reform of Civil Litigation Funding was agreeing with me so, naturally, I agree with him. and Costs in England and Wales, which consult on The right approach is about growth, getting the deficit these issues and copies of which will be available in the under control, international trade and fighting the Vote Office and on the Ministry of Justice website. battle against protectionism—a path other countries The changes will require primary legislation and, subject would like us to head down. The noble Lord can easily to consultation, I hope to include proposals in a Bill as make the case that it is still too early to decide whether soon as parliamentary time allows. Basel III has been a success. It is true that there is a Legal aid forms a vital part of a system of justice of long transition period between 2013 and 2019, when it which we are rightly proud. The Government strongly needs to be put in place. believe that access to justice is a hallmark of a civilised Having said that, a significant strengthening of society. However, I believe that there is a compelling capital and liquidity requirements and a binding constraint case for going back to first principles in reforming on leverage are essential to strengthening financial legal aid. The current system bears very little resemblance stability. Therefore, we welcome the G20’s endorsement to the one that was introduced in 1949. Legal aid has of the Basel reforms to global capital and liquidity expanded—so much so that it is now one of the most standards. Full, consistent and non-discriminatory expensive systems in the world, costing the public implementation of these new international standards purse more than £2 billion a year. It is now available is now crucial to minimise the risks of regulatory for a very wide range of issues, including some which arbitrage and the fragmentation of international financial do not require any legal expertise to resolve. It cannot markets. The UK, as the noble Lord well knows, has be right that the taxpayer is footing the bill for unnecessary consistently argued for strengthened international financial court cases, which would never have reached the regulation to address the failings that were laid bare by courtroom door were it not for the fact that somebody the crisis. The G20 has agreed major reforms to else was paying. international financial regulations and we aim to move these forward. The key to this is to maintain the The previous Government made many attempts to momentum that has come from Basel and the G20. reform legal aid, conducting more than 30 consultations since 2006. However, successive changes have been of Lord Foster of Bishop Auckland: It is impossible at a piecemeal nature and have failed to address the the moment to persuade China to be more flexible underlying problems. I have gone back to basic principles over its currency. What is the Prime Minister doing to to make choices about which issues are of sufficient develop a powerful consensus that surplus countries priority to justify the use of public funds, subject to have a responsibility equal to that of deficit countries people’s means and the merits of the case. I have taken in dealing with global crises? into account the importance of the issue at stake, the litigant’s ability to present their own case, and the Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the noble Lord is right availability of alternative sources of funding and of to say that one of the key issues has been the global alternative routes to resolving the issue, as well as our imbalances. Part of what was discussed at the G20, domestic and international legal obligations. and much of what was agreed on, was a protocol to My proposals have also been designed with the aim reduce these global imbalances. The Prime Minister, of achieving significant savings. No other Government in a speech at Peking University, said: in the world believe that the taxpayer should pay for as “We need a more balanced pattern of global demand and much legal aid and litigation as we do in the United supply, a more balanced pattern of global saving and investment … We all share an interest and a responsibility to co-operate to Kingdom. We have made clear our commitment to secure strong and balanced global growth … just as China played reducing the fiscal deficit and encouraging economic a leading role at the G20 in helping to avert a global depression so recovery. Last month’s spending review set out the it can lead now”. scale of the challenge. My department’s budget will be That was the clearest signal to policy-makers in China reduced by 23 per cent over four years. Legal aid needs that they need to play a full part in sorting out global to make a substantial contribution to that reduction. I imbalances. The recognition that we need to move towards estimate that the proposals in the consultation paper, more market-determined exchange rate systems was a if implemented, will achieve savings in the region of vital ingredient of that and was agreed by all parties in £350 million in 2014-15. the G20. I contend that that is a positive step forward. I do not propose any changes to the scope of criminal legal aid. However, I propose to introduce a Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform more targeted civil and family scheme, which will Statement discourage people from resorting to lawyers whenever they face a problem, and instead encourage them to 5.35 pm consider more suitable methods of dispute resolution. The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Legal aid will still routinely be available in civil and McNally): My Lords, I wish to repeat a Statement family cases where people’s life or liberty is at stake, or made earlier today by my right honourable friend the where they are at risk of serious physical harm or Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice: immediate loss of their home. For example, I plan to 557 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 558 retain legal aid for asylum cases, for debt and for Court regardless of the stage at which the plea is housing matters where someone’s home is at immediate entered, and to do more to contain the costs of very risk, and for mental health cases. It will still be provided high-cost criminal cases. where people face intervention from the state in their These proposals complement other reforms to the family affairs which may result in their children being justice system which I will be bringing forward, designed taken into care, and for cases involving domestic violence to encourage cases to be brought quickly and efficiently or forced marriage. I also propose that legal aid should to justice, so sparing the victim the ordeal of giving remain available for cases where people seek to hold evidence in court unnecessarily and the justice system the state to account by judicial review and for some significant but avoidable costs. It is important to strike cases involving discrimination which are currently in a balance between the need to ensure that legal aid scope. Legal assistance to bereaved families in inquests, provision is innovative, efficient and good value for including deaths of active service personnel, will also taxpayers’ money on the one hand; and ensuring that remain in scope. However, prioritising these areas people can continue to access legally aided services requires that we make clear choices about the availability where necessary on the other. I believe that there is of legal aid in other areas. Therefore, we propose to more that can be done to strike that balance. I propose remove from the scope of the scheme issues which are to reduce fees paid in civil and family cases by 10 per not, generally speaking, of sufficient priority to justify cent across the board and make similar levels of reductions funding at the taxpayer’s expense. I therefore propose in rising experts’ fees. I also propose to extend telephone to remove private family law cases, unless there is access to advice through the Community Legal Advice domestic violence, forced marriage or child abduction telephone helpline, which has a high rate of public involved. I will continue to provide funding for mediation satisfaction, to help people find the easiest and most which can benefit those involved in family disputes by effective ways to resolve their problems. I am also avoiding long drawn-out and acrimonious court consulting on proposals to make much better use of proceedings. alternative sources of funding for legal aid. In particular, Other cases which I am proposing to remove from I would welcome views on making use of the higher the scope of the civil legal aid scheme include clinical rates of interest generated on money invested in a negligence, where in many cases alternative sources of pooled account used by solicitors to hold their clients’ funding are available such as no-win-no-fee arrangements. money, and on making use of a supplementary legal They also include education, employment, immigration, aid scheme. Lastly, I seek views on how to make the some debt and housing issues and welfare benefits, administration of legal aid less bureaucratic for solicitors except where there is a risk to anyone’s safety or liberty and barristers doing legal aid work. I recognise that or a risk of homelessness. In many of these the issues processes have become overly complex and want to do are not necessarily of a legal nature but require other what I can to simplify these while remaining consistent forms of expert advice to resolve. with the highest standards of accounting practice. I recognise that there will be some cases within Also, Mr Speaker, on 26 July this year, the Government those areas of law which I propose to remove from announced their intention to consult on implementing scope which international or domestic law will require Lord Justice Jackson’s recommendations on the reform to be funded by the taxpayer. I therefore propose a of civil litigation costs and funding arrangements. new exceptional funding scheme for excluded cases. I Sir Rupert Jackson’s independent and comprehensive want to ensure that those who can either pay for, or report published in January 2010 makes a clear case contribute to, their legal costs do so, so that we ensure that the costs in civil cases in England and Wales have continued access to public funding in those cases that become too high, and he makes a broad range of really require it for those who have little or no funds of recommendations for reducing those costs. I am convinced their own. I therefore propose that all clients with by Sir Rupert’s argument that achieving proportionate £1,000 or more disposable capital should make a costs and promoting access to justice go hand in hand. minimum £100 contribution to their legal costs and I believe that the consultation proposals for the reform that the capital of any prospective legal aid clients is of civil litigation funding and costs presented today taken into account when considering eligibility. will help rebalance access to justice with proportionate I have also looked at how best to reform the way in costs in civil cases. which we pay lawyers who provide legal aid services. I In particular, Sir Rupert’s proposals would reform want to ensure that criminal cases are resolved quickly the operation of no-win-no-fee conditional fee agreements and cost-effectively and that legal aid fee structures or CFAs. CFAs are funding agreements under which support that aim. In the long term, I propose to fulfil lawyers are not paid if they lose but may charge an the recommendation of the noble Lord, Lord Carter uplift or a success fee of up to a 100 per cent on their of Coles, to the previous Administration to move base costs if they win. CFAs as they currently operate towards a competitive market to replace the current allow claims to be brought at no financial risk to system of administratively set fee rates. However, it individual claimants, but the other side of the coin is will not be possible to fulfil that aim in the short term. that CFAs impose substantial additional costs on Therefore, I propose some more immediate changes to defendants. The Government have already accepted the current fee structure. I propose to ensure that in the recommendations of my right honourable and Crown Court cases that could realistically have been noble friend Lord Young of Graffham’s recent report dealt with in the magistrates’ court, a single fixed fee on health and safety and the compensation culture, for a guilty plea will be paid based on fee rates in the Common Sense, Common Safety. My noble friend’s magistrates’ court. I also propose that the same fee typically cogent report endorses Sir Rupert’s proposals. should be paid in respect of a guilty plea in the Crown The key proposal is to abolish recoverability of success 559 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[LORDS] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 560

[LORD MCNALLY] difficult and hard times such as these, and ensures, or fees and the associated after-the-event insurance premiums does its best to ensure, that everyone can obtain access in CFA cases. Under the current regime, defendants to justice in both the criminal and civil fields, regardless must pay these additional costs if they lose. These of their means. additional costs can be substantial, as the success fee Under successive Governments, the legal aid budget can be double the base legal costs. In addition, significant has grown to the point where it now stands at more costs can arise from claimants’purchase of after-the-event than £2 billion per year. That is not sustainable, especially insurance. After-the-event insurance can be taken out in the current economic context. Indeed, the previous by parties in a CFA-funded case to insure against the Labour Government had moved to cap the legal aid risk of having to pay their opponent’s costs and their budget and to reduce it. We also planned to turn the own disbursements if they lose. We are proposing that Legal Services Commission into an executive agency, claimants should have to pay their lawyers’ success fee and the then Opposition—both parties that now make and will therefore take an interest in controlling the up the Government—supported us. Why have the costs being incurred on their behalf. This will also Government not introduced legislation to achieve that reduce the disproportionate costs burden on defendants. aim? It was quite clear that that was a necessary step We are also seeking views on implementing other to take as quickly as possible. They have not done so, recommendations which are designed to balance the thus far; when are they planning to do so? impact of these major changes, in particular to assist In recent years, we brought the principle of fixed claimants. These recommendations include a 10 per fees into civil and family legal aid cases. That principle cent increase in general damages to help pay the has applied to criminal cases for some time past. We success fee and introducing a mechanism of qualified introduced means-testing into the magistrates’ courts one-way costs shifting. This would protect the vast and this year into the Crown Court. Indeed, on the majority of personal injury claimants from paying a very day that the general election was called, we signed winning defendant’s costs and will therefore reduce off cuts to advocates’ fees in higher courts without any the need for after-the-event insurance. We also propose support from the parties opposite; so much for the to allow damages-based agreements or contingency accusation that the then Government were somehow fees in litigation before the courts. These are another economically irresponsible. form of no-win-no-fee agreement under which lawyers We took those decisions because we recognised the can take a proportion of the claimants’ damages in need to reduce the legal aid budget, and it should be fees. This would increase the funding options available said that many of our actions were taken in the teeth to claimants. of opposition from the legal profession, as one would Other proposals would further encourage parties to of course expect, and from the parties that then made make and accept reasonable offers, as well as introduce up the Opposition—by that I do not mean just the a new test to ensure that overall costs are proportionate. Liberal Democrat party. Let me make it absolutely We also propose to increase the modest costs which clear to the House that had we been in government can be recovered by people who win their cases where today, we would have announced, perhaps not today they represent themselves without lawyers. but earlier, further cuts to legal aid. That is a reality Taken together, my reform proposals complement that we have to acknowledge. the wider programme of reform which I will be bringing The crucial question, however, is where those cuts forward to move towards a simpler justice system: one are to be made and how the money that is left—still a which is more responsive to public needs, which allows large sum—will be spent. Our policy was, and is, to people to resolve their issues out of court, using simpler, control the legal aid budget and to get value for money more informal remedies where they are appropriate, for the taxpayer while optimising services for people and which encourages more efficient resolution of who need support the most. That is why we concentrated contested cases where necessary. so much of our investment on what is described, perhaps I commend this statement to the House”. a little uncomfortably but accurately, as social welfare law legal aid, by increasing it over the years and—even My Lords, that concludes the Statement. towards the end, when we were cutting back other parts of the legal aid budget—making sure that we protected 5.50 pm it at all costs. That is because we argue that legal aid, Lord Bach: My Lords, I thank the Minister for delivered in the form of legal advice and delivered early, repeating the Statement made in another place by the has the power to change lives and, of course, save huge right honourable and learned gentlemen, the Lord amounts of public money further down the line. Chancellor, and for allowing me an advance sight of The housing possession court duty scheme, for the Statement; but I have to say, thanks to the very example, still saves thousands of people from repossession. comprehensive briefing that has clearly been given to It delivered a social and financial good. Are the two newspapers over the past 24 hours, we have had Government committed to preserving that and similar the chance of looking at the Statement more than in schemes? What balance do the Government intend to just the past few minutes. strike between the needs of criminal legal aid and civil The Green Papers on cutting legal aid and reducing legal aid? Everyone knows that, over the years, criminal civil costs are among the most important published by legal aid has had the majority of the spend. Do the the Government to date. Legal aid, as the Minister Government believe that that should continue? said, is one of the pillars of the welfare state that were The Minister said that the Government propose in set up by the post-war Labour Government. It plays a the Green Paper to reduce fees paid in civil and family crucial role in tackling social exclusion, especially in cases by 10 per cent across the board. That proposal is, 561 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 562 on the face of it, disturbing. Does it mean, for example, his recognition that a £2 billion legal aid fund is not that when a fixed fee is paid for advice from solicitors sustainable in present circumstances. The Statement, who practise social welfare law, or from the not-for-profit all the comments that the Lord Chancellor and other sector—whether it be the CAB or law centres—solicitors Ministers have made and we in the Ministry of Justice in that field will lose 10 per cent on each piece of new all recognise that these decisions are influenced in part advice that they give? This will make life very difficult by our having to cut £2 billion from our budget over indeed for those lawyers, who by no stretch of the the next five years of the spending regime, and that imagination can be described as rich. I ask the noble legal aid is one of two or three big-ticket items in the Lord to answer that question, if he would be so kind. MoJ budget. I turn to another serious point that I should like to I hear what the noble Lord says about social welfare ask the Minister about: the proposal that all clients law. In reviewing this, we are trying to focus legal aid with £1,000 or more disposable capital should make a on the most serious cases. We are looking at where minimum contribution of £100 to their legal costs. other sources of funding may be available and where Full ineligibility is extremely worrying. We as a advice can be given to take some of these matters out Government increased civil legal aid eligibility rates of the legal system to tribunals and other instruments by 5 per cent last year to deal with the unfairnesses of resolution. However, we are not trying to pretend that the recession had meant for those who needed anything other than that we are taking hard but necessary that vital piece of advice. However, the Government’s decisions to move some cases out of scope and out of proposal in the Green Paper reduces eligibility a great legal aid. deal more than that, and we are concerned that it will The noble Lord asked about the Legal Services take many people who cannot afford the private insurance Commission. We will take action on that as soon as that the Green Paper talks of away from getting the parliamentary time is available. We are battling for legal advice that they need and deserve. Does the that time at the moment. The 10 per cent across-the-board Minister agree that that is likely to happen if civil legal cuts will apply to the assistance that the noble Lord aid eligibility is reduced by so much? Will that not referred to, and to social welfare work. The noble harm what we all want: access to justice? Lord asked in particular about housing cases. We One other disturbing part of the Statement talks made it clear that in cases where there is the threat of about some housing, social welfare and debt cases absolute homelessness, assistance will be retained. We being taken out of the scope of legal aid, although propose that legal aid will be retained for both housing some will be left in, apparently. Can the Minister help and debt cases where there is the risk of homelessness, by telling us which cases in those categories will be and for housing cases where there is a serious problem taken out of scope and which will be left in? to be addressed. We propose that legal aid ceases to be I turn briefly to the important and massive report available for employment and welfare benefit matters, of Lord Justice Jackson on civil legal aid costs. Before because the vast majority of these are heard before we respond in detail, we will consider that report tribunals. We propose no changes for community care. carefully, as we will consider the Green Paper on legal On the question of contributions, it is critical that aid. I remind the Minister and ask a question about those who have the resources to pay for or contribute what Lord Justice Jackson said at paragraph 4.2 of towards their legal costs should do so, and that the chapter 7 of his final report, on page 70. He stated: public purse must be the fund of last resort where “I … stress the vital necessity of making no further cutbacks people own substantial assets. in legal aid availability or eligibility”. I hope that I have covered most of the specific He is talking about civil legal aid and continues: points. I understand that the noble Lord will want to “The legal aid system plays a crucial role in promoting access study carefully what Lord Justice Jackson said. Like to justice at proportionate costs in key areas”. the previous Government, we are trying to take away Do the Government agree with what Lord Justice the inflation pressures caused by the way in which Jackson wrote in chapter 7 of his report? no-win no-fee operated and by the way in which costs, The basic test that we will apply to both Green damages and add-ons were calculated. Our old system Papers is whether the proposals will deliver a saving to was inflationary in costs, and encouraged litigation. the public purse while ensuring that no one is denied We hope that what we have extracted from Lord access to justice simply because of their means. Justice Jackson’s recommendations will address problems that were recognised by all parts of the legal profession. 6pm 6.07 pm Lord McNally: My Lords, first, I agree with the Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I cannot noble Lord about the press coverage over the weekend. welcome the Statement, but I welcome the fact that I wonder what advantage it gives, with something that the Minister has said that not principle but finance has is going to be the subject of a three-month consultation, caused the reductions that we have seen. When I read if somebody leaks to or briefs the press. I will say that the Statement, I thought that the noble Lord, Lord neither report is entirely accurate, but this is the world Bach, could easily have issued a similar Statement in that we live in. I would much prefer that Statements the previous Government. No doubt that is why his were made to the House of Commons and to the criticisms were so muted. House of Lords and then reporters could do their job. This is a considerable challenge to the legal world. I welcome the noble Lord’s assertion that we are Here I declare an interest as a practising criminal Silk, talking about one of the most fundamental parts of paid very often by legal aid. The suggested reforms set our society: namely, access to justice. I also welcome out in the Green Papers require very considerable 563 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[LORDS] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 564

[LORD THOMAS OF GRESFORD] but there are many veterans and military widows who, attention from both the criminal Bar and the family the moment they leave the protection of the services, Bar. It is the latter that will really suffer under the are on the streets and very vulnerable. I feel that provisions that are being put forward. somewhere in the Minister’s and the Ministry of Justice’s I ask the Minister about the suggestion that there plans there should be special provision to see that will be a new exceptional funding scheme for excluded these very fine people are not left out in the cold. cases. I had a number of discussions with the noble Lord, Lord Bach, when he was in the previous Lord McNally: My Lords, I associate myself with Government, on that very issue. Its importance is that the comment of the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, about it is wrong for an individual to be in a court, tribunal the noble Lord, Lord Bach, and his record in this area. or inquest and to find himself facing a state-funded Within the constraints in which we find ourselves, we organisation such as the Army or the Air Force, or a certainly intend to make sure that our responsibility to well funded public company, when an allegation of service personnel and their families remains. Exceptional negligence has arisen. The previous provisions for an funding will remain available where there is a significant exceptional funding scheme were largely concerned wider public interest in the applicant being represented with inquests. The noble Lord, Lord Bach, will recall at an inquest. Therefore, the families of service personnel that it was not easy through that mechanism to obtain will still be able to access legal aid funding for proper funding for families in distress who faced paid representation at inquests into their loves ones’ deaths. advocates at a very high level who were trying to make Rebuilding the military covenant is one of the top sure that their clients were not accused of any negligence. objectives of this Government, and the Ministry of What is the new exceptional funding scheme? Will the Defence is currently considering how best to fulfil that mechanisms be improved? Will they be more apparent covenant. so that people understand how to obtain exceptional funding in the future? That is a very important issue Lord Davies of Stamford: My Lords, I am very and I hope that the Minister will be able to respond. sorry that the Minister just brushed aside the leaks in this case, as the Government always seem to do, by Lord McNally: I thank my noble friend. His question saying that it is just a matter of the world that we live gives me the opportunity to mention a point raised by in. It is a matter of the world that we live in only the noble Lord, Lord Bach, to which I did not respond. because it is tolerated. It is about time the Government If not exactly ring-fenced, criminal legal aid is more adopted a slightly more rigorous approach to investigating protected because we take the view that when people and pursuing these things, as the Ministry of Defence are on trial for a criminal offence, it is important that did in the previous Parliament. I very much welcome they have access to justice and legal aid. However, that the Government’s decision to propose that success fees does not mean making a choice between criminal and should no longer be chargeable to defendants. It seems civil cases, other than that, in terms of access to quite wrong to penalise defendants because of the justice, a criminal charge is more serious. funding structure that plaintiffs agree with their lawyers. Does the noble Lord agree that one of the great The exceptional funding scheme will go wider than anomalies and problems of legal aid is that the costs assistance for inquests, and it will indeed be available incurred by a successful defendant cannot be claimed for those who may find themselves out of scope in against the plaintiff? That is not only unfair, unjust these decisions but who have an exceptional case to and unbalanced between plaintiffs and defendants make. I note what my noble friend says. We are well and legally aided plaintiffs and non-legally aided plaintiffs; aware that we are making tough decisions that are it clearly reduces the financial disincentive to litigate needed to ensure access to public funding in cases that marginal cases. Do the Government have any plans to really require it and in protecting the most vulnerable deal with that anomaly? in our society, as well as encouraging the efficient performance of our justice system. As we have made Lord McNally: I think that I had better duck for absolutely clear, those decisions are motivated partly cover in this case. I hear the point that the noble Lord by economic circumstances but also by a view that the makes. If we already have specific plans in this area, I legal aid system, as the noble Lord, Lord Bach, shall write to him; if not, I shall make sure that that acknowledges, needs to be recalibrated and rebalanced, point is fed into the discussions that will be part of the and that is what we have tried to do. review, which will go on for the next three months. On investigating leaks, at the very beginning of my Lord Davies of Stamford: I am very sorry that the career I recall the Labour Party, under Harold Wilson, noble Lord just brushes aside the leaks in this case— setting up a leaks inquiry and the first meeting of that inquiry being leaked to the Guardian. I was not dismissing Noble Lords: Cross Benches. the issue; I deplore it and, as I said at the beginning, I wish that we could get back to the rather old-fashioned Viscount Slim: My Lords, following on from what idea that statements are made to Parliament and then the noble Lord said just now, I should like to thank the the newspapers report them. noble Lord, Lord Bach, for the sensitive way in which, during the previous Government, he dealt with many Baroness Browning: My Lords, can my noble friend issues relating to the military and, in particular, veterans clarify the response that he gave the noble Lord, Lord and war widows. He would always listen and I know Bach, just a few moments ago, when I believe I heard that he then went off and did his best. I did not like the him say that welfare cases are to remain the same? The phrase “out of scope”and I am not sure about “eligibility”, House will be aware that, with all-party support in 565 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform 566 both Houses during the previous Parliament, the Autism legal aid, will have difficulties with this Statement. I Act is now on the statute book. One thing that triggered also think that there are likely to be difficulties for the the need for that Act was the fact that many adults and CABs which, as the noble Lord indicates, face the problem adolescents with autism find themselves in dispute of the impact of cuts in local authority funding and with their local authority over not being able to access the likely loss of legal-aid work in the legal advice that appropriate packages of support. That applies not just they cover. My right honourable friend the Lord to those with autism but to people with a great many Chancellor is fully seized of these problems and is very lifelong disabilities. One of the difficulties in challenging willing, during the period of consultation, to talk to a local social services department is that often the key those bodies and to explore alternative assistance and person who knows most about you is the social worker, funding. The noble Lord points to the real impact who is an employee of the very department with which made by the decisions that we have taken. you have to negotiate. These disputes often become legal cases, although those in social services departments Lord Phillips of Sudbury: My Lords— to whom I have spoken about this openly put up their hands and say that, once a legal challenge is made, Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, I welcome they very often settle out of court before the case the reference to promoting alternative dispute resolution reaches that stage. However, I should be very concerned to accelerate and simplify the resolution of disputes. if vulnerable adults—and they are vulnerable—across Can my noble friend indicate what the criteria are to the disability spectrum were denied the support of the be where exceptional funding for excluded cases is courts. awarded? In particular, will he recognise that it is an issue not just for the excluded individual but for the courts, Lord McNally: My noble friend’s question points because if a case is of a particular complexity it can to many of the problems that we face. If legal aid is clog up the courts: a point that was made by a former automatically given in many of the areas that we are Lord Chief Justice and a former Master of the Rolls removing from scope, it becomes almost a first stop. when a previous Conservative Government cut legal aid? We are actively trying to promote a different, cheaper and quicker mechanism for settling disputes. A dispute Lord McNally: My Lords, if we are going to recalibrate between someone suffering from autism and the local legal aid, we shall have to explore the alternative social services department almost automatically ends resolution of disputes through mediation and other up as a battle between lawyers in court. We have got means. On the exceptional cases fund, part of the something wrong somewhere. We have taken tough consultation will be about the criteria and the range of decisions; we have taken people out of scope; and we that fund. The recommendations of the legal services shall look at different ways of getting advice. We commission to the Secretary of State will determine propose that legal aid be retained for community care how the fund is used, but the opportunity to consult cases and for judicial review in community care cases. will be taken to ensure that the fund is flexible to the As I said before, we are not hiding the fact that this is a needs of those who really need access to justice. removal of legal aid from areas and cases that have previously been covered. We seek to encourage the Lord Beecham: My Lords, does the Minister agree alternative resolution of disputes, partly because, as that the conflation of the costs of civil and criminal the noble Lord, Lord Bach, said, successive Governments legal aid in the sum of £2 billion, to which my noble have found that the creep of legal aid makes it very friend Lord Bach referred, disguises the greater proportion difficult to keep overall control of it. devoted to criminal legal aid? What will the percentage cut on the civil legal aid budget be? Can he also Lord Boateng: My Lords, no one would seriously indicate where he expects alternative provision to be suggest that we should not reform the legal aid and made and at what cost, and who will fund that cost? civil costs regime. However, citizens advice bureaux Perhaps he could also identify an estimate of the and the law centre movement have long played a number of cases currently in receipt of legal aid in the distinguished part all over our country in providing categories that will no longer receive legal aid: that is, access, not just for the most vulnerable but for the as the Statement made clear, education, employment, middle classes, to the law and to legal advice. It is cost immigration, debt, housing and welfare benefits. effective and involves paid volunteers, lawyers, mediators On a slightly tangential matter, will the Minister and experts from a whole variety of sources who are ask his right honourable and learned friend the Secretary needed to ensure that people get justice. The Minister’s of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor to look again right honourable friend has been silent in his Statement at the court fees that local authorities are required to about the role of citizens advice bureaux and the pay in child protection cases and which are widely law centre movement. Can he give some words of thought to inhibit the necessary promotion of those encouragement and support for the contribution that cases? I declare an interest as an unpaid consultant in they currently make? Can he indicate whether they my former practice as a senior partner in a Newcastle will have an opportunity to play an enhanced role in firm of solicitors. the future and perhaps do something about the crisis in funding that CAB centres face up and down the Lord McNally: My Lords, I shall write to the noble country, even as we speak? Lord on the specific numbers that are being dealt with in areas that are now going out of scope. I shall raise Lord McNally: My Lords, I can give some limited the issue of court fees with the Lord Chancellor. The encouragement. It is true that the law centre movement target saving is £350 million, and I made it clear that and other such bodies, which rely on certain cases of that would come mainly from the civil side. 567 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 568

Lord Phillips of Sudbury: My Lords— Of course, I would have liked 20 more Conservative seats at the general election, but that was not the Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: My Lords, first, people’s choice. They did not deliver a majority for a are the Government aware that the greatest advances single-party government. They asked us to work together in the development of law happen in legal aid cases? —and that, I believe, is our duty. By diminishing legal aid, you end up undermining law This Government have started on the giant task of as a whole. Secondly, family law has already suffered restoring this country from the economic, diplomatic cuts, and we are seeing legal aid deserts in certain parts and social wreckage of the past 13 years. of the country. Women, for example, are not getting the kind of expert help that they need in cases of Noble Lords: Shame on you! domestic violence. Thirdly, if the Ministry of Justice is concerned to look at spending on legal matters, has Lord Strathclyde: It would be madness to risk that consideration been given to the money paid to lawyers coalition to stop the British people having a say in how by government, not as legal aid money but money they choose their Members of Parliament. paid by government departments to lawyers at the I know that many of my noble friends do not like or market rate, which is often excessive? Perhaps we want the alternative vote system. Frankly, I am inclined should do something to drive those costs down instead to agree. As this Bill allows your Lordships to vote in of limiting access to the law by the poor. the proposed referendum, I can let you into a secret: I will vote no. Lord McNally: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Strathclyde is encouraging me to cheap populism by Lord Falconer of Thoroton: You will not have a vote. agreeing that we should drive down the cost of legal advice to government. Legal costs in general are certainly Lord Strathclyde: I will have a vote in the referendum. being looked at. I can reassure the noble Baroness that I can let your Lordships into another secret: my in the key areas of family law, which I referred to as noble friend Lord McNally will vote yes. Some might domestic violence and child protection, legal aid will think, as our votes will cancel each other out, we should be retained. just stay at home and have a quiet dinner together, but On the breakdown of the savings, I have a slip of we will not, because both of us are agreed that the paper that says that the aim is roughly to try to find British people should have this choice, and we will £100 million savings on criminal aid and £250 million each campaign for the answer we seek. on the civil side. How odd it would be if this unelected House, which On the Statement’s intention, I can say to the noble lately voted overwhelmingly against the very idea that Baroness only that, against the financial constraints your Lordships should be elected, should have the that we face and a general agreement that legal aid temerity to tell the elected House how to proceed on needed recalibrating, we have tried to take some tough its own election or to deny its wish to give the people decisions in a way that protects the vulnerable and their say. retains the core sense of our system: that all have a The Lords Constitution Committee has now published right to access to justice. its report on the Bill. It states that there has not been enough consultation on it. Respectfully, I disagree. Parliamentary Voting System and The proposals in this Bill apply entirely to the other place. It has been rigorously examined there over eight Constituencies Bill days on the Floor of the House and through 35 Divisions. Second Reading (1st Day) It reflects the settled will of the elected House. On the referendum, the Government have worked 6.30 pm closely with the Electoral Commission and administrators, Moved by Lord Strathclyde and the commission has declared itself broadly satisfied that sufficient progress has been made to enable the That the Bill be read a second time. local returning and counting officers to run the polls well and that voters will be able to participate in them. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord The provisions in the Bill are sound, and Members Strathclyde): My Lords, it is considerably later than of this House should consider carefully the clear signal we had intended to start the main business of the day, from the elected House before making major changes but I now beg to move that the Bill be read a second in it. time. This Bill is a core part of the coalition Government’s There has been speculation about the last possible programme. It is a simple measure that provides for date for royal assent to allow the referendum to happen three things: a referendum on the voting system for on 5 May. I believe there is more than adequate time. the other place; a modest reduction in the number of It is certainly important that, commensurate with MPs; and fairer, more equal constituencies. It would full scrutiny in this House, we give participants and not have existed in its present form without the creation campaigners in the referendum as much time as possible of the coalition. Speaking for my party as well as for to prepare for a full and informed campaign. We owe the Government, I say clearly that we are completely that to the electorate, but it is possible to do that and committed to honour the coalition agreement. That is allow enough time to examine the Bill, which I hope why, as Leader of this House, I open for the Government will complete its passage as soon as possible in on the Bill. January 2011. 569 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 570

I do not want to make unnecessary political points, Lord Strathclyde: I do recall the chaos, and the but I remind noble Lords opposite of a forgotten noble Lord is right to refer to it. I hope that a number document: A Future Fair for All, the manifesto of the of lessons were learnt as a result of that, but the party opposite only this spring, written by their current referendum question is different from the issues raised leader. On page 62, it talks of, “A New Politics”. It in May 2007. It is a very simple yes/no question. I am continues: sure that our respective countrymen in Scotland will “To ensure that every MP is supported by a majority of their be able to decide between the two. constituents voting at each election, we will hold a referendum on I hope that we can agree with the other place on the introducing the Alternative Vote for elections to the House of question of the date and the other provisions in the Commons”. Bill: that the size of that House should be reduced, That was what Mr Miliband thought then, so I take it and the unfairness resulting from imbalances in the that we will have full support from the party opposite size of parliamentary constituencies rectified. for the part of the Bill that provides for what it itself promised at the general election. Surely, under any electoral system, people’s votes should have as equal weight as possible. That is not the There is a small quibble: the party opposite promised case for the people of Warrington South, which last a referendum by October 2011. The Bill proposes it in December had just under 80,000 electors; their vote is May 2011—one year into this Parliament, but that is a worth a quarter less than the people of Preston, which far slower timetable than the six-month one used by had 60,000. This is not an anomaly: these differences the party opposite for the referendums on Scottish are repeated up and down the country. As of last and Welsh devolution in 1997. December, a vote in Arfon in Wales had twice the weight of a vote in Falkirk. This inequality is compounded Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: Is not there a big distinction, by the drawn-out process by which boundaries are drawn. in that what the Opposition, then in government, were It took more than six years to complete the last review proposing was a pre-legislative referendum, not a in England. The constituencies in place for the 2010 post-legislative referendum, which is an important general election were based on data that were a decade constitutional distinction? old. That is not fair for electors. Other countries draw their boundaries far more quickly. Lord Strathclyde: Yes, my Lords, but on the whole I Then, we are all pledged to reduce the cost of think it is better for people to know what it is they are politics. voting on, which is what is envisaged in the Bill. Lord Martin of Springburn: We must be even-handed, Lord Grocott: Further to the question of the noble my Lords. The noble Lord will know that, because of Lord, Lord Forsyth, I hate to have to admit it in the Scotland Act, there was a reduction from 72 seats public, but we lost the general election. Can the noble down to 60. It was Lady Cosgrove, the High Court Lord point me to a constitutional principle which tells judge, who looked after these matters. This matter was us that parties which lose the general election are dealt with very efficiently and a report was put before thereby bound to put to the electorate ad infinitum the Parliament in due course. So it is not always the case same proposals on which they lost? that it is a long drawn-out process.

Lord Strathclyde: There is none. I was just hoping that there might be a little consistency from the party Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, that of course is right, opposite and that it would wish to support the coalition which is why I pointed out the case in England. In in giving the people their say on whether there should Scotland there was a reaction to the Scotland Act and be an alternative vote system. the reduction in the number of seats. It does not mean The reason to have the referendum on 5 May is that that it always has to take a long time, but in England it it will save money—about £30 million—to hold it on demonstrated that it did. Maybe in Scotland these the same day as other votes. About 84 per cent of the things are, on the whole, managed rather better. UK electorate can go to the polls for local elections or The new rules put in place by this Bill will require elections to the devolved assemblies on 5 May. I do not that every constituency is within 5 per cent either side see the purpose of dallying a few months, at a cost of of a single size. To ensure that constituencies remain £30 million, to get to the self-same place. equal and up to date, boundary reviews will take place on a five-yearly basis. The Bill will also set the size of the other place at 600 MPs. This is a modest reduction Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: On that particular point, of around 8 per cent and will save the public an is the Leader of the House not aware that because of estimated £12 million a year. the chaos in the Scottish elections in 2007, when many people lost the right to vote because of spoiled ballot papers, the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament Lord Snape: I am grateful to the noble Lord. In his have now legislated so that council elections, which opinion, which political party would benefit from were due to take place next May, will take place a year these changes? later, in 2012? Is it not absolutely daft then to add the referendum to the complex elections for both the constituencies and the list that will take place, when Lord Strathclyde: I cannot possibly predict what the Scottish Parliament has freed it, as it were, by will happen at the next general election, but all taxpayers getting rid of the council elections on that day? will benefit from a saving of £12 million each year. 571 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 572

Lord Maples: I am grateful to my noble friend. My right honourable friend’s proposals will result Does he agree that an electoral system which, at the in constituencies of around 76,000 electors, and over a general election in 2010, required the Conservative third of existing constituencies are within the approximate Party to get 40 per cent of the vote to get an overall range that will result from this Bill. That, I believe, is a majority but Labour to get only 34 per cent cannot reasonable proposal. possibly be considered fair? We look back at how the Duke of Wellington wisely led this House to allow reform of the constituencies in Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, my noble friend makes another place, and we marvel at the fact that your a very good point—but it is not the fundamental case Lordships originally resisted it. So I think that, in that the Government are making in the Bill. This is future generations, if people read our debates, they about a general fairness across the country. will marvel at any speech by noble Lords or any other ditchers or diehards who venture to suggest that the Lord Wills: I am grateful to the noble Lord for disparities in current constituencies should be preserved. giving way. Before he moves off this point about the As is now well known since the debate earlier today, size of the reconstituted House of Commons, does he the Bill preserves two specific constituencies: the island recall that at the election both the coalition partners groups of Orkney and Shetland and the Western Isles. were committed to reducing the House of Commons Both are dispersed island groups which cannot readily to below 600? Can he explain to this House what be combined with the mainland. In recognition of the exactly changed their minds about that? fact that certain parts of the United Kingdom are very sparsely populated, the Bill caps the size of a constituency at just larger than the largest now—Ross, Skye and Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, in the same way as the Lochaber. figure of 650 is one that has developed over time and is The Bill also reforms the process for boundary basically an arbitrary one, so the figure of 600—I see reviews. As one leading academic has commented on that the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, plucks a figure from the present system of local inquiries: the air. It was not quite like that. Six hundred strikes “it would be wrong to assume that the consultation process me as being a nice, round figure. But these are precisely largely involves the general public having its say on the the points that we will take up in Committee. recommendations”. It is important that consultation is effective, and that Lord Anderson of Swansea: If the motive, as the is why the Bill reforms the system. It triples the time noble Lord says, is to save money, can he say how it is that people and political parties have to make written consistent with the constant churning out of new representations from one month to three. Local people Peers by this coalition? will be better able to make their points to the commissions, and the overall review process will be faster and more Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, the number of new efficient. Peers since the general election is infinitesimally small compared with the number of new Peers introduced Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: My Lords, I am during the period of new Labour. Moreover, no one is grateful for the way in which the Leader has given suggesting that these new Peers will cost £12 million to way, and I appreciate that it is difficult at this stage. house and look after in this House. However, I wonder if he will comment on this section of the Bill in the context of constituencies where Lord Beecham: My Lords, can the Minister say how there is a low level of electoral registration. His noble much could be saved by a downward adjustment of friend sitting next to him referred to an “average” on ministerial salaries by reducing the size of the the radio this morning, but we all know that non- Government? registration is much higher in impoverished communities in city centres. What are the Government doing in advance of this proposal to change constituency numbers Lord Strathclyde: Given that ministerial salaries to ensure that the electorate have a proper chance and have already had a 5 per cent cut since the general are encouraged to register? election, the answer to that is: not much more. The other place has considered all of these questions carefully. Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, of course registration is important, and currently the average registration in Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top: Does the noble the United Kingdom is 90 per cent, which, by international Lord accept that this is a constitutional issue, not a comparisons, is extremely high. We will continue to financial issue; and that by reducing the number of encourage people to register their votes and play a MPs but not reducing the size of the Executive, the part in the democracy that we have in this country. Government will weaken the Commons’ ability to The commission will continue to use the electoral hold the Executive to account? register as the basis for its reviews, as it has done for decades. To go on to the point that the noble Baroness Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I fully expect that this just raised, as the secretaries to the Boundary Commissions will be an issue that we shall discuss in detail when we themselves have noted, the register is the most get to the Committee stage. The Government have comprehensive data source that is regularly updated, already expressed a desire to reduce the size of the and this Government will continue to seek ways of Executive, but not in this Bill, not at this time, not at ensuring that more individuals exercise their right to this stage. register. 573 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 574

Lord Campbell-Savours: Does the noble Lord accept This has been described as the most important that low registration in inner-city constituencies means constitutional Bill since 1832. Those are not my words high-population constituencies? Is that not a central but a description of the Bill by the right honourable flaw in the Government’s whole approach? Mr Nicholas Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, who came to office stressing that his job is to raise what he described as the hitherto lamentable standards of our Lord Strathclyde: No, my Lords. First, the basis of politics. As he put it on 19 May 2010, deciding constituencies based on the size of the electoral “This government is going to persuade you to put your faith in register is well precedented. Secondly, the Government politics once again”. will continue to seek ways of ensuring that individuals The Deputy Prime Minister had the opportunity in exercise their right to register. So we will want to avoid this Bill, the most important constitutional change the problem that the noble Lord raises. since 1832, to put his sanctimonious mouth where his money is. Instead, there has been no Green Paper, no Lord Campbell-Savours: Does the Minister not accept public consultation and no pre-legislative scrutiny, that it is extremely difficult to get high levels of registration which are all things that over the years we became so in inner-city constituencies? used to hearing the Tories and the Liberal Democrats demanding. At the first opportunity, they have disappointed us and they have disappointed the public Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, that does not negate out there. This is hypocrisy, and hypocrisy does not the reason for creating fairly based constituencies of help to restore trust. 76,000 electors plus or minus 5 per cent. This Bill spent nine days being debated in another Members of this House have opposing views on place, the place to which it is most important. The which is the better system with which to elect Members Political and Constitutional Reform Committee in the of the other place, but the place for that debate is Commons said of the process: during the campaign. At the end of the campaign, it “The Deputy Prime Minister has accurately described the Bill will be for the voters to decide which system will be as ‘fundamental to this House and to our democracy’. We regret used in the future, and this is fair too. that the Government’s timetable has denied us an adequate Before I finish, I will briefly outline the effect of the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill”. substantive clauses. I know that many noble Lords The Bill before your Lordships’ House today is an wish to speak, so I will not detain the House with a ill-thought-through, partisan muddle of a piece of clause-by-clause commentary. I hope it will suffice to legislation that, in truth, seems to be more about say that there are three main parts to this Bill: provisions ensuring the longevity of the coalition than about nobler for a referendum to be held and combined with aims of equality of representation. As the Minister other polls on 5 May are found in Clauses 1 to 7 and has told us, the Government seek to hold a referendum Schedules 1 to 9; provisions for implementation of the to ask the British public whether they would like to alternative vote system in the event of a yes vote in the adopt the alternative vote system for Westminster referendum are found in Clause 9 and Schedule 10; elections. The intended date for the referendum is and provisions to reform the setting of parliamentary 5 May 2011, a day on which more than 80 per cent of boundaries are found in Clauses 10 to 13. The remaining the population will, in addition, be asked to vote in Clauses 14 to 19 and Schedule 11 deal with technical local council, devolved Assembly or mayoral elections. and financial aspects of the Bill, and that is it. The Bill is being rushed through to meet this desired target date. It is not a complex Bill. It offers a referendum on the alternative vote, reduces the size of the House of However, can the Minister explain to the House Commons and makes the size of constituencies why the rush with Part 2? The independent boundary more equal. This is a fair Bill and a clear Bill. It gives commissions of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern people choice on how they vote and a more equal say Ireland are being asked to redraw every single when they do vote. The other place, which is uniquely parliamentary constituency in three years, which is affected by it, has approved it, and I commend it to less than half the time that previous periodic boundary the House. reviews have taken. They are being asked to do so before the electoral register, on which the new constituencies are to be based, can be brought up to 6.52 pm date to correct for the estimated 3.5 million voters who Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, together are currently missing from it. Under-representation is with my noble friend Lord Bach, I shall pick up the the real scandal, but this Government feel that that baton so expertly carried by my right honourable can wait to be addressed until after they have railroaded friend Mr Sadiq Khan and my honourable friend through new constituencies based on flawed data that Mr Chris Bryant in another place. We have heard two will inevitably punish the people to which my noble speeches today from the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, friend Lord Campbell-Savours referred. This is not the Leader of the House. In the first, he refused to fair but nonsensical. engage with the issue at all, and in the second, he said If all that were not illogical enough, the that we should not think about amending the Bill Government—and the noble Lord did not even mention because the House of Commons has approved it. I this—seek to take away any serious public say in the regard this House as responsible for improving legislation redesign of constituencies. Public inquiries, which are so, if the noble Lord does not mind, we will reject his the democratic life-blood of boundary reviews and second invitation. which allow local people a say in what happens to 575 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 576

[LORD FALCONER OF THOROTON] ignore the—if I may say so—entirely admirable approach their local representation, are being removed. Why? to which the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, refers. I do not Obviously, to fit in with the timetable. There is no know why he is looking at me. He should be looking at rational justification for this haste, which is born of a the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde. wish to hold the next general election in 2015 and This is an unsatisfactory Bill. As its specific proposals subsequent elections every five years after that using are not to be found in either of the coalition party’s the favoured electoral boundaries. The Bill before us general election manifestos, we must conclude that not proposes five-yearly boundary reviews in future to only is it an unsatisfactory Bill but, as the noble Lord match this election cycle. As our all-party Constitution appeared to be conceding, it has no mandate. This is Committee noted in its excellent report on this Bill, truly a shame. We on this side of the House support “the provisions of this Bill and the Fixed-term Parliaments Bill the holding of a referendum on the electoral system are interrelated”. for elections to the House of Commons and we approve The damning conclusion of that all-party committee of the stated intention to bring the size of Westminster was that, constituencies more into line with each other than “the constitutional relationship between the provisions of this they are at present, but the way in which the Government Bill and the Government’s other proposals for constitutional articulated their proposals and rammed them through reform have not been adequately thought through”. in another place quite hypocritically—as the noble We wholeheartedly agree. Lord, Lord Tyler, has demonstrated—was shoddy. The committee’s criticism of the process is all the Then they say, “We can’t change it because the other more heated—rightly so, we would argue—for the House has approved it”. I should say to the noble lack of any pre-legislative consultation. It is an insult Lord that this has succeeded in uniting opposition to to democracy and to the principles that we in this House their plans. hold so highly that a measure to enact constitutional First, on the Liberal Democrat part of the Bill, the change of such lasting significance has not been subject AV referendum, I completely agree with the noble to pre-legislative scrutiny and public consultation. Only Lord, Lord Forsyth, that the provisions in Part 1 are last month, the Leader of the House said that the not in reality a referendum Bill. The Bill seeks to Government are committed to pre-legislative scrutiny change our system of voting from first past the post to because, an alternative vote system, but it makes the introduction “it improves the quality of legislation and provides an opportunity of those changes subject to a yes vote in a referendum. for public engagement”.—[Official Report, 28/10/10; col. 1306.]. The referendum in this Bill is not advisory, as in all What was wrong with this Bill, the most important previous referendum Bills in this country, but binding. constitutional Bill since 1832, that it did not require There is a requirement on the Minister to lay the order that? The Constitution Committee concluded: that will introduce the changes. It is totally unclear “This is an unsatisfactory basis on which to embark on from the Bill whether it will be a negative or an fundamental reform of the legislature”. affirmative order that will fundamentally change our electoral system. We need therefore to scrutinise very Lord Strathclyde: I do not like to overquibble with carefully the provisions concerning the new system. the noble and learned Lord, but I went on to say that The Bill proposes that the referendum will take early Bills in a Session could hardly be subject to place on the same day as elections already scheduled pre-legislative scrutiny because they were early Bills in in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and most local the Session. authorities in England. The Government have failed to consult with the devolved institutions on the timing Lord Falconer of Thoroton: What a load of nonsense. of the referendum. The plans have been condemned Of course they could be subjected to pre-legislative by the devolved Assemblies, but the Government have scrutiny. I shall tell the noble Lord what you do. You arrogantly ploughed ahead regardless and have not say, “Let’s have pre-legislative scrutiny first”, as I explained the magic of this date. We need to ensure understand the Government are doing in relation to that, if there is a referendum, it is one that best House of Lords reform. Why could that not have been addresses the development of the electoral system in done in relation to Part 2 of the Bill? our country. The following are points that we will explore in the Lord Tyler: The noble and learned Lord was a very next stages of this Bill. First, the referendum should distinguished member of the previous Administration. be advisory and not binding. Secondly, the referendum Does he recall that it took two years to bring forward should give voters the opportunity to vote on other any proposals on the Constitutional Reform and systems apart from just first past the post or AV. Governance Bill and that, when the Bill came forward, Thirdly, the date should be moved to a date when there it acquired a completely new clause on AV that had are no other elections. Fourthly, there should be a not been subject to any pre-legislative scrutiny? Was threshold of yes votes measured against a total number that not just the same thing as what he is now suggesting? of those who can vote in the referendum. Part 2 proposes a reduction in the size of the House Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The noble Lord, Lord of Commons by 50 MPs and a redrawing of constituency Tyler, exemplifies the attitude of the Liberal Democrats, boundaries that—give or take 5 per cent—will prioritise who seem to think that the Bill is splendid and marvellous. the equal size of parliamentary seats above all other Look at them. The moment that they have the most factors. Considerations of community, local ties, shape important constitutional Bill since 1832, they simply and accessibility of constituencies and geographical 577 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 578 and natural boundaries are all to be subordinate to reviews had meant that the number of MPs had crept achieving the numerical ideal. On this side of the up. That is what he said in the House of Commons, House, first, we ask the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, but it is not so. The number of MPs is lower than it where the magic total of 600 constituencies has come was a decade ago and no higher than it was 20 years from. I apologise for asking that because he has answered ago. It is virtually impossible to discern any principle that question. He said that it came “from the air”. It underlying the proposal to reduce the number of MPs. certainly does not derive from either of the— We will oppose the reduction and we will in any event make any reduction conditional on a proportionate Lord Strathclyde: I did not say that the figure came reduction in the number of Ministers in the Commons. from the air. I said that the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, Crucial in the Bill is the method for determining had grabbed it from the air. I said that it was a nice new constituency boundaries. With the exception of round figure. Orkney and Shetland and the Western Isles, a new system will apply to all constituencies. The crux of the new system is that the driving factor will be the Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I apologise. The noble number of constituents in a constituency. We agree Lord is absolutely right. It was the noble Lord, Lord with the need for substantially greater equalisation of Dubs, who said that the figure was plucked from the constituency size and that there should be a small air. The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, said that it was number of exceptions to the process, but we consider “a nice round figure”. Thank you very much. Does the that the constituencies to be treated as exceptions to 600 figure have anything to do with research from the the system should be identified and chosen in a fair University of Liverpool, conducted for “Newsnight”, way. Why not choose the Isle of Wight? Why not which clearly demonstrates that Labour will be the net recognise the importance of keeping Cornish and losers in this situation? Labour would lose 25 seats to Devonian constituencies separate from each other? the Tories’ 13 and the Lib Dems’ seven. We support the inclusion of the two exceptions that are already there, but we think that there should be Lord Dubs: I did not say anything. I just waved my more and that their selection should be entrusted to arm a bit and I have become the centre of the debate. I someone other than a politician. Let there be a fair am sitting quite quietly, behaving myself. process. If the hybridity route has been rejected by this House, perhaps there should be an inquiry conducted Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Perhaps I may say that by the boundary commissions, which have proved the unspoken interventions of my noble friend Lord themselves over very many years to be above politics. Dubs are more powerful than the words of the noble As regional, council and even ward boundaries Lord, Lord Strathclyde. What is the effect of removing are crossed in the onward march to perfectly sized 7.7 per cent—some 50—of the total of MPs? According constituencies, representation will become more strained to Professor King, the respected psephologist, the and harder to navigate. For instance, the Government’s average constituency size will go up from 66,000, insistence on only 5 per cent leniency in constituency which it was at the end of the Second World War, to size would require 385 extra electors to be found for around 105,000 by the time of the next election. the Forest of Dean and 59 electors to be expelled from Warrington. The prospect is ridiculous. Lord Phillips of Sudbury: Does the noble and learned Lord appreciate that the figure given by Professor Lord Anderson of Swansea: My noble and learned King was not of electors but of the total population? friend has mentioned the report of the Constitution Committee. Is he also aware of the recommendation Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I appreciate that. The of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee in the other reason why I refer to that figure is because that is the place, which is a Conservative-dominated committee? group of people that the MP has to deal with. If It said: someone comes in and says, “I want some help”, I do “in terms of … geography, culture and history … We recommend not think that you say, “Can you prove to me that you that the Government brings forward amendments to the Bill to are a voter?”. permit the Boundary Commission to give greater weight to these factors when drawing up new constituencies than it is currently MPs provide the pool from which Ministers are allowed under the current proposals”. chosen. That pool would be reduced. The removal of Again, a committee of this Parliament rejects what the 50 MPs would reduce at a stroke the number of MPs Government are doing. available to scrutinise legislation and to hold the Government to account. Professor King said: “The House of Commons, compared with other national Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I was not aware legislatures, is already a feeble affair. The present proposal would of that. There seems to be a trend that any independent enfeeble it further”. body within Parliament that looks at this matter criticises I hope that, in the five days that it cobbled together the way in which it has been done and criticises the this agreement, the coalition thought about what effect conclusions. The only way in which we can give effect this number—to quote the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, to that is by this House introducing amendments to “a nice round number”—would have on our democracy. the Bill. Why does the coalition propose the reduction? The The prospect of the sort of fiddling around with Deputy Prime Minister, whom I mentioned earlier, constituencies to which I have referred is ridiculous said that it was because the legislation underpinning and unnecessary. It can be removed by increasing the 579 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 580

[LORD FALCONER OF THOROTON] 7.12 pm leeway to 10 per cent either side of the standard Lord Elystan-Morgan: My Lords, I find myself in constituency size, which would give considerable considerable agreement with the remarks of the noble equalisation but at the same time give the ability to and learned Lord, Lord Falconer. Within six days, this reflect local needs. Mathematical purity should not House has seen the Government deal with two Second be allowed to carve up communities. We advise the Readings of Bills of immense constitutional importance. Government that they should seek a balance between Noble Lords will recollect that last Tuesday we had equalisation and recognition of tradition, culture, and the Second Reading of the Public Bodies Bill, and local authority boundaries rather than aim for bland now we have this matter before us. The Bills have a uniformity. great deal in common, but what is most striking is the To add insult to injury, the Bill plans to remove fact that the Government seem to be very much on the public inquiries from the boundary process. The proposals defensive and, if I may say, on to a loser in respect of in the Bill have been described by Dr Stuart Wilks-Heeg them both. They are on a loser in relation to the of Democratic Audit as, arguments that have been and will be deployed in this “the most ambitious attempt to redraw the UK’s electoral geography House later today and tomorrow, and very much on to in six decades”. a loser in relation to the castigation of both Bills by As acknowledged by the chairs of the boundary that most distinguished body of persons, the Select commissions, every constituency will have to change. Committee on the Constitution. The committee’s If this is not an ideal moment to include the public, castigation has not been a mild dissertation on what who will be most affected by these changes, in a the alternatives might have been. It was not a slap on meaningful way, I cannot think what is. The Government the wrist, as I described it the other evening. Rather, it talk—just as the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, has talked—of was a magisterial rebuke of such dimensions and the big society and of a new politics where power is intensity that it would cause, I suggest, any sensitive handed to the people, but they stubbornly ignore Government to smart in embarrassment. the calls of the constituencies of the Isle of Wight or One is tempted, in relation to both these losses, to Argyll and Bute to special recognition of their communities. remember Oscar Wilde’s “The Importance of Being The Government may talk of the big society, but with Earnest”. Losing one is indeed unfortunate, but losing the abolition of public inquiries they will remove the both smacks of carelessness. That will be the verdict of one meaningful mechanism that allows ordinary people the community not only in relation to these two matters to have their say. I hope that the coalition Government over the long term, but also very probably in relation will realise their mistake, but I am not optimistic. to the third, which will be with us in a few weeks or The Electoral Reform Society has described the perhaps months, on the Government’s protection of coalition’s proposals as meaning that, their position in the House of Commons. They will be “most constituencies will pay less regard to what most voters protecting themselves on a five-year basis, taking out a think of as community and natural boundaries, and change more lease on a certainty of five years rather than having a frequently, destabilising the link between MPs and constituents”. month-by-month tenancy, as it were, along with the The United States, notes the Electoral Reform Society, other provisions of that Bill. “has rigorous requirements for arithmetical equality of population On the question of the attempt to equalise the size in congressional districts, but the worst gerrymandering in the of constituencies in the United Kingdom, it is of developed world”. course superficially attractive to aim for equality all We want to support proposals for greater equalisation round. But that is the most shallow and superficial and we would welcome discussions with the coalition approach imaginable. It is based entirely on the mirage to achieve it. This sort of Bill is a classic vehicle for of a chimerical conception. You cannot achieve, with seeking consensus rather than ramming things through a mere mathematical formula, any form of total equality. in this way. We will not support operating in this Even with constituencies of exactly the same size, you overly hasty way, which places the power to influence would not achieve equality. Let us assume for the constituency boundaries out of reach of local people purposes of argument that the AV provision is not and which in the short-term will disfranchise 3.5 million carried by a referendum—and I would be surprised if people in the country, the vast majority of whom are it would be. If that is so, you would still have inequalities. young, living in private rented accommodation, in Constituency A will have a successful Member elected poverty and from the BME communities. by 37 per cent of the electorate, while constituency B This Bill will promote rapid and damaging changes would have a 55 per cent vote and constituency C to our constitution in order to have the new boundaries 65 per cent. Where is the equality in the situation of a in place by the next election. It will do so at great cost compact urban constituency covering a few square to local communities and to the unregistered voter, miles in which a constituent living at the furthest and it will do long-term damage to faith in our politics. periphery can walk to the office of his Member of We can achieve the goal of equalisation without the Parliament in 20 minutes, compared with a massive damage that this Bill will cause. I hope that the fact rural constituency comprising a couple of counties where that there is now a coalition embracing the Tories and it would take half a day’s travel to achieve the same the Liberal Democrats does not mean that this House result? No equality is possible. Slavish adherence to a loses its reputation for amending Bills when they need mathematical formula does nothing to bring about amending. I hope that the House will join together to equality save in the most shallow and chimerical way. make this Bill a much better Bill than the poor, partisan The price that has to be paid for this is high. Many Bill that it is at the moment. It can be done, and I ask constituencies are communities that have a history. your Lordships’ House to help us to do that. They have a soul, an identity and a cohesion that will 581 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 582 disappear completely or, at the very best, there will be but we have a much greater population than most so much doubt and uncertainty about the matter that others. However, the ratio of Member of Parliaments no one will know who their Member of Parliament is per 1 million of the population is, in this country, or might be, or where his constituency is going to be. I lower in the main than in many other countries. We had the great honour of serving the county of Cardigan compare roughly favourably with France and Italy. in the other place for eight short years. That community Many of the states in Europe are federal states and do is one of the oldest in the United Kingdom, going not heap upon the shoulders of their Members of back around 1,500 years. The community in that land Parliament the constituency duties that we have given from the estuary of the Dyfi to the Teifi and to the ours. In the 60 years leading up to now, the population west of the Plynlimon range to the sea has been of this country has increased by 25 per cent; the hammered out on the anvil of the centuries. But under increase in relation to Members of Parliament is 4 per this formula it will virtually disappear and its identity cent. So there is at least an arguable case that an will be lost totally. That uncertainty will apply to inquiry could have recommended a greater number hundreds of constituencies in the United Kingdom. If rather than a lesser number, or indeed leave the matter there is any real benefit to be gained, even superficially as it was. and over a short period of time, by a slavish adherence The point has been eloquently made more than to a mathematical formula, it will all be lost and once already in the debate that it is not as though counterproduced by uncertainties and the sheer chaos slavish adherence to mathematics is of itself any panacea brought about by this attempt at equality in relation to because you cannot slavishly adhere to that which is constituencies. impure and incomplete in itself—in other words, a That position is one which will bring about the register of December 2010 that is inaccurate to the greatest injustice of all in Wales. The total number of tune of 3.5 million. seats in Wales will inevitably be reduced under the plus I doubt very much whether the Conservative Party or minus 5 per cent on 76,000 rule from 40 to 30—a really believes that it is necessary to reduce the numbers reduction of 25 per cent. Wales will have fewer seats of Members of Parliament. It has given the wrong than it had at the time of the Great Reform Act 1832. message—a message which belongs more to Gilbert Many will say, “Come off it. You should be saying not and Sullivan’s “The Mikado”, Pooh-Bah and Ko-Ko— that it is wrong now to change the system but that it remember the little list of the people who should was wrong not to change it over the decades”. That disappear—than to the bringing about any equity in argument was put to Mr Kenneth Clarke when he was this situation. Home Secretary and dealing with the Boundary Commission Act 1992. He said, “No, I am not having I refer the House to the evidence given in 2003 by a it. Wales is a national entity; there is here a constitutional Member of Parliament, a member of the Conservative arrangement of long standing which I am determined Party, to the Boundary Commission in relation to the tohonour”.Thesituationnowisexactlyasitwasin1992. question of reducing the numbers of Members of Parliament. He said that he was entirely against it and There is one further consideration in relation to that he hoped very much that the idea would be Wales—the question of devolution. I raised that point abandoned. He was the Member of Parliament for with the Deputy Leader of the House in June of this Witney, Mr Cameron. year and asked him whether there would be an over-cull of Scotland and Wales because of devolution. I received This Bill, the one that we dealt with six days ago a straight and clear answer—no. So the situation in and the one that we will be dealing with in a couple of relation to Wales turns entirely upon the question of months’ time will have a massive impact on the whole the 76,000 plus or minus 5 per cent rule. That is situation; it will be epoch-making. It will not cause entirely wrong and the matter must be looked at again. equity but it will bring about total chaos. The question of reducing the total number of Members 7.25 pm of Parliament compounds the evil. We are in a situation where Members of Parliament—some of them deservedly; The Lord Bishop of Blackburn: My Lords, the Church most of them undeservedly—have been castigated and of England has been around for some very considerable regarded as extremely unworthy persons. The coalition time. We have centuries of experience of making changes Government are saying, “Yes, we agree with you. They and we have not always got it right. What we have are pretty rotten chaps so we will get rid of 50 of learnt, though, is that change management is a skill them”. I will not animadvert on the question of why it which has to be honed with experience—and my is 50 rather than 115, as proposed by the Conservative experience still tells me that trying to run two unrelated Party, or 150 as proposed by the Liberal Democrats and non-interdependent changes at the same time is but, be that as it may, I make the point, with as much fraught with difficulty. force as I can possibly command, that there never was With regard to the voting system for the other a factual basis for that calculation. One could easily place, noble Lords will know that the established argue that, if an in-depth inquiry had been held into church has for many years adopted the principle of the number of seats the House of Commons should the single transferable vote for election to its own have, it is at least as possible that the inquiry would governing body, the General Synod. While the church have found that we needed more Members of Parliament will not be putting forward a corporate line on the rather than fewer. alternative vote, I would comment that there is a Let us consider the facts. It is said that we have danger that under this system the member elected, more Members in our House of Commons than most rather than being “the one whom most people like”, as other Parliaments in Europe. That is perfectly true, is often claimed, could better be described as “the one 583 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 584

[THE LORD BISHOP OF BLACKBURN] 7.33 pm fewest people dislike”. Is this a move to the lowest Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords, I hope that it common denominator rather than the highest common will not come as a shock and surprise to my noble factor? Perversely, this can be less proportional than friend the Leader of the House that I intend to support the first past the post system we currently have. this Bill. The redrawing of the constituency boundaries may seem, on the face of it, to be a welcome move in Noble Lords: Hear, hear. equalising the size of constituencies, but surely we must not forget the law of unintended consequences. Lord Baker of Dorking: Any port in a storm. I say If, as we are assured, the revisions are to be speedy and to my noble friend that I am supporting it because I often to ensure that the constituencies remain roughly am very much in favour of the second half of the Bill, equal in size as registered voter numbers change, small which deals with the reduction in numbers in the communities on the edge of larger populations could House of Commons and the equalisation of votes in find themselves being moved in and out of a particular constituencies. I do not care for the first half of the constituency at consecutive elections—a kind of electoral Bill, but that is the price for having the Bill; it is the ping pong. A different though related problem could coalition price. I think that it is a price worth paying, arise for a rural community surrounded by urban because I do not think that the referendum will succeed. communities. The small pockets of population in the I am sure that there will be a majority of no votes. rural area could be used similarly to the “makeweight I am opposed to the alternative vote system. I shall chocolates” that I remember from my youth; they speak against it at rallies and all the rest of it. I am would be added to larger urban areas just to make up rather surprised that my new friends the Liberals are the numbers. quite so keen on the alternative vote. After all, Roy An advantage of our present constituency system is Jenkins’s commission savaged it and said how that a community of interest develops over a period of unsatisfactory it was. However, my surprise is even time. I would suggest that such communities of interest greater that large parts of the Labour Party have are important, not only to those who live in them but embraced the alternative vote. I would have thought also to those who represent them. To move parts of that they had had enough of the alternative vote. They communities from one area to another, with no recourse have just gone through the process of having an alternative to representation from the members of those communities, vote in electing their leader. It wreaked havoc on their is in my view wrong. It may suit the numerical purists party and did not produce the best man as the winner. to be able to work it out on a spreadsheet, but it is The result of every alternative vote is that you have to destructive of the very thing that we are trying to try to persuade yourself that the person who won was produce, which is better accountability. the best man, when everyone knows that he is not the Noble Lords will note that I referred to “those who best man; he is the lowest common denominator rather live in them”—elected Members of the other place than the highest common factor. If the Labour Party represent all who live in their boundaries, as we have continues to embrace the alternative vote system, all heard this evening, and not just those who are registered I can say is that the position was well described by to vote. There is strong evidence that the urban, more Kipling, who said: deprived areas are those that have the highest number “the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her of unregistered eligible voters. That view is supported Mire, And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wobbling back to by the Electoral Commission. These are the very areas the Fire”. that are likely to be affected most by the redrawing of the boundaries and the consequent reduction in the Lord Snape: I am sure that the House is grateful for number of elected Members. that bit of doggerel, but will the noble Lord accept The north-west as a region has the lowest deviation from me that not all of the Labour Party is in favour from the mean electorate in England, based on the of the AV system? I will find myself campaigning election of 6 May 2010. However, under the proposed alongside him against that prospect later, but will he revisions, it would lose the most representatives of any come to the nitty-gritty of the Bill and his support for English region. I hope that these proposals will be it? Is it not about political advantage for his party looked at again and that a solution will be found that rather than anything else? is both locally supported and fairer in impact than the present suggestion. To do less would, I suspect, be to Lord Baker of Dorking: I say to my new ally in the disfranchise large numbers in my diocese. campaign—Snape and Baker ranging the country—that “Act in haste and repent at leisure”: I fear that that we will draw great crowds. I will come on to political may be the most useful comment with regard to this advantage later, if I may. Bill. The changes proposed are far-reaching and, as I favour the second half of the Bill because three the noble and learned Lord said, they are untested—they years ago I took a Bill through your Lordships’ House were not even in an election manifesto. The Bill also that did very nearly the same thing. The Bill was to has major implications for other constitutional changes reduce the House of Commons by 10 per cent, which that are being talked of, not least in relation to your was then Conservative Party policy, so there would Lordships’ House. In humility, I ask that we think have been not 50 but 65 fewer Members. It was also carefully about separating parts of the Bill and allow designed to equalise votes. I was interrupted by my time for that community of interest to develop around new noble friend Lord Rennard—yes, he is in his an agreed way forward. place—who knows a thing or two about constituencies 585 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 586 and electorates. He reminded me that the policy of the Lord Baker of Dorking: Yes, and I enjoyed that Liberals was to reduce the number in the House of enormously. I do not see where that comes into it. The Commons to 500. The Liberal policy was to reduce constituency eventually disappeared altogether, it was the number by 150; the Conservative policy was to so small. But if you think generally of all the other, reduce it by 65. Well, in the sweet compromise that great constituencies in the country—I would not want figures the coalition’s proposal, the figure 50 was to make a personal matter of it—that is the plain fact. settled on and I am happy to settle for 50 now. That There has to be a greater equality. will be a considerable improvement. Labour’s attitude, from what the noble and learned Why do I think so? The noble Lord, Lord Elystan- Lord the former Lord Chancellor was saying tonight, Morgan, talked about the numbers in other countries. is that this Bill should not proceed because a large We have a population of 60 million and we have number of people are unregistered in our inner cities. 600 MPs. Compared to other countries, we could be The general comment was that it was not fair to do it described as well represented. Japan has twice our until registration had gone up. I find that rather an population and 470 MP equivalents. Russia has two astonishing argument. Some electoral scholars call the and half times our population and 450 MP equivalents. people who do not register non-people, although they America has five times our population but just are not non-people but actual people. It is quite possible 430 Congressmen and 100 Senators. Six hundred is for people to register if they are interested in politics; quite a good number for the electorate’s representation. if they are interested in affecting society, they can In Scotland and Wales, there are also the local Members register. It is their duty and responsibility if they wish of Parliament, who deal with most of the complaints to have it. If the Labour Party wishes to pursue that of their constituents, as powers have been considerably argument very far, it should ask itself what it did in devolved. There is plenty of representation at all levels office about registration of the electorate. where people can go and seek support from their elected representatives. Under the Bill, the new constituencies will have an Lord Falconer of Thoroton: We introduced individual average electorate of 76,000, give or take 5 per cent registration and it drove up registration to more than either way. The former Lord Chancellor wanted 10 per 90 per cent. It is completely wrong to say that people cent, which would largely negate some of the Bill’s do not want to register because they are not interested effects, but he is used to putting forward such amendments. in politics. If you have a registration drive, registration At the moment, the size of an electorate in England is goes up. The noble Lord is talking rubbish. 72,000, in Scotland it is 65,000, in Northern Ireland it is 63,000 and in Wales it is 56,000. I remember when Lord Baker of Dorking: With great respect, I ask the noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, and I were the noble and learned Lord to address the figures. both in the House of Commons. It was a long time ago. That is a total exaggeration, which is not unknown from the former Lord Chancellor. In fact, very little Lord Elystan-Morgan: A very long time. was done, and I have read apologies from those on the former government Front Bench in the other House Lord Baker of Dorking: Time runs not to the memory saying that they did not do enough. I ask the noble of man. The noble Lord had quite a small constituency and learned Lord to read Hansard occasionally. compared to an English constituency. I think that his electorate was about 50,000. That meant that English Among the other things I favour in this Bill is the seats had 14,300 more electors than Welsh seats. There proposal that the Boundary Commission should do is substantial overrepresentation. You cannot deny it. five-yearly reviews. We have been accused of just looking If democracy means anything, it should be that one after the Conservative interests in this Bill, but I have vote is equal wherever it is, but it is not. The Welsh seen situations when Labour in office has deliberately voters who put the noble Lord into power as an MP delayed boundary reviews. Let me give an example. were much more powerful than the voters who put me Before the 1970 election I had won a by-election in into power in England; they had a greater say on our Acton, which was a Labour seat. We were coming up nation’s affairs. The noble Lord cannot shake his to the 1970 election and a boundary review was published, head; it is a fact. It is true and realistic. There is which was going to make my seat a safe seat, so I had a massive overrepresentation. vested interest in it. Alas, the Home Secretary of the That can be seen not just in Wales. Islington in day, Jim Callaghan, did not share that interest and did London has an electorate of 67,000, whereas just a everything that he possibly could to manoeuvre to little way away in Brent—these are Labour seats—the prevent the Boundary Commission proposals coming electorate is 87,000. There is no logic to this and it is before Parliament. It was a shameful process; he tried indefensible. to jiggle a few seats here and a few seats there, and it had to be withdrawn. So for electoral advantage the Lord Snape: My Lords— Labour Party rigged the system in the 1970 election, and it has done it before. Lord Baker of Dorking: Can we have our campaign Successive Governments have always been rather meeting later, please? slow to introduce Boundary Commission reports. As a result, you had the electorate of 2000 for the 2010 Lord Snape: I am grateful to the noble Lord for election, while the 2005 election was on the electorate giving way. I remind the House that he did at one time of 1991. Successive Governments have delayed. So I represent Marylebone, which was one of the smallest welcome the fact that this will be done on a five-yearly constituencies in the country. basis. 587 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 588

[LORD BAKER OF DORKING] make, about the old hammered communities and how I am also glad that public inquiries are going to be they had lived there over the centuries, how the pathways scrapped. I do not know how many Members of this were defined and all the rest of it. But the arguments House have attended a public inquiry of the commission, that he was using were exactly the arguments used to but they will all agree that it is a misnomer to call it a defend rotten boroughs in 1832. One has to reflect public inquiry. At the ones I attended, no ordinary changes in population movement. citizens turned up at all. The only people who turned I come back to the point made by my new-found up were the ward councillors and their wives—I suppose campaign colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Snape, about they are ordinary citizens—the sitting Member of political advantage. Yes, I am glad that the Bill removes Parliament, the various candidates and their election quite a large part of the advantage that the Labour agents. It was really a rehearsal of all the submissions Party has at all general elections. At the general election, they had made to the Boundary Commission. Those we had to be eight to nine points ahead in the opinion with the small interests of the locality were not there polls before we got to a level playing field with the at all. Moreover, with regard to the findings of those Labour Party. What fairness is there in that? That is inquiries, the greatest changes that they have ever partly due to the maldistribution of seats around the instituted were to change the name of the new country. So I want a fairer and more equal playing constituency. In the whole history of the Boundary field; I want the checker board of politics to be on an Commission there have been three inquiries leading to even table. That is what this Bill does. significant changes in the boundaries. 7.47 pm Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Boundary Commission Lord Hart of Chilton: My Lords, I put on record report for England and Wales in 2007 said that 64 per that I am a member of your Lordships’ Constitution cent of public inquiries affected a change in the initial Committee, whose report was published last Thursday. proposal of the Boundary Commission. The Bill today is one of three promoted by the coalition. Two have commenced their parliamentary process and Lord Baker of Dorking: Those changes are as modest the third, for an elected House of Lords, will appear at as the change that the noble and learned Lord was some unspecified date next year. Each impacts on the speaking about earlier concerning the movement of other, but the coalition is proceeding with them in Charlwood from Surrey to Sussex. That happened to isolation. The evidence of the Deputy Prime Minister be in my constituency. They are very minor changes and Mr Harper was that the underlying purpose for on the edge. constitutional reform is a desire to win back the confidence of the British people by electoral reform, greater accountability and legitimacy, reducing the power of Lord Alton of Liverpool: I am grateful to the noble the Executive and increasing the power of the legislature. Lord for giving way. That brings to mind two public Those are important ideals and put in a rather more inquiries that I was involved in when the constituencies high-flown way than the noble Lord, Lord McNally, that I represented in Liverpool were abolished in two put them this morning on the radio, when he said that successive reviews. A quite significant change was the Bill was really about ironing out a few wrinkles. made as a result of the first public inquiry. I regret that That seemed to assume that the House of Commons significant change was not made as a result of the was a crumpled frock that needed a bit of tightening. second. But many ordinary people and communities did attend and participate in those inquiries and I very The Constitution Committee points out that proposals much regret the removal of the right of people to for major constitutional reform should be subject to appear at those inquiries to contest decisions made by prior public consultation and legislative scrutiny. There the Boundary Commission. are obvious advantages in doing that: first, by seeking consensus on important issues, not just in principle but in detail, in order to ensure that the principles Lord Baker of Dorking: I appreciate that some will work; secondly, by testing the evidence for the proposals; feel that, but in my experience no members of the thirdly, by considering the implications of one proposal public turned up at all and I think that that was more on another; and, fourthly, by seeking to explain and the pattern. Occasionally they do, but very rarely. justify, as the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, Obviously, they did in the case brought up by the constantly reminds us, how the proposals fit into an noble Lord, Lord Alton. overall constitutional framework. Finally, if you are going to have an equal and fair The coalition seeks to justify the rush to legislation democratic system, where votes should have equal on the basis that the referendum on AV needs to take value, you have to address the problem of unequal place on 15 May next year, but that only justifies boundaries. Other countries do this on a regular basis, Part 1 of the Bill. It does not justify Part 2. The such as Australia and New Zealand, and in America it timetable for the Bill is so tight that it runs the risk of goes on all the time. It is a sensible thing to do. I know deadlines not being met. That is why the Bill was that it upsets local communities. I remember listening rushed through the Commons. Hansard records the to a speech by Michael Foot in the House of Commons controversy in the five heavily whipped and guillotined when he represented Ebbw Vale, which was very days, with some Members of the other place expressing reminiscent of the speech made by the noble Lord, the hope that your Lordships would provide the scrutiny Lord Elystan-Morgan, when Ebbw Vale was to be that they could not, while the report from the House very much changed and expanded. It was a most of Commons Select Committee on Political and moving speech of the kind that Michael Foot could Constitutional Reform is heavily critical of the Bill. 589 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 590

The absence of any full, proper and normal Conservative Party and three for the Liberal Democrats. consultation and scrutiny for a constitutional Bill is At the previous election, we returned five Members of nowhere more apparent than in the provisions relating Parliament to the other place. As recently as 1832, we to parliamentary constituencies. There has been: no had 44 Members of Parliament sitting for constituencies coherent explanation for the number chosen for the in Cornwall, which tells your Lordships something reduction in constituencies to 600; no analysis of about the economic decline of that beautiful part of population shifts and increases; no proper analysis of England. comparable legislatures or the missing millions from The boundaries, however, of Cornwall—the boundary the electoral register; no proper examination of the of the Tamar river—have not been crossed by a roles and functions of MPs; no action on the increase parliamentary constituency for 750 years. The Tamar in the power of the Executive at the expense of the has not been crossed by any local government Back Bench; and no account of the inter-relationship reorganisation in the past 200 years. Yet this Bill of the House of Commons and your Lordships’ House proposes such transgression into the county of Cornwall in the context of proposals for another elected House. by voters from the county of Devon. We heard earlier How ironic—somebody has mentioned this already—that about the preserved status of the Western Isles and the as 50 elected MPs are hurtled to oblivion from the voters from Orkney and Shetland. I am persuaded of other place, the door to paradise in here is thrown the good reason why they are given such a preserved open and in come another 50 unelected Peers. status, but I ask myself whether they are the only Many of your Lordships will wish to comment on constituencies that so qualify. It seems clear to me that the speeding up of boundary reviews, so I simply Cornwall does, by dint of its geographical extremity. observe that if the fixed term of Parliament is shorter In terms of getting from there, it is probably a longer than five years, for whatever reason, a review could be distance from north Cornwall to London by public completed a mere six months before the next election, transport than from any other constituency in the with the attendant crisis at local level as attempts are country of England. made to adapt the new constituency boundaries and Cornwall has a distinct culture. It has a Celtic contests. Similarly, many will wish to comment on the history and an economy which is very distinct and proposed basis for equalisation. Here, there has been different from that of Devon and of Plymouth in no attempt to achieve consensus and no consultation particular. The economic position of Cornwall is dire; with the public. What evidence is there that a strict it is one of four parts of this country which qualify for arithmetic formula with little flexibility—just 5 per EU poverty-related grants. The people of Cornwall, cent—is preferred by the electorate to more weight even where their homes, their schools and their being given to geographical, customary or traditional communities abut the county of Devon, look to the local and historic boundaries? south and west for leadership and self-identity. They Finally, may it not be that by removing a right to a look to Cornwall and regard themselves as Cornish, local inquiry, many will feel that a sense of legitimacy even if they live on the borders of Devon. They do not has been taken away from them, for no good reason, at want to be absorbed into Plymouth or north Devon a time when the confidence and trust of the public is and it is, quite frankly, shameful that arithmetic so important? How is this Bill likely to achieve the should take precedence over identity and common objectives that I outlined as being the coalition’s avowed sense. intentions? First, the Bill will increase the power of Not a single Member for a constituency in Cornwall the Executive, not diminish it, while by an absence of spoke in the other place against this proposal. Not a consensus, consultation and scrutiny, and by an absence single Member from Cornwall in the other place voted of any solid evidence for its proposal, it has failed against the Bill. Today, we had an opportunity, on the to make out a case for greater transparency and earlier Motion from my noble and learned friend Lord accountability for constitutional change. All these Falconer, for those Members of this House who have arguments are ones that the two parties opposite had associations with Cornwall to have voted in support constantly put forward when in opposition. I see now of the hybrid proposal. They did not do so, and those from the papers that the coalition is going to have the from Cornwall and with associations in Cornwall will audacity to ask us all whether we are happy. I fear that be recognised as such for their failure to vote and there may be many who, when they actually hear of speak up for Cornwall in our earlier debate. the provisions of the Bill, will answer in the negative. Some people in Cornwall are saying that now is not the time for dissent. They mislead their constituents, 7.54 pm arguing that the Bill is not important and that the real Lord Myners: My Lords, I will be brief and confine point where you exercise your leverage is with the myself to a single point. I have chosen not to speak on Boundary Commission for England. Yet under the the issue of alternative voting, the referendum or the powers of the proposed new schedule in Clause 11(1), size of the other place, because many in your Lordships’ in its paragraph 5(1)(a) to (d), the interests of local House are far more knowledgeable and can make a communities are recognised by the boundary commission far more effective and informed contribution on those but are at all times subordinated to the 5 per cent subjects than I can. I speak as a man of Cornwall and tolerances, while no arguments about boundaries are to issues relating to Cornwall, which my noble and to be taken in a public arena. I regard this as a very learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton has already unhelpful step if we want to engage people in democracy, referred to twice today. Cornwall is bounded by the with a sense of being involved in the choice of their oceans and the Tamar. At the last general election, we own constituency and in having control over the political returned six Members to the other place: three for the process. 591 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 592

[LORD MYNERS] challenge the idea that two-thirds of MPs should The noble Lord, Lord Renton, who I see is not in continue to be elected with only a minority of support his place, asked earlier whether there was any opposition in their constituencies. Surely they will challenge the to these changes from the people of Anglesey or those stark fact that, at present, no single Member of the of the Isle of Wight. I cannot speak for people from other House could put their hand on their heart and those constituencies, but I can tell your Lordships that say that they represented more than half of those who the feeling in Cornwall on this issue is absolutely could vote for them. That is how we should be approaching intense. In our anthem, we sing of Bishop Trelawny the change to our electoral system. and of 20,000 Cornishmen who will want to know the I hope, too, that when the public are given the reason why. But 250,000 Cornishmen will want to opportunity, they, not politicians, will enthusiastically know why the Liberal Democrats are supporting this sell AV’s potential to strengthen the connection between change, which strikes at the heart of the identity of people and Parliament that was so woefully damaged Cornwall and its uniqueness. last year, affecting both Houses; to end the scandalous When we come to Committee, I for one will be complacency of safe seats; and to make politics positive proposing that we widen the tolerances from the 5 per again so that elections are about expressing a full cent currently allowed in the Bill to 10 per cent or preference for those who want to represent you rather 15 per cent. As noble Lords have suggested in this than a bald vote against the candidate that you most debate, that will also provide a greater continuity of fear. relationship. We simply do not want, as the right That will be the case, and it is a strong one. I am reverend Prelate the Bishop of Blackburn pointed out, delighted that Ed Miliband, in his speech to his conference, people in a constituency for one election but out for said, the next election. That would be a terrible outcome “I support changing our voting system and will vote yes in the anywhere in the country but would be devastating in referendum on AV”. Cornwall. Hear, hear to that. I am sure that all those on the In the same way that preserved status has been opposition Benches who have supported AV during granted to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland so the general election and since in supporting their new that parliamentary constituencies will not cross national leader will support Part 1 of the Bill. boundaries, I will argue that that should also apply to That brings me to Part 2. This is where there will be Cornwall. The integrity of Cornwall should be protected legitimate and proper concerns that we will need to by preserved status. address carefully in your Lordships’ House. I agree that, by drawing attention to this section of the Bill 8.01 pm and making it clear that this is the really controversial part that we have to analyse and scrutinise, the Lord Tyler: My Lords, I am delighted to follow my Constitution Committee has given us a great deal of fellow Cornishman in this debate. He may well know assistance. that I am a direct descendant of the great bishop Jonathan Trelawny, about whom he spoke and about I feel confident that your Lordships’ House will not whom we sing in our national song. He is, though, want to challenge the basic principle of Part 2; I think technically incorrect: it would have been totally that that was indicated even in the speech from the inappropriate to deal with Cornwall under the hybridity opposition Front Bench. I hope that we will not challenge issue. It is much more appropriate, as my colleagues in the right of the elected House of Commons to give the other place indicated, to deal with it under Clause 11 people a say in how MPs are elected, as in Part 1. and revised Schedule 2. It would be quite possible to The principle in Part 2 is quite simple, as well, as amend the Bill if that was the wish of your Lordships’ has already been indicated. It is that votes should have House. an equal value, an equal weight, whether you are in the The noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, seemed farthest reaches of rural Cornwall or in the inner to have one core message for the House today. What cities, and whether you are in England, Wales, Northern he was really saying was that, because his Government Ireland or Scotland. That is the principle spelt out failed in 13 years to make progress on central constitutional clearly nearly 200 years ago by the Chartists, from reforms, promised to the electorate in their manifestos whom Labour claims political descent. Along with at a series of general elections, somehow the present their calls for a universal franchise, they recognised Government should therefore proceed more slowly. that votes for all would be of little use without challenging That seems to come within the definition of “hypocrisy” the rotten boroughs. that he was preaching to us about earlier. Incidentally, I should say to the noble Lord from I turn to Part 1 of the Bill. I do not want to spend Cornwall that it was not because of Cornwall’s economic precious minutes on the merits of AV; that, as has strength that we had so many rotten boroughs there—it been indicated, is a debate that we will take to the was because of the Duchy of Cornwall. As it was a country next year. It seems, though, that the public royal possession, it was always possible to promote the already see that the first past the post system is no Court party by having more Members improperly longer fit for purpose. In the 1950s, when I was first elected from that part of the country. interested in politics, that system worked—the two-party So, the Chartists expounded the key idea of system was well represented by first past the post. In constituencies of equal size—or, rather, of equal worth. the 21st century, though, it patently does not work; the There would be no seat that could simply be constructed electorate are cheated. When the battle is joined next to suit vested interests, and no election could be bought year, those in the “yes” campaign can surely robustly with the votes of a few poor and pliant electors. 593 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 594

Lord Elystan-Morgan: I am much obliged to the Lord Wills: I was interested in the noble Lord’s noble Lord. The fifth point of William Lovett’s charter quote from the Deputy Prime Minister. This is what was equal-sized constituencies. Whether he meant it the Bill says—no matter what the Deputy Prime Minister literally is another matter; he was applying his mind to says—in relation to the factors that the noble Lord the question of Old Sarum having, I think, seven people just outlined: living in it and one Member of Parliament while “This rule”— Manchester had two MPs. At the same time, of course, in other words, the effect of community and so on— along the same avenue of thought—trying to make Members more answerable to the public—the noble “has effect subject to rules 2 and 4”. Lord will remember what the sixth point was: annual It says “subject to”, not “alongside”. The rules about general elections. Thank God it never came to that. the equalisation of numbers take precedence over all those other considerations. That is what we are so worried about on this side of the House. Lord Tyler: My Lords, I should not have gone so far into the issue of the Chartists; the noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, is an expert on everything that can Lord Tyler: That is precisely the role of your Lordships’ be taken literally. I do not wish to pursue him down House. When we reach Committee stage, I am sure that course. Perhaps I should say, though, that I there will be general agreement on both sides of the represented North Cornwall, and one of the rotten House that we need to look carefully at the order of boroughs in that constituency was Bossiney, of which priority of those criteria. That is precisely what I said. Sir Francis Drake was the rotten borough Member. I I am delighted to have the support of the Minister, think that here were only two electors, one of whom who was previously responsible for these matters and might have been himself. sadly had so little effect on other, more senior members We in this House would be incredibly unwise to of the Administration. We would have made more subscribe to the hubris in the other House about progress on these issues if he had had his way. alleged gerrymandering, led ad nauseam—I have followed As I have already said, I have a special connection this both in print and in person—by Mr Chris Bryant. to Cornwall. My ancestry is there and my constituency At best this was misplaced and, at worst, deliberately was there. There is strong evidence from the people I misleading. At present, Mr Bryant has 51,554 constituents. have spoken to and heard from—whom I knew over I had over 87,000 constituents when I represented 40 years in public life there—that keeping Cornwall North Cornwall. If ever there was a gerrymander, that whole, as the campaign is called, is a priority. It may is it. That is something to which we must surely attach be that it is a higher priority even than the equality of a principle, and it is justifiable to do so. representation. I hope we can do something in this Since the Bill is about voters and their relationship House to meet that demand, as perhaps we might for with Members of Parliament, though, we need to look others with a particularly compelling case, such as the in detail at how Part 2 will be implemented. There Isle of Wight. However, we should recognise that it is a must be a vital role in your Lordships’ House for dilemma. In both cases it may be that the communities revising that. Having represented Cornish constituencies concerned are prepared to accept a lower level of for some 14 years, I know that special connection representation in exchange for maintaining their identity. between MPs and their constituents. For years people That dilemma is one that should be put fairly and campaign in an area, helping constituents or putative squarely to the people concerned. constituents and hoping to earn their trust. We must The Bill is not a panacea. It is not some holy grail in be careful that the Bill ensures that those links, those the scripture of political re-engagement, but it is a distinct local ties, are enabled to stay in place. The good start. Again, I say to noble Members opposite: it Deputy Prime Minister clearly wants that. I carefully is a great pity that they did not start this process when examined the statements that he gave to the Constitution they were given such a long opportunity to do so. The Committee, and he said that he is seeking only to give Bill says that people, not politicians, should have the primacy to the electoral numbers in each seat, not to final word over the architecture of their voting system. completely override the other factors, which he—not It says that whichever system we use, everyone’s votes I—lists as follows: community relations, community should be of roughly equal value. These are good cohesion, history, the character of an area and the principles from a good Government, and principles disruption that might be caused. So the issue of disruption that the latter day Chartists on the other side of your to existing constituencies and communities is, at the Lordships’ House should endorse as well. In short, it moment, a serious question under the Bill and we will is a good Bill and, with some work along the way to have to look at it carefully. I think that there are improve Part 2, it is a Bill we should all be able to Members on all sides of the House who have formally support. performed that important constituency role and will agree with me that that is a proper role for us to undertake. 8.12 pm The Bill could lead to an electoral map drawn from Lord Touhig: My Lords, as a Welshman in your scratch, with all the ties that constituents and campaigners Lordships’ House, I will direct my remarks to the have made with one another severed at a stroke. However, impact that the Bill will have on Wales and address I do not believe that that is what Ministers or indeed three main issues: the impact of the Bill on the union; your Lordships want, and we have a vital role in the ending of community-based representation; and addressing that problem. I look forward to hearing the the silencing of local opinion in parliamentary boundary Minister. changes. 595 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 596

[LORD TOUHIG] and Australia give greater representation to smaller As the noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, said, states within their unions, recognising the benefits for Wales will be more adversely affected than any other the whole—the benefits for the union. Look across the part of the United Kingdom by the Bill. If this measure Atlantic. California, with a population of 37 million, becomes law, Wales will lose 25 per cent of its elected sends two senators to Washington, as does Wyoming, representation in this, the Parliament of the union. It which has a population of 544,000. Even at this stage, will be the biggest shake-up in representation since the I urge the Government not to lose sight of the wood 16th century and it will leave Wales with fewer MPs in for the trees. Do not harm the union. If noble Lords Parliament than at any time since 1832. One hundred will forgive me for paraphrasing: it is the union, stupid. and seventy-eight years ago Wales sent 35 MPs to That is the big impact that the Bill will have. I can Parliament. If the Bill gains the statute book, we will think of no single act more likely to threaten the union send just 30. It will weaken the voice of Wales in than to cut Wales’s representation in the Parliament of Parliament and it will weaken the union—something I the United Kingdom by one in four. and many others have fought against all our political My second point is that the Bill will bring an end to lives. As I look across to the almost empty Benches community-based representation in Parliament—a feature opposite, occupied by a once great party that was of our parliamentary system since the earliest times. proud to call itself the Conservative and Unionist When giving evidence to the Welsh Affairs Committee, Party, I cannot believe that for short-term party-political Mr Paul Wood, a member of the Boundary Commission advantage the Conservatives are prepared to put our for Wales, said that, union at risk, but that is what the Bill will do. “issues such as local ties and historical ties, which may have had The Bill will adversely affect the predominantly more weight previously, are clearly subsumed in the legislation to Welsh-speaking parts of Wales. This was powerfully the numerical issues”. illustrated in a letter that Lewis Baston, senior research My good friend the right honourable Member for fellow with Democratic Audit, sent to the Welsh Affairs Torfaen, who is a former Northern Ireland Secretary Committee in the other place. The committee, which and has twice been Secretary of State for Wales, said: has also been mentioned and which has a Conservative “The creation of very large constituencies, rigidly defined by chairman and a non-Labour majority, conducted an numbers, will destroy community-based constituencies since it inquiry into the implications of the Bill, concluded it would appear that, to create such constituencies, local ties, geography was wrong and roundly condemned it. Mr Baston said: and tradition are likely to be ignored”. “There are currently 5 majority-Welsh constituencies: Ynys What will the ending of community-based representation Mon, Dwyfor Meirionnydd, Arfon, Ceredigion and Carmarthen in Parliament mean in practice? I see from an exercise East & Dinefwr. All of these are undersized, and the Bill will carried out by the Electoral Reform Society to redraw mean reduction accompanied by radical boundary changes. The Bill risks severely depleting the representation of Welsh-speaking the boundaries in Wales based on this Bill that my areas in the UK Parliament”. former constituency of Islwyn will disappear. I am not suggesting that the society’s report is definitive but it As I look across the Chamber to the left, I shake my gives a flavour of what could happen. It suggests that head in disbelief at the Liberal Benches. How can the the community of Abercarn should be part of the new heirs to Lloyd George, who loved Wales, loved its constituency of Caerphilly. Abercarn is in the Ebbw people and loved its language, support this Bill? Lloyd Valley; Caerphilly is in the Rhymney valley. They are George must be turning in his grave. Both Tories and separated by two mountain chains and three rivers. Liberals will pay a high price for the Bill when their There is no community of interest between the two. candidates face the electorate in Wales next spring. The community of Cefn Fforest, the society suggests, Mr Baston, in the paragraph I quoted, mentioned could become part of the new constituency of Merthyr constituencies that are undersized. This brings me to Tydfil and Ystrad Mynach. Historically, Cefn Fforest the heart of the second part of the Bill. The mantra and Merthyr Tydfil are in different counties—they are that the Bill’s supporters use is “fairness of representation”. miles apart—separated by mountains and rivers. There The noble Lord, Lord McNally, spoke about it on the is no community of interest between the two. If this radio this morning. Its supporters say fairness of Bill becomes law, we will not need a Boundary representation can only be achieved by creating Commission to settle new boundaries—the new constituencies of equal numbers of electors. Why is parliamentary seats can be created by anyone with a that the only criterion? Why is that the only definition map, a pencil and an abacus. We might as well give the of fairness that they will admit to? The union of the job to the Flat Earth Society for all the good it will do four nations of these islands, which has allowed us to in preserving local representation. live as a united country for centuries, recognises that My third and final point is the proposal to end local fairness means allowing the smaller nations to have public inquiries into boundary changes. The Bill, most greater representation in Parliament than their population disgracefully, does away with this, thus denying local might justify. That sense of fairness and understanding people a say in the drawing up of constituency boundaries. is the glue that has held this union together. The abandoning of local public inquiries into proposed We do not have a written constitution. Some of us parliamentary boundary changes will silence the voice say, “Thank God for that”, but had we sat down to of local people. What price the big society now? The write a constitution, would we not have had the good Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition agreement sense to allow for the smaller states of our union to said of the big society that the aim is, have greater representation in our Parliament than “to create a climate that empowers local people and communities, their populations must justify? The United States did building a big society that will take power away from politicians that, as did the Australians. Both the United States and give it to people”. 597 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 598

The Prime Minister said in an article in the Guardian generation. They bear great responsibility. Even at this in September that this is the Government who will give late stage, they should take stock and change tack. power back to the people. How hollow all that sounds Too much is at stake. now with this Bill, which is silencing the voice of The system is far too complicated. Even the Electoral dissent in a way that only people such as Robert Commission reports admit that the public find it Mugabe is used to deploying. The Bill is partisan and difficult to understand the numbering of candidates there is no motivation for redrawing the constituency and their relevance to the result. The commission map other than Tory Party self-interest. The Liberals believes that public education will help. I do not have gone along with it in exchange for the holy grail believe that. People will not be interested. Secondly, of electoral reform, except that the Bill does not give Ministers have repeatedly stated that candidates need them electoral reform—it merely promises a referendum more than 50 per cent of the vote to win. Indeed, the on changing the voting system to AV. They do not like noble Lord, Lord McNally, said it again this morning it and nor do the Tories, so why on earth are they on the “Today” programme. That is plainly not true. pursuing it in this way? I suspect that many Liberal Furthermore, they are still peddling this myth, using supporters in Wales will think that is not much of a carefully crafted language and skilful juggling of statistical prize to gain for the betrayal of selling out the Welsh argument. It will all fall apart when exposed to public people. scrutiny. The 50 per cent argument has become the This is the most partisan Bill I have ever seen. central plank pushed by advocates of optional preference Its aim is to manipulate our constitution to assist the AV. It will crumble when exposed, as indeed will the governing parties to remain in power. This House has argument of those who suggest that AV is some form long prided itself on being the guardian of our of proportional representation. constitution. This is the great challenge we face now in Then there is the argument, so clearly expressed by defending our constitution from subversion to party- a Mr Attenborough of Lincoln in his article in the political interests. If we are worthy of our role as Daily Mail of 9 September, under the headline, constitutional guardians, we need to find the stomach “Why this unfair system won’t get my vote”. to fight and tackle this Bill head on. To do anything He reveals in simple language a real concern already less would be a dereliction of our constitutional duty. known to we anoraks. In tightly fought seats, the second preferences of the bottom candidate, the first 8.22 pm to be eliminated, can determine who wins the seat. What that means is that the BNP and other extremes, Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, my interest in can actually determine who wins, while all second and this Bill is not so much in the reduction in seats and its subsequent preferences of the majority are not even effect on boundaries, although I regard the truncation taken into account. of process in the boundary reviews as outrageous, and from what I hear it is causing concern across the Then we have the work of Professors Colin Rallings Commons. and Michael Thrasher, of the University of Plymouth. Their research into voting behaviour in Queensland, I have been through two Boundary Commission Australia, which uses the Government’s proposed system, inquiries and I know that you simply cannot short-circuit concludes that the most likely scenario over time is the whole process—it leads to mistakes. For those that many voters will treat an AV election just like first MPs who do not pull their weight, it does not really past the post, and not cast multiple preferences. Incredibly, matter, but for MPs who take pride in offering a in Queensland in 2009, 63 per cent of those who service it is hugely important and can be very disruptive. turned out at the state elections voted for just one Anyhow, enough of that, that is for the Committee candidate. It defeats the whole raison d’être of the stage. initiative that the Government are taking. This will be My interest is AV and the question asked in the music to the ears of my noble friend Lord Grocott. We referendum—the Liberal Democrat agenda. Therefore, then have freak results. Do we really believe that when I direct my contribution to their Benches. I hope that the public learn that third-placed candidates on the they seriously consider my concerns. I believe in electoral first ballot and, in extremis, fourth-placed candidates, reform and in a preferential voting system for the can leapfrog the top-placed candidates and win seats, Commons which allows for the use of more than a that they will support the AV system proposed? I single preference. I do not believe in STV for the believe not. Commons. I could stomach an additional member So why did the Labour Government propose a system but I am not advocating it. If AV as proposed similar system? The answer is very simple. It was due survives the Bill, I shall reluctantly vote for it but I to a combination of a lack of detailed research, insufficient believe that the system is flawed and should be amended. consultation and a failure to draw lessons from our Furthermore, I do not believe that the public will vote experience in the mayoral elections. We should have for it. A turnout of more than 30 per cent would acted years ago and learnt from our experience. In surprise me. 1990, in an attempt to select a credible system, Labour A system which allows voters to number candidates 1, established the Plant commission, under my noble 2, 3, 4 and so on, eliminating the least popular in turn, friend Lord Plant. The commission undertook the has major flaws, which will be exposed during a task of examining a number of electoral systems, and referendum campaign. I believe that the Liberal Democrats in its landmark and authoritative report recommended are allowing their electoral reform agenda to be hijacked the introduction of a variation of AV called the by a system which they do not believe in and which, if supplementary vote—SV. In the previous year, prior defeated, will delay the electoral reform agenda for a to the Plant commission being established, I had worked 599 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 600

[LORD CAMPBELL-SAVOURS] Some of my amendments will introduce delay. I am on this system with the support of Professor Patrick afraid that that is inevitable if we are to place a Dunleavy, of the London School of Economics, and I credible system before the electorate. I appeal to the recommended it to the commission. The benefit of SV Liberal Democrats, who have it in their hands to sort was its simplicity. It would be easily understood by out this problem. I am sure that they will find support the public and it has subsequently been described by on the Conservative Benches for a tweaking of the Dunleavy as “London AV”. proposed referendum question. I remind the House With the supplementary vote, there are two columns that it was a Conservative Member of Parliament who on the ballot paper—one for first choice and one for moved the SV amendment in the Commons only a second choice. Voters can mark an X in each column if few weeks ago. It is not too late to do the same in they so wish. All the first preferences are counted. If a this House and to change the question that will be candidate has more than 50 per cent, they are elected. asked. If no candidate wins more than 50 per cent, then the top two remain and the rest are eliminated. The second preference votes of the eliminated are then added to 8.33 pm the top two candidates and counted. The candidate Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, I will follow the with most first and second preferences is then the winner. noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, in talking about It is simple and easy to sell to the general public. the alternative vote system and the question that will When the system of mayoralties was established in be put in the proposed referendum. Before turning to 1998, Nick Raynsford MP and his department had the main burden of my remarks, I will make one or to select an electoral system. They opted for the two observations about things that have been said, supplementary vote, the London version of AV,because and will ask the Minister three questions. of its simplicity and the fact that it was easy to sell to First, I return to a point that I made in an intervention the public. It is a well proven system, already in use in on the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Baker of the United Kingdom, that has worked very successfully Dorking. I refer to the question of public inquiries for millions of voters in multiple elections. Boris Johnson and reiterate my belief that the public should have the and the mayors are elected under it, so why not MPs? right to contest decisions made by the Boundary Professor Dunleavy at the LSE, Professor Helen Commission. In the 25 years that I served as a local Margetts and a number of other academics, including councillor, and the 18 years as a Member of Parliament Professor Simon Hix and a few international for an inner-city neighbourhood of Liverpool, I was commentators, all seem to prefer the supplementary struck by the alienation and the detached nature of vote, or London AV.Peculiarly, when asked to comment democracy from the grass roots. It is important that on how the Bill’s version of AV would work, both we do not entrench that further. Having been through Labour and government spokesmen have used SV two public inquiries and successive boundary reviews arguments to support AV. They did not even know in the constituencies that I represented, Liverpool how the system they were supposed to be advocating Edge Hill and Liverpool Mossley Hill, I was very works—a sort of plagiarism in advocacy. I have often conscious of how important it was that the process asked MPs how AV works in detail, and most of them was given legitimacy. As the noble Lord, Lord Touhig, got it wrong. remarked a few moments ago, if we do anything to London AVis very popular in London and elsewhere. undermine the legitimacy of the process, it will not If we chose the London AV system, support among inspire confidence in our democracy. Labour and Conservative voters for a yes vote would I am also struck by the remarks that have been go up and the referendum would be won, whereas the made about registration in inner-city areas—which, Bill’s complex and problematic imported Australian again, I wholeheartedly support—and by what has AV model will fail to gain public support. been said about geographical and community How do we get ourselves out of this mess? The considerations being taken into account, as well as Liberal Democrats might wish to ask themselves that sheer arithmetic. In another place, Mark Durkan MP question, as they control the agenda. We could amend said that he felt that the process had been, the referendum question in Committee or on Report. I intend to table an amendment on London AV/SV, “driven by robotic computer-generated arithmetic”.—[Official Report which I regard as a form of alternative vote, as does , Commons, 1/11/10; col. 718.] Professor Dunleavy. Alternatively, we could amend He particularly raised the issue of Northern Ireland, the referendum question in Clause 1, which states: which has not yet been referred to in our Second “Should the ‘alternative vote’ system be used instead?”. Reading debate. I hope that when the Minister responds, This could read, “Should an ‘alternative vote’ system he will say something about the effect of the arithmetic be used instead?”—we could substitute “an” for “the”. on the very delicate balance that has to be sustained in The effect would be that, after a yes vote in a referendum, Northern Ireland. Of course, we should do nothing in Parliament would have to decide between AV systems. this legislation that in any way jeopardises what has Professor Dunleavy’s view is that the electorate may been achieved there. have difficulty in supporting a system that had not My other remark concerns the process through been specified. He suggests that an amendment might which we have got to this point today. I am aghast at refer to a question being placed before the electorate the fact that we have not used pre-legislative scrutiny after Parliament has specified the system that it wishes and that we have not had the opportunity in a Select to legislate for. I shall therefore also table such an Committee to try to reach more consensual positions amendment. on issues that I think need not divide the House as 601 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 602 much as they have done today. I think that we have seem to have become a devalued currency in politics. been driven on by other factors and considerations Our politicians should beware of losing authority and which the coalition Government will come to regret in respect if they too easily jettison their beliefs and due course. commitments. I said that I had three questions that I should like to On 5 October last, the noble Lord, Lord McNally, put to the Minister. First, given that Jenny Watson the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, and Peter Wardle, the chair and chief executive of the gave an explanation as to why the decision had been Electoral Commission, have said that they need at made to jettison previous support for STV. He said: least six months to prepare for a referendum, how can “If we could persuade our coalition partners and the Labour that requirement now be met, as we have passed Party of the merits of STV, on which the noble Lord, Lord Alton, 5 November and the ballot is scheduled for 5 May and I agree … we could then go to one system in all elections”.— 2011? Secondly, can the Minister explain why the [Official Report, 5/10/10; col. 8.] Government resisted threshold amendments in another I have no doubt that the noble Lord, Lord McNally, place? Will he confirm that a referendum could be truly believes that, but it is not about persuading his won on as little as 15 per cent of the popular vote? coalition partners or even the Labour Party about the Furthermore, does he accept that such an outcome merits of a particular system; surely it is about allowing would, again, call into question the legitimacy of the the electorate to express their views on several alternatives. process? Thirdly, do the Government regard the proposed We were told earlier that the referendum is to cost change to the voting system as a constitutional change— £30 million of public money; I think that was the hence the need for a referendum—or is this simply an figure given. If it is entirely to exclude a question on incremental change in how we govern ourselves? If it whether we might move towards a proportional system— is a constitutional change, will the referendum be used which the alternative vote, AV, is not—this political as a precedent for how the voting system is determined deal, which superseded the manifesto commitment, for your Lordships’ House when the Government’s will miss a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create next reform Bill is laid before the House? If not, why a truly fair, just and representative system. Even worse, are elections to the two Houses to be treated differently? from the noble Lord’s point of view, it is likely to I said that the main body of my remarks would create an alliance among those who oppose the political focus on the referendum question which will be used fix of the alternative vote and leave us with the status to determine the future shape of our voting system. quo. Certainly from some of the speeches we have I will join others in seeking to amend that question, so heard today from both sides of the Chamber, the I was particularly pleased to hear the noble and learned noble Lord would agree that he is likely to be caught in Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, say today that he that kind of pincer movement. intends to table amendments to broaden the scope of This argument is not about persuading other political the referendum question, and I am sure that many parties; it is about whether the public should be allowed others will support him in that. to decide on something other than the alternative vote, On 11 January this year, I initiated a short debate in which is neither proportional nor much of an improvement your Lordships’ House and argued the case against on the present system. This argument involves popular closed party-list systems, which of course we continue sovereignty and it is surely a matter for our fellow to use in European elections, and for carefully assessing citizens to settle, not political caucuses. other electoral systems before contemplating any changes I need hardly remind the noble Lord—in those to Westminster elections. In that debate, I recalled that times we were noble or at least honourable friends—that at the age of 17, and perhaps in danger of being called the late Lord Jenkins of Hillhead’s 1998 commission an anorak—a word used earlier by one noble Lord reported to the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, that about those who are interested in electoral systems—I AV can be even less proportional than first past the chaired a meeting for the late and indefatigable Miss Enid post and that: Lakeman, who was then director of the Electoral “So far from doing much to relieve disproportionality, it is Reform Society and had been sent to our town by capable of substantially adding to it”. Mr Grimond to extol the virtues of the single transferable Contradicting something that the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, vote, or STV, system. said earlier, he said that, We currently use STV in Northern Ireland, where, “there would still be large tracts of the country which would be for well known reasons, we say that we need the fairest electoral deserts”, possible system. However, we also use it in local elections and that most seats in the country would remain safe. in Scotland—an experience addressed in evidence by As the late Lord Jenkins warned: Mr Peter Facey of Unlock Democracy in remarks that “AV on its own is unacceptable because of the danger that in he made to the House of Commons Political and anything like present circumstances it might increase rather than Constitutional Reform Committee. He said on 22 July, reduce disproportionality”. reported at page 3 of the oral evidence: Mr Clegg has reportedly said that he sees AV as a “I think that STV in Scotland is a very clear example of step towards a proportional system. Perhaps the noble something which increased accountability and increased the influence Lord could clarify that remark. What is the timetable? of voters compared to first past the post”. What would be the system? In political life, do you not Therefore, I was particularly glad last May to see get some credit for arguing for what you believe in that in the general election Mr Clegg gave a pledge rather than something less? In any event, you do not that his party would support the single transferable usually get to your destination by walking in the vote in any reform of the voting system. Sadly, pledges opposite direction. 603 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 604

[LORD ALTON OF LIVERPOOL] vote at the general election and, from the debates on As it stands, the Bill provides that the question the Bill thus far, there seems to have been some sort of should read: do you want the United Kingdom to aberration when that support was given. adopt the alternative vote system instead of the current When we come to Committee, this House should first past the post system for electing Members of do its historic duty and amend the referendum question Parliament to the House of Commons? As proposition so that there is genuine voter choice about the way in questions in the United States illustrate, voters are which we cast our ballots. In this generation, there will quite capable of understanding multiple choices and be only one opportunity—one chance—to achieve they are also capable of understanding when real electoral reform, and we have a duty to get it right. choices are denied them. What are these arguments for STV, arguments which the public have a right to hear? I set out some of those considerations in my short 8.47 pm debate on 11 January when I said: Lord Wills: My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord “By contrast with AV, single transferable votes give voters a Tyler, has already outed me, I begin with the confession choice of different candidates whom they can support within that I was indeed the Minister in the previous Government each party—a kind of built-in primary, without the extra expense responsible for the issues with which the Bill is concerned. ... Since each party has more than one candidate, there is wider Had my party been re-elected, I am sure that we would voter choice and the power to eliminate the least suitable”. have approached these issues rather differently, but I pointed out that: that has not led me to oppose the Bill. I oppose the “There is also far more scope under STV to promote candidates Bill because a large part of it attempts to rewire our from such underrepresented groups as women, ethnic minorities constitutional arrangements for partisan advantage; and so on, without quotas—a point highlighted this weekend by the Speaker, Mr Bercow … in comparison with STV, AV would and that is unacceptable. still allow parties with minority support to have large majorities Part 1 sets out to deliver a referendum on the in the Commons”. —[Official Report, 11/1/10; col. 354.] alternative vote. Had the Government adopted the Like AV, but unlike list systems, STV retains a crucial approach pursued by the previous Government, I geographically determined constituency link, something might have felt able to support them on that, although that I greatly valued during my 18 years in another place. I recognise that some of my colleagues in this place Another contrast between STV and AV is that AV will differ from me on this in all conceivable circumstances. would still allow parties with minority support to have If agreed in a referendum, I believe that the alternative large majorities in the Commons. That is something vote could help to tackle the problem of legitimacy which many of us are vigorously opposed to. By created by the phenomenon of Government after contrast, STV would ensure fairness, with the parties’ Government—including the present Government—being share of the seats more closely reflecting their share of elected to power with the support of only a minority the vote, while avoiding the fragmentation and centralising of the electorate. The alternative vote system is not a effect of party lists. That would change the culture and panacea for all the problems of legitimacy faced by the conduct of politics, ushering in a permanent need our political system, but it at least ensures that more to build relationships and alliances and to win pre- MPs will be returned from their constituencies with legislative agreement before introducing legislation. the support of a majority of those voting. Crucially, it One of the outcomes of the 2007 Scottish elections, does so while retaining the MPs’ direct link with their to which I referred—elections which used STV—was constituents. Here, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord that nearly three-quarters of voters are represented by Alton, who made exactly that point. That is vital for their first-choice candidate. They now have a choice of accountability in our democracy. representatives to turn to when the need arises. By Sadly, the Government have not followed the careful contrast, AV would leave many voters without a local approach of the previous Government, they have pushed representative whom they had supported at the ballot ahead with a process which, as we have already heard, box. Nor would AV do anything to end the relentless is precipitate; it denies Parliament a proper opportunity focus on a handful of key marginal seats—100 or to scrutinise such an important constitutional measure. so—which so distorts British politics. Under STV, As the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, pointed out, this there are no safe seats and no no-go areas for any referendum is post-legislative. party. STV has the added advantage that it requires I shall return to some other flaws with this process political parties to coexist, as it has done to such shortly, but I turn to Part 2. It aims to reduce the historic effect in Northern Ireland. number of seats in the House of Commons and equalise By comparison, AV is a very complicated and the size of the constituencies that remain. It is reasonable uncommon voting system, used only in Fiji, Papua at the very least to debate such reduction and equalisation. New Guinea and, as we have heard, Australia—where, There is nothing axiomatically right about that Chamber’s incidentally, 60 per cent of people are reported to current size. As the House will know, the principle that want the system scrapped. That does not seem like a all constituencies should be a broadly similar size is compelling case for taking a small step in the wrong already written into legislation. direction. However, when we examine how the Government The political reality is that we are saddled with a are setting about these tasks, we see principles and proposal which neither coalition partner likes. The practice which have long ensured the fair working of Conservatives will campaign against it, and the Liberal our constitution rejected in what I am afraid can only Democrats—and certainly the old Liberal Party, of be construed as partisan self-interest. It has long been which I am a one-time Chief Whip—have never supported accepted, as we have heard over and over again this it. Only the Labour Party argued for the alternative evening, that the boundaries of a constituency should 605 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 606 be shaped not only by numbers but also by the specific House of Commons to below the number of 600. character of the constituency, local identities and natural They had different figures but they were united in their boundaries, such as mountains and rivers, which have belief that the House of Commons should be reduced throughout history helped to define communities. But to a figure below 600. So what exactly changed their in this Bill such considerations have been demoted by minds? Will the Minister tell the House whether any the Government. modelling was done by the Government or the Liberal Nor do the Government appear to have given any Democrats or the Conservative Party on the effects on consideration to other relevant factors—for example, those parties’ representation in the House of Commons the optimum size for a constituency; not a number of reducing the number of MPs below 600; and if so, plucked out of the air, like 76,000, but the optimum what such modelling showed? number, taking into account the respective role of Then the Deputy Prime Minister tells us—we have MPs in their constituencies and their role in Parliament, heard a lot about this from the government Benches and the implication for both those roles of further already tonight—that, decentralisation of power to local authorities and, “it is patently obvious that individuals’ votes should carry the indeed, then to local councillors. same weight”—[Official Report, Commons, 6/9/10; col. 35.] Instead of a proper consideration of all these important That is right—but they already do. They are only issues, what we see is the Government claiming that counted once. Every vote is only counted once. What the equalisation of constituency size must be elevated the Deputy Prime Minister appears to mean is that on above all these other important considerations. Why? average it takes fewer votes to elect a Labour MP than We are not given any satisfactory answer whatever. a Conservative or Liberal Democrat MP. However, But then they do not uphold even this dubious principle that is not because votes for the Labour Party weigh consistently. Wales, as we have heard, is to lose in one more than votes for other parties; it is the consequence, swing of the axe 25 per cent of its parliamentary in part, of the fact that turnout and electoral registration representation while Northern Ireland, for perfectly are lower in Labour areas and in part it is because understandable reasons, is allowed to depart from the Labour’s vote is currently distributed more efficiently electoral quota rule. within the first past the post system. There is no Moreover, as we heard in a previous discussion inherent, systemic bias in favour of the Labour Party. earlier today, the Bill makes an explicit and privileged The same system worked against the Labour Party exception for two Scottish seats, one of which, I am throughout the 1950s and 1960s. sure coincidentally, is held by the Liberal Democrat As Liberal Democrat MPs, of all people, should MP, the Deputy Chief Whip of the Government. And know, if each vote weighing equally means that the then again, as we have already heard, a further exemption share of the vote translates directly into an equal from the electoral quota is given on the basis of proportion of seats held in the House of Commons, the territorial extent of a constituency, drawn up there is only one electoral system that delivers that. We coincidentally, I am sure, in such a way that it can have have already heard that tonight. It is proportional practical effect in only one area of the United Kingdom— representation, which is not on offer in the Bill and the Scottish Highlands, where only one constituency carries with it all sorts of other problems that mean currently falls into this special category: the seat held that I for one would never want to see it introduced as by the former leader of the Liberal Democrats. So why a method of election into the House of Commons. exactly does the Bill allow the factors of sparsity and geography to be given priority over electoral equality If the Government were really so concerned about in these places but nowhere else? equality among voters, they would not be seeking to redraw the electoral map on the basis of a register that It is hard to find anywhere in the Bill anything that fails to include over 3 million voters who would otherwise could pass as a consistently applied informing principle. be eligible to vote. Do the Government seriously believe The Bill abolishes the ability of local people to have that any credible equalisation of boundaries can take any significant say in the shape of the constituency place when some constituencies achieve nearly 100 per in which they live, even though local representations cent registration rates while others achieve barely half have significantly influenced boundary revisions in the that? When we look at it, another so-called principle past. As we have heard, the Boundary Commission crumbles. report in 2007 found that just about two-thirds of local inquiries had led to changes in the original Then there is the way the Bill has been introduced recommendations of the Boundary Commission. in a display of contempt for Parliament by the Executive. The Labour Government introduced a raft of The Deputy Prime Minister has justified this change constitutional reforms, and they always did so by with these words—I quote them because they are seeking consensus wherever possible on the grounds worth hearing: that whenever constitutional changes are made, they “The review process is lengthy and time-consuming”. should be made in the interests of the legitimacy of Lengthy and time-consuming—exactly the same might our constitutional system as a whole. This is a crucial be said for democracy itself. Administrative convenience principle. These changes should not be subject to for the Executive is never a good argument for attacking claims that partisan advantage is being pursued. I am the foundations of accountable democracy. truly sorry that this Government have rejected this Then we have the decision on the proper size for the approach. House of Commons. How exactly did the Government In the rushed passage of the Bill through the other alight on the figure of 600? Both the coalition partners place, not a single Opposition or Back-Bench amendment were committed before the election to reducing the was accepted by the Government. That is not the only 607 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 608

[LORD WILLS] widely accepted that revising the boundaries when example of the Government’s contempt for good practice. millions of eligible voters are missing from the register The Electoral Commission has consistently made clear is likely to damage the Labour Party most. its view that: Let me quote from a prominent Conservative, Mr Mark “The rules on how the referendum will be conducted must be Field, Member of Parliament for the Cities of London clear from at least six months in advance”. and Westminster. On his website, which is available to For that to have happened in this case, the Bill would all Members of this House, noble Lords can read that, need to have been passed on to the statute book two “the current proposals for AV and the reduction in number of weeks ago. parliamentary constituencies are being promoted by Party managers If due process and consistent principle do not underpin as an expedient way to prevent our principal political opponents the Bill, why are the Government bringing it forward? from recapturing office”. A clue might be provided by the speed with which That is the purpose of this legislation in the words of these measures are being rushed through: speed in Mr Mark Field MP. rushing this through the other place, speed in holding It should not need me to say that political expediency a referendum less than six months from the presumed for one party is an unacceptable basis for constitutional passage of the Bill on to the statute book and change. This is not the new politics we were promised. unprecedented speed in completing the wholesale revision It is an old politics where constitutional arrangements of constituency boundaries. Why the rush? Surely are subverted for partisan advantage, which should such important constitutional measures deserve have no place in our democracy. Far from restoring appropriate pre-legislative and legislative scrutiny. Surely legitimacy to our politics, as the Government claim, people should have the time and opportunity to have this Bill will damage it further. It is a bad Bill. I hope their say on the shape of the constituencies in which that this House will do its duty in making all the they live. changes necessary to make it a better one. It is clear that the reason for this haste is that the Government want to get the new system in place by 9.02 pm the next election, but why? Important as I believe these Lord Snape: My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my measures to be, there is no popular clamour for them, noble friend. I have only one quibble about what he nor any other compelling reason to rush these measures said: it is not just one party attempting to rig our through. Why rush to draw up the boundaries on the constitution in this Bill, it is two of them; it is the basis of an inaccurate and incomplete register when coalition. That is the purpose of it all and what is legislation has already been passed by the previous behind it. There is no magic figure of 76,000 as far as Government—this is the answer to the charge laid by electors are concerned. Anyone who has read reports the noble Lord, Lord Baker—to task the Electoral from the Boundary Commission—I do not say that Commission to make the register comprehensive and they are exactly compulsive reading, although those of accurate by 2015 and gave it new powers to do that? us who served in the other place will know that they The Governments that the noble Lord, Lord Baker, so are if they refer to your own constituency—will know illuminated in his time in the other place never did that sheer numbers is not what they are about. I think anything like that to achieve a proper register. The that the figure was 66,000 in my time in the other date selected in that legislation was 2015 because it place. That is a general aim, and an avowed intention was judged that that time was needed successfully to when new constituencies are created and old ones are compete the task, not least because the key to guaranteeing altered. But it is not a hard and fast rule. There are that the register is comprehensive and accurate is other considerations too. going to be using the results of the 2011 census, the As my noble friend Lord Touhig said earlier, there most up-to-date figures we have on the population, to are geographical considerations to be looked at. He validate it. amplified the nonsense of seats in Wales where it is Such an analysis is unlikely to be available before possible to cross two mountain ranges and three rivers, 2014. So why are the Government rushing it through or whatever the figure was, in order to arrive at this before that crucial analysis is available? Why could the magic figure of 76,000 electors. As the right reverend Government not wait just a few months longer to be Prelate the Bishop of Blackburn said, it is community sure that boundary revisions can take place only on that is important—community is the vital aspect of the basis of a comprehensive and accurate electoral any constituency. This is a cynical attempt at register, which is the only fair basis on which such gerrymandering. revisions can be conducted? The only reason can be As my noble friend Lord Hart reminded us, this is that the new boundaries would not be in place for the part of a triple attack on our constitution by the next general election, but constitutional changes of coalition Government. It does not apply just in the this significance should be drafted to endure for other place; it applies here too. They want to reduce generations. In this context, whether they are in the the other place by around 50 and to increase this place place for the coming general election or the one after by, coincidentally, the same number. The problem is that really should not weigh in the balance. that they will not be the same people. The idea is to get Why, after all this, might the Government still be so rid of a majority of Labour Members from the other anxious to get these measures in place by the time of place and plant—it has been said in the newspapers— the next election? They must have foreseen these criticisms. another 50 or so Liberals in your Lordships’ House. I I am sure that they did. But why are they proceeding am not sure, given the rate of attrition in the Liberal like this nevertheless? Is it too cynical to suspect that it Party currently, that there will be 50 of them left to is because they expect to benefit from them? It is come in here before Christmas. But certainly that 609 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 610 seems to be the avowed intention, which would make Lord Snape: I shall reflect on his distinguished this House anything but a revising Chamber where career, but I was surprised that he failed to point out traditionally it has been said that that is what we are to your Lordships that he has had some experience of about. a small constituency and made no protest at the time. In opening the debate, the noble Lord, Lord Let me turn to his article, a copy of which I have Strathclyde, threw out a comment about the number with me. I am not sure whether the Times is compulsive of Labour Peers created by the Labour Government. I reading on either side of your Lordships’ House, but I would remind him that it took more than a decade of can imagine the conversation that took place between Labour Governments, two of whom had majorities in a senior journalist on the Times and the noble Lord at three figures and one with a substantial majority, the beginning of October: “Ken, what’s your view on before Labour Members of your Lordships’ House the coalition?”. “Oh, I am broadly in favour of it”. outnumbered the Conservatives, let alone formed a “Good. Knock us out a thousand words for 4 October”. majority on the Floor, which of course we never did. Being the sensible man he is, my computer says the But that is the clear intention of the gerrymandering article is only 985 words, so I hope the Times does not that is taking place in both Houses. It will ensure that ask him for a rebate for the words he has missed out. a Conservative/Liberal alliance or something similar The very readable article about this legislation appeared will continue up to and, they hope, including the next under the headline, election in 2015. But I hope it is our job to see that such a philosophy does not go unchallenged, and “Stop worrying and learn to love the coalition: A Tory government when we come to the Committee stage, I hope that the with a tiny majority could not achieve what we are able to do now”. battle for some of the things that have rightly been pointed out during the course of this Second Reading The noble Lord then set out exactly what the coalition debate is waged loud and long. I say that because if we hoped to achieve. I have to say that the article is not are still a revising Chamber, at least until the parties entirely accurate, and again I hope that there will not opposite have done their worst, then if ever a Bill be a demand for his fee to be returned. However, it is needed revising, it is this one. eminently readable, as one would expect given the The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, was at his ebullient talents of the noble Lord. He said: best earlier today, saying that the Bill is almost a “It begins to look as if the chances of one party having a tidying-up exercise that makes a few minor alterations, significant overall majority will only come about if an incumbent with nothing really to concern your Lordships. But government is greatly unpopular”. that is not the view of his distinguished noble friend We might test that theory over the next few years. He Lord Baker, who let the cat out of the bag in his went on to say, speech. I have always envied his capacity for swallowing his words and inventing new ones. He talked about the “as it was in 1979 to the benefit of Margaret Thatcher, and in small size of some constituencies, predominantly Labour 1997 to the benefit of Tony Blair”. ones, but I remember that he won a by-election in Again, that rather ignores the lessons of history. I St Marylebone. His hair was darker and shorter in seem to recall that Tony Blair, if I can call him that in those days, if I may say so, but I am sure it was he who your Lordships’ House—repeating the noble Lord’s represented one of the smallest constituencies in the words—was pretty successful in 2001 as an incumbent country. However, I do not think he made any protest and did not do too badly in 2005, again as an incumbent. at the time about the relatively low number of constituents. I am not sure about the accuracy of that part of the Indeed, like many of us who represented inner city article but I am sure about the part I am about to read areas, I bet he was grateful that his constituency was a out because, despite the emollient words from the Leader bit smaller because your Lordships will recognise that of the House to which I have referred, the noble Lord, social problems in the inner cities are enormous. I do Lord Baker, went on to say: not say that Conservative or Liberal Democrat Members in the other place have fewer problems so far as their “The greatest prize for the Tories is yet to come: constitutional constituents are concerned, but in my experience the change that will eliminate Labour’s 8 per cent advantage at every general election. This will be achieved by equalising the votes in number of social problems in inner city constituencies each constituency to around 76,000 and by reducing the size of can considerably outweigh those in the more affluent the House of Commons by 50 MPs”. parts of rural areas. So there is a good reason for the relative size of constituencies. That brings it down to the 600 figure that my noble friend Lord Dubs was accused of mentioning and the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, was afraid to mention, Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords— or chose not to mention, during the course of his speech. Lord Snape: Let me finish the point. I certainly have The noble Lord, Lord Baker, went on to say in his not finished with the noble Lord yet. However, I shall eminently readable article: give way to him now, as he did for me. “MPs of all parties are coming to accept that there will not be an election in 2011 or 2012, when the British public will not want Lord Baker of Dorking: I did represent a small to be diverted from enjoying the Olympic Games”— borough which disappeared completely. But we should to get rid of this lot, some of them might be prepared dwell on the rest of my political career, when I went on to be diverted— to represent a constituency in Surrey that was one of the biggest seats in the country. “and celebrating the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee”. 611 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 612

[LORD SNAPE] learned Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, was equally I was around for the silver jubilee, as was the noble delighted as a former MP for Orkney and Shetland. I Lord, but it did not stop us having by-elections and a do not think that Orkney and Shetland have been so continuance of the normal political toing and froing. near to the pulse of the nation since Charles James The article continued: Fox was for a short time the Member of Parliament “In 2013 the rewards of austerity are still likely to be meagre, for the rotten borough there. That was after he had so an election in 2015 looks odds-on. This coalition has staying contested the Westminster by-election and there was power”. an inquiry into whether the result was fraudulent. For the sake of the noble Lord’s colleagues in another However, I do not think that I ought to go into the place, he had better hope that that is right because, in merits of the special treatment of Orkney and Shetland. the short term, the coalition is going to be unpopular. I wish to follow the noble Lord, Lord Snape, in one respect, as I shall talk mainly about AV. On Part 2 of Lord Baker of Dorking: I thank the noble Lord for the Bill, which seeks to reduce the size of the House of drawing to the attention of a wider audience the words Commons, I agree with the point made by my noble that I wrote in this article in the Times. The point I friend Lord Baker that, when we compare the size of wanted to make is that the Bill will be very significant our legislature with the size of legislatures in other in removing the basic unfairness in our democracy countries, we should look not at Europe—as the noble that at the last election we had to be eight points ahead Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, did—but at countries in the opinion polls even to come level with Labour. such as Japan, the United States and India. There is That is manifestly unfair in any democratic system a strong argument for saying that our legislature is and cannot be justified. The Bill removes not all but too large. about half the unfairness and means that the checkerboard Briefly, on the second principle of equalising of politics will for a long time be set out on a level constituencies, I will listen carefully to what the Opposition table. say, but I do not think that so far the case has been wholly convincing. Lord Snape: There were a few clichés there which I would not care to follow too far. I do not agree that the present electoral system gives the Labour Party Lord Wills: My Lords— an 8 per cent advantage, nor do many independent commentators, for the reasons amply outlined by my Lord Lamont of Lerwick: I want to deal briefly with noble friends during the course of the debate. this, as I really want to talk about AV, if the noble Before I leave the noble Lord’s article, I should say Lord does not mind. that I am pleased that he feels the two of us should embark on a crusade against AV because, like him, I We heard moving speeches from the noble Lords, am against it. Before we go round the country together, Lord Myners and Lord Elystan-Morgan, about natural however, I have one request to make of him: that he boundaries, rivers, county boundaries and history. I lets me speak first because, given the quality of what remember in my suburban constituency of Kingston he has said tonight, he could empty a hall even faster that people used to think that Worcester Park should than me. However, it would be worth while to undertake be excluded simply because it was on the other side of such an exercise because on this issue he is right. the bypass. I am sure that in Shetland, too, some During my 27 years in the other place I never heard a people think that Orkney should be excluded because great clamour for AV. Indeed, I have yet to hear from it is too far away. These are, as has been said, important any of my former constituents that they would be points and principles, but the overriding factor must happy in West Bromwich only if they had AV at the be the integrity and fairness of the democratic system next general election. AV is about transporting the and, as the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, elegantly said, party that traditionally comes last in the electoral ensuring that as far as possible each vote is of equal system—that is, the Liberals—into permanent second value. place and, of course, into permanent coalition with Part 1 of the Bill stems from the coalition agreement. whichever party happens to come first. As I support the coalition and the necessity of a coalition The Bill is a blatant attempt at gerrymandering. It because of the economic situation that we face, I arises not from a desire to do good in our thankfully support the general principles of the Bill. However, I unwritten constitution but from a desire to survive. have some suggestions for improving it. In the coalition The coalition Government hope that the voters will agreement, there is one statement with which I disagree. have short memories and that, with a rigged and The agreement says: gerrymandered system, they will sneak back into power “The Government believes that our political system is broken”. in 2015. It will be up to us during the Committee stage The phrase, and in the debates on the Bill to ensure that none of “our political system is broken”, that comes about. was last used by Sir Oswald Mosley. I do not believe that our political system is broken. Of course we have 9.14 pm had, rightly, anger and disillusionment with politicians Lord Lamont of Lerwick: My Lords, as someone over expenses. We have had some rotten apples. We whose title was taken from Lerwick in Shetland, I was have had some people who should be and will be somewhat startled and delighted this afternoon to punished. However, that is not the same as saying that arrive here to find that Shetland is once again in the our constitution is broken. There is no connection cockpit of history. I am sure that the noble and between the scandal of expenses and arguments about 613 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 614 fixed-term Parliaments, an elected House of Lords or, under AV in Australia, it is possible that, depending indeed, AV; they are totally separate. There might be on the number of candidates standing, someone might more respect for politics, which is what we all desperately actually be elected who was nobody’s first choice. want, if we admitted that AV is being put forward As was said by my noble friend Lord Forsyth, the because of a political alliance, as a result of which one referendum proposed on AV is unusual in that it is not party that would not naturally have favoured it has an advisory referendum but an implementary one. conceded it to the other party. There is no reason to That raises an important matter. Changing our voting justify this by saying that our political system is broken. system is a very significant move. As the noble Lord, Bismarck once remarked that laws are like sausages, Lord Wills, said, when we make such changes they in that it is better not to see them being made. Many ought to be for generations—for the long term—and laws, many aspects of our constitution and many the outcome must be seen to command confidence anomalies in our constitution are the result of accidents and respect. They must be seen to reflect a real demand of politics and political deals. That applies even to for change. If there is a derisory turnout, those conditions the wonderful and pure theory of PR in Europe. In will not be met. I submit that this is a significant continental European countries, PR was often introduced change. in order to save the Liberal party from the rise of The noble Lord, Lord Tyler, made some points socialism and Labour parties. against the first-past-the-post system, but I say that it None the less, we should be cautious about trading has served us well. The same system is followed by permanent changes in the constitution for short-term leading democracies such as the United States, India political advantage. We do not want to get into the and Canada. It has accommodated change, such as situation of Latin American countries, where people when the Labour Party replaced the Liberal Party in campaign on changes to the constitution. We do not the interwar period. What some see as inflexibility or want to get into the situation of the fourth republic in the insensitivity of the system has often protected us France, where there was an old joke about the man from extremism, such as we see when we look at the who went into the library and asked for a copy of the different electoral systems in Europe and the rise of constitution and was told, “We don’t stock periodicals far-right parties in Holland and Belgium. That was here”. We do not want to get into the situation whereby particularly the case in the 1930s, when extremists of one political change is seen as a precursor to the next. both left and right failed to get any parliamentary Some see AV as precisely that—as a precursor to a representation whatever in this country, which was move towards PR. quite different from the experience in continental Europe. We like to put that down, of course, to the moderation The support for AV in the Bill and the coalition in and good sense of the British people. I am sure that some ways seems quite surprising. In February this that exists, but we should not deceive ourselves too year, the Deputy Prime Minister described AV as a much. It may also have a lot to do with our electoral “miserable little compromise”. As has been said, AV is system, so I suggest that we have to think carefully the system used in Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Australia. before we change that. In Australia, AVhas proved to be often less proportional even than first past the post and to lead to even larger That brings me on to the point about referendums swings—the large swings under first past the post have and constitutional change. Many countries have a been among the things most criticised about our present specific threshold, either of turnout or of the numbers system. AV has not reduced the proportion of safe voting yes, before constitutional change can be made seats, which is a very high proportion that is similar to in a referendum. Germany and Spain have provisions the number in this country. In addition, the system of for a fixed majority before they can effect a change in AV often leads to deals, which are not always declared their constitutions. In Denmark and Italy, the requirement publicly, between major and small, minor or fringe is for a specified proportion—in Italy, it is 60 per cent, political parties in order to secure office. I think—not in outcome but in turnout. In 1979, of course, George Cunningham inserted into the Scottish The intellectual justification for AVseems somewhat devolution bill a requirement for a 40 per cent yes elusive. The system was first proposed in 1917 in the vote. That has possibly somewhat scarred the Labour Speaker’s conference, which is more likely to be Party—I am not quite sure why—so I was particularly remembered for having proposed votes for women interested that the noble and learned Lord, Lord over 30. The system was put forward in 1931 as a Falconer, returned today to the subject of a threshold. positive solution, and Winston Churchill described it I want to put a question to my noble friend Lord at the time as, McNally, the Minister who, as I understand it, will “the worst of all possible plans … the stupidest, the least scientific answer at the end of the debate. I understand that the and the most unreal. The decision … is to be determined by the coalition agreement specified that there should be a most worthless votes given to the most worthless candidates”. simple majority in the referendum without an outcome- As has been said in this debate, in many cases the specific threshold—that is, there should not be anything outcome of a poll in a constituency under AV will be similar to the Cunningham amendment. Am I not decided by the person who comes bottom, who might therefore right that the coalition agreement does not be the British National Party candidate, as has been specify that there could not be a turnout threshold and said. In any case, it seems difficult to justify why the that a provision in the Bill which said that the result of result should always be decided by the second preferences the referendum would only have the effect of law of those who voted for the candidate who came bottom, provided that there was a certain turnout would not be even if he is only the third candidate. I recently read an inconsistent with the coalition agreement? That turnout article by an Australian academic who suggests that, provision could be put at whatever level the House 615 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 616

[LORD LAMONT OF LERWICK] been at the heart of our democracy. It is what brings decided. It could be quite low. It could be in accordance all MPs back to earth every weekend, whatever part of with the recent turnout in local elections—in the high the stratosphere they have inhabited during the week. 30s or higher than 40 per cent—which would mean It is what gives you strength and direction. What is that, to get a yes vote, you would have to get the votes more, it is generally appreciated by the public; amid all of 20 per cent of the electorate as a whole. the difficulties of recent months and years, the one Some people object to a turnout threshold on the constant has been that, while the public do not like grounds that it encourages people to abstain but, first, MPs in general, generally speaking they quite like the the referendum is to be held—this is a subject of work that their own Member of Parliament does. controversy—on the same day as local elections, when I find the Bill depressing because it weakens Parliament people have every reason to participate. Secondly, in in relation to the Government. There is no answer to order to encourage someone who would have voted that and no Minister, as far as I know, has tried to not to vote as a gesture with political meaning, you offer one. would have to have some sort of campaign. I do not The Bill is depressing for another reason too, and really accept the argument that having a turnout threshold the Minister really will need to address this. He repeatedly would simply encourage people to stay away and prayed in aid big majorities in the Commons. Now, he would invalidate the whole idea of initiating a debate knows the Commons pretty well, as do a lot of people on this subject. The result of the referendum vote in this House, and he should know it well enough to would be much strengthened if there was a provision know that if people had been voting in the way that for a minimum turnout. That would lend much greater they strongly felt—in a free vote, let us say; a funny legitimacy to the outcome of such a referendum, and I thing for an ex-Chief Whip to talk about, but let us hope that my noble friends on the Front Bench will surmise for a moment—my guess is that there would give it serious consideration. have been at least a two-thirds majority against changing the electoral system. Nearly all the Conservatives would 9.28 pm vote against it, although they can speak for themselves, Lord Grocott: My Lords, having sat through this and my estimate, although it is a low one, is that 60 per debate so far, I have been greatly encouraged, as I cent of the Parliamentary Labour Party would have suppose we all are, by the number of people who I voted against it. I do not suppose that any Liberals found myself agreeing with wholeheartedly—not least would have done so because they vote as a bloc in a the previous two speakers. I thought that the noble Stalinist way, but the rest of us would have made our Lord, Lord Lamont, made a series of points very own minds up. That is my guess. So let us not feel any effectively—I will not repeat them—while my noble inhibition whatever about what we do in dealing with friend Lord Snape, with whom I have not knowingly the Bill, because the House of Commons, and I could disagreed for 36 years, likewise made some very powerful cite names if that were required, wants us to do some points indeed. Yet I do not want to put false optimism work on the Bill and make changes to it. into this debate because, overall—trying to find the I shall say a word or two about first past the post right adjective to describe the Bill—I find it depressing. versus AV, which is a crucial part of the Bill. If anyone That is the best adjective I can offer to the House. should hate the first past the post system, it really I find it depressing, in part, because it is a political should be me. I have lost more elections under that fix. The noble Lord, Lord Lamont, tactfully described system than I care to remember: four out of eight it as a political alliance but we know what we are general elections, not to mention sundry country council talking about. I was not born yesterday; I know perfectly elections and others. In this case, though, experience well that parties have to reach agreements and that gives me an even greater respect for the first past the compromises are made. However, I cherish many aspects post system, certainly in comparison with AV. Indeed, of our constitution and I do not like the idea of it for me it is not first past the post versus AV; I prefer to being the subject of a political fix, not least for the see it as being first past the post versus second or third reason, which was mentioned earlier, that once past the post, which is obviously what AV amounts to. constitutions are changed, the chances are that they It means that the person who comes first is not necessarily will stay changed. declared the winner. As someone who spent a bit of I am also depressed because there is no overall view my youth talking to bookies, I must admit that I quite of the constitutional reform structure, if I may put it like the notion of the horse that comes third or fourth as grandiosely as that, that the Government are engaged being declared the winner—I would be richer—but upon. There is no attempt to explain how each of the that is not a good basis on which to operate a constitution. three Bills that we are promised—there is another one I find the arguments in favour of AV almost totally as well, I think, about recalling MPs, so I make that unconvincing and almost dishonest. As the noble Lord, four—relate to each other. Not least, why are we Lord Lamont, suggested, it is not at all the solution to discussing changing the electoral system in the Commons the difficulties that the parliamentary system has in such detail when we are about to talk about introducing encountered recently. an electoral system into the Lords? Surely those things A whole new concept has been introduced, which should be considered, at least in part, in relation to made me do some research. I was suddenly being told one another. by Liberal Democrats and others that there was a I am depressed as well because the Bill damages crucial determinant of someone’s eligibility to be a two or maybe three important parts of our parliamentary Member of Parliament—namely, whether they achieved democracy. First, it damages the relationship between 50 per cent of the vote. That is what gave them MPs and their constituencies, which for me has always legitimacy. If they did not have 50 per cent, they did 617 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 618 not have legitimacy. Not being an anorak as far as the real job later”. That is no basis on which to change numbers are concerned, I thought I would check whether the electoral system of a country. When its most I achieved 50 per cent in those four elections that I prominent supporter describes it only as a miserable managed to win. Frankly, I did not have the faintest little compromise, that is not a great rallying cry: idea. I am happy to report to the House that the “What do we want?” “A miserable little compromise!” figures were as follows. My first win was on 42.6 per “When do we want it?” “Now!”. It is not the kind of cent; my second was on 42.8 per cent; and my third thing which inspires an audience, quite apart from the was on 48.3 per cent, so at least the figures were fact that it will cost a lot of money. We keep being told moving in the right direction. My fourth win was on that it will save £12 million to have fewer MPs, yet we 57.8 per cent; at last I was legitimate. are embarking on this hugely expensive referendum. I simply report to the House as a matter of fact—I I want to comment on the “making constituencies am happy for someone to intervene or contradict me bigger” section of the Bill, which I prefer as a title. on this—that not only did I not know whether I had Again, I offer the House my own experience, which got 50 per cent until I checked the figures, but I may or may not be accepted. I had the privilege of absolutely assure the House that my constituents would representing two constituencies during my political not have had the faintest idea. Whether I had 50 per life: one was Lichfield and Tamworth, with an electorate cent did not make a scrap of difference to the work that then of 101,343; the other was The Wrekin, which, I did in the constituency. The same people came to me before its redistribution, had an electorate of 90,872. about the same kind of problems. Nor did it make a Thank heaven, the dear old Boundary Commission scrap of difference to my work as a Member of came along and split that constituency into two, as it Parliament. As far as I know, no one said, “Don’t has also done with Lichfield and Tamworth. The link listen to him” or “Listen only to 48.3 per cent of what between MPs and their constituents is at the heart of he says because he hasn’t got 50 per cent of his electors our constitution. However hard you work—and, my word, behind him”. I did work hard, as do most Members of Parliament—you cannot give the same service to constituents when you I hoped I could pray in aid the noble Lord, Lord represent 101,000 as you can when you represent McNally, on this. I took the precaution of checking 60,000 or 70,000. For the life of me, I cannot see the the result in Stockport South in 1979. The noble Lord, justification for increasing constituency size in the way Lord McNally, achieved 45.1 per cent of the vote. I enshrined in the Bill. had not appreciated the angst that he must have suffered because of this. When the returning officer declared I can conclude only where I started. I hope that this him duly the Member of Parliament for the said speech is not too depressing because I feel depressed Stockport South constituency, he would have been about the Bill. The coalition has a huge majority in consumed by guilt, I imagine, because he was not a this House and in the other House and so far there is legitimate Member of Parliament. He must have felt no sign that the Government are listening to any of quite ashamed when he came down here as an illegitimate the arguments. However, I am encouraged by the Member. It is beyond parody or sarcasm. It simply overwhelmingly hostile contributions which so many bears no relationship whatever to how people here or noble Lords have made today. Their speeches were in our constituencies ever think about the legitimacy overwhelmingly hostile to large sections of the Bill. I of an MP. hope that we will do our job in this House and put it into better shape. I will say two other things about the weakness of the alternative vote system, which I hope are relevant to our debate. First, we surely have enough different 9.42 pm electoral systems operating in this country at present. Lord Lipsey: My Lords, whoever drew up the speakers We have five by my calculation: first past the post, the list clearly had a good sense of humour since my very additional member system, single transferable vote, good friend, the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, and I have supplementary vote and—wait for it—the d’Hondt debated the electoral system just about since the river system of proportional representation, which I do not Tamar came to mark the boundary between Cornwall understand and I suspect many other people do not and Devon, and I am sure that we will go on doing either. More to the point, we will now not only have so in the run-up to the referendum, whenever that another electoral system for the Commons if the may come. coalition has its way, but we will also have another Before I turn to the other side of the case that he electoral system for the House of Lords. That makes has put so well this evening—the case for AV—I want seven different electoral systems in this country. I to refer to the other bits of the Bill in a couple of would have one simple question in the referendum: considered sentences. Governments of every complexion would you like to revert to the first past the post have generally proceeded cautiously on electoral matters, system, which has served us so well in the past, for all giving them due consideration, using, where possible, these elections? I am certain that it cannot possibly be the independent judgment of the Boundary Commissions, right to have seven different electoral systems. Added and avoiding any charge of partisan manipulation. to which, we are warned—let us acknowledge the Most Governments have been extremely wary, and warning—by Nick Clegg and others that this is only a rightly so, of making electoral arrangements a kind of temporary phase. I wish those who are going to vote in war booty to go into the hands of whatever party favour would be honest with the electorate and this wins. We have only to look at France, which has House and say, “We are voting for it but, as Nick enjoyed no such tradition, to see how wise we have Clegg has said, it’s a miserable little compromise. It been to adopt that. Therefore, it is our duty in this won’t last long. Get ready because we’re coming with House to ignore the spurious arguments that have 619 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 620

[LORD LIPSEY] two-party system, first past the post was great. Once been put forward that somehow this is the prerogative you do not have a two-party system and you have a of the House of Commons, which, incidentally, has multi-party system—with nationalist parties in Scotland not had a chance to consider very much of the Bill. We and Wales, a complicated situation in Northern Ireland, must do our duty and give this Bill the most careful, and a resurgent Liberal Democrat Party—first past the objective and, where possible, non-partisan consideration. post does not work any more. It is as simple as that. I want a referendum on AV but I do not want it on I do not want to go full circle by going for a fully 5 May next year. Whenever it comes, I hope that the proportional system—partly because I have never seen country returns a yes vote. I speak as a member of the the advantage of it. I do not very much like the Jenkins committee on electoral reform, on which my additional member system, which applies in Germany, noble friend Lady Gould, who is not in her place this because it too much erodes constituency loyalties. I do evening, also sat, and which recommended AV as part not like STV, loved by the much-mourned kind of of its recommended solution. I say to the noble Lord, Liberal who went around in sandals. STV again breaks Lord Alton, who rightly quoted the report, that Lord the constituency link. In any case, in our constitution, Jenkins, who chaired that committee and was held in we prefer to proceed by evolution rather than revolution. respect on all sides of this House and in British That is why we should have AV now and then in a few politics, had, by the end of his life, changed his mind. years, we could take stock again, or go further, stay He wanted a move to AV, and he would be arguing for where we are or, if you like and you can make your it if he were here tonight. case, go back to first past the post. What is wrong with first past the post? In days of I want here to confront a paradox. We AVers argue yore, maybe there was not much wrong. In 1951, that AV is a relatively modest change and that it would 97 per cent of voters backed one of the two big be a change significantly for the better. How can we parties—Labour or Tory. Nine MPs in 10 received half ride both these horses at once? As Jimmy Thomas or more of the votes cast in their constituencies. The said, if you cannot ride two horses at once, you should change has been dramatic. Today, the two big parties not be in the political circus. The resolution is like this: have just two-thirds of the national vote between it will not make an enormous difference to the results them, and only one-third of MPs—one-third—are the of elections. At the general election in 2010, according choice of at least half the voters in their constituencies. to the academics David Sanders, Paul Whiteley, Marianne That may not bother the noble Lord, Lord Grocott—as Stewart and Harold Clarke, it might have led to 22 fewer long as he was there, he felt all right about it—but it Tory seats, 10 fewer Labour seats—sorry about that—and should worry anyone who believes in majority rule. 32 more Lib Dems. The effect, if there were to be a These facts create a disproportionate House of general election tomorrow, according to Professor Patrick Commons, of course, but that does not particularly Dunleavy, would be much less. Even changes of this bother me. My objections to first past the post are magnitude would of course have mattered in a close quite different. It starves MPs of the legitimacy that election such as that in 2010, but they are scarcely comes from election. First past the post delivers Menshevik seismic. However, there would have been far more MPs. It encourages perverse political tactics by MPs. seats in which the result was genuinely in doubt—so We should seek an inclusive politics where MPs try to more MPs would have had to work harder to reach get as many votes by reaching out to as many voters as out to more people to win them. possible. With first past the post, the temptation all I come finally to the main argument that I hear the time is to concentrate on just enough of your core used against AV; namely, that it would help to create a voters to get you back into Parliament. It gives too situation where we had permanent coalition government many MPs safe seats for life—a matter to which I shall and disproportionate power was given to the third return in a minute. It robs voters of choice. What do party. I hear this complaint mostly from Conservative you do if you are a voter? Do you back the candidate politicians. I am not sure how they square their enthusiastic you most want, or the candidate who has the best support for the present coalition with the belief that chance of beating the candidate you most do not coalition government is by definition a bad thing. It want? First past the post, like rotten boroughs, the must be understood that in the new political geography all-male franchise and university seats, is a system of Britain, the strong probability is that coalition will which people back out of nostalgia. Its day has gone, be the norm. It is true that the eight general elections it is broke and it must be fixed. up to 2005 all produced majority Governments, but Should we therefore go full circle? psephologists have compared this to tossing a coin that comes up heads eight times in a row—unlikely, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: The noble Lord alluded but it happens. I often back eight even-money shots in to the situation in the 1950s when he said that first a row at the races and they all lose. past the post worked very well. We are often told that First past the post has lost its potency to deliver the Conservatives received a majority of the votes in majority Governments in most circumstances. There Scotland in 1955. Was not part of the reason for that has been a very sharp decline in the number of seats that really only two parties stood in most constituencies, that are marginal. According to Professor John Curtice because the Liberals had been destroyed as a result of of Strathclyde University, the number of marginal their involvement in a previous coalition? seats has fallen from 166 in 1955 to just 85 in 2010, so a given swing is much less likely to bring about the Lord Lipsey: The noble Lord is, of course, completely number of changes in seats that will deliver a majority right historically, although he makes a wholly irrelevant to one party or another. There will be fewer majority point. In the political circumstances of those days, in a Governments under first past the post in future. 621 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 622

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Perhaps my noble friend “To begin the task of building a new politics, we will let the will give way. One of his arguments is that first past British people decide on whether to make Parliament more democratic the post creates rotten boroughs. Would he tell us what and accountable in referenda on reform of the House of Commons happened to the Tory rotten boroughs of Stirling, and House of Lords, to be held on the same day, by October 2011”. Dumfries, Eastwood and South Edinburgh in Scotland? The Labour Party manifesto said six months ago: Are they still Tory rotten boroughs? “To ensure that every MP is supported by the majority of their constituents voting at each election, we will hold a referendum on introducing the Alternative Vote for elections to the House of Lord Lipsey: My Lords, over a very long period of Commons”. time, of course, political geography changes; but, in Thirdly, it is greatly to the credit of the Prime each contest, most MPs contest boroughs that I would Minister that he agreed, as part of the coalition agreement, not call rotten, but in which they can reckon themselves to allow people to have their say on the fundamental to be wholly safe. That is why so many MPs do not constitutional issue of making a change to the voting reach out as widely as they should, and as we would system. The coalition agreement says: desire them to, to get the support of a wide section of “We will bring forward a Referendum Bill on electoral reform, the electorate. which includes provision for the introduction of the Alternative I was about to say, when we took a slight diversion Vote in the event of a positive result in the referendum, as well as into Scottish local politics, that AV may indeed make for the creation of fewer and more equal sized constituencies”. it more likely that there will be majority Governments I do not propose at this stage to enter into the in future, because AV tends to be good for parties that subject matter of the referendum itself but I will say are making ground and advancing. Anyone who can that I think it is right that it should be held. I will predict that first past the post will deliver more majority address briefly two areas of controversy relating to the Governments than AVsimply has not done the electoral referendum. First, there is the timing issue. arithmetic. I would not expect AV to be popular in this House. Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: The noble Lord, when Among those who benefited from first past the post in arguing the case for the alternative vote system, said the House of Commons, there is a great affection for that it is important for the person elected to get 50 per that system, though I accept that the noble Lord, Lord cent of the votes. Does he favour thresholds for the Grocott, lost some elections as well as won some. referendum? Is it important to receive 50 per cent of However, I am confident that when the arguments are the votes from the electorate in a referendum, for put fully before the British people in the referendum example? that is to come, voters will opt for a system that gives them more choice and more power. Lord Rennard: I shall turn my attention to thresholds very shortly because in my view they are tied to the 9.53 pm issue of turnout, and turnout is tied to the question of Lord Rennard: My Lords, I will speak mostly about when the referendum is held. If it is held at the same the principle of the referendum proposed in the Bill. I time as other elections, in my view there will be a would like the House to imagine an organisation with higher turnout and greater legitimacy. 650 consultants working for it, each of them on a First, on the issue of timing, there is in my view no fixed-term contract. What would we think if that ideal or perfect time to hold a referendum. However, organisation gave the 650 consultants the exclusive we know that we struggle to get voters to turn out at power to determine all the details over whether to renew polling stations to choose their elected representatives, their contracts? We would say the organisation was and we should not assume that they will be any more barmy, yet this is effectively what happens at present likely to want to turn out to vote in a referendum with the House of Commons. It is a closed shop of the which is held on a day separate from when any elections sort that employment law some time ago rightly prohibited are held. It is actually convenient for many voters if an trade unions from operating. At present, only Parliament election and referendum are combined, and I do not has the power to determine the system by which MPs believe that it is beyond the wit of people in this are elected. Unsurprisingly, MPs in the past have country to put an X on two or three different pieces of tended to support the system that got them there and paper within the space of a few minutes. Indeed, it is a that they feel is most likely to keep them there. However, rather easier task than filling in a National Lottery the people who pay for their services have had no say form. in how their representatives are chosen. On the question of a threshold and whether there I will look briefly and in turn at the positions on should be a minimum turnout for voters’ views to be this referendum of the Constitution Committee of deemed valid, there are those who want to say that the House, of the Labour Party and of the coalition anyone who does not turn out to vote should effectively Government.In my view, the Constitution Committee be recorded as having voted no. However, I do not see was right to be sceptical about the legitimacy of the any democratic argument whatever in counting abstentions widespread use of referendums, but in its report, which as no votes. There is no more legitimacy for that we recently debated, it accepted that, if referendums argument than in counting them as yes votes and are to be used, they are most appropriately used in saying that change should certainly happen unless relation to fundamental constitutional issues, of which most people turn out to vote against it. We have this must be one. elections in this country for councillors, MPs, MEPs Secondly, the commitment to holding a referendum and Members of devolved Assemblies with sometimes on AV was of course a core item of the most recent very low turnouts. If a minimum turnout threshold Labour Party manifesto. It said: were imposed in this referendum and it were held at 623 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 624

[LORD RENNARD] On both counts, as many Members of your Lordships’ the same time as other elections in most of the country House have been quoting the Constitution Committee next May, would we be saying that those elected earlier today, they have stated specifically their advice representatives—members of local councils and Members to the House. of the Assembly in Wales and the Scottish Parliament— with the same low turnout should be disqualified from Lord Rennard: My Lords, I thank my noble friend serving because the turnout was not sufficiently high? for that point. That is not a logical argument. A minimum turnout threshold— Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, my noble friend has said that it would not be difficult to have multiple Lord Hoyle: My Lords, the noble Lord will recognise choices on the same day, with people voting in several that there is a difference between voting in local and different contests, such as for a devolved Parliament, a parliamentary elections and voting for constitutional local election and the referendum. Therefore, why is it change. Surely, we are arguing that there ought to be a such a problem for people to vote on, for example, bigger majority for constitutional change than for a propositions for AV, STV or against first past the post? normal election. Lord Rennard: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord Lord Rennard: My Lords, I am arguing that if for that point. As many noble Lords will know, I was people do not turn out to support an alternative, it is very proud to be his agent in elections some years ago. equally valid to say that their vote could be counted in We have discussed this issue many times. I noted very favour, as it is to say, as other noble Lords have carefully his comments when he spoke of it not being argued, that they should simply have their vote counted a question of persuading people that they should have as a no. It is in the interests of democracy always to more options than simply two. I wish it were as easy as encourage high turnouts and that is why I believe that that because I think the electorate could cope very the first Thursday in May next year would be a good easily with that choice, as other electorates do in a time to hold the referendum. number of elections in other countries. It is not a I also want to address briefly the issues of boundary matter of persuading the people that they could do reviews. this; it is a matter of persuading people in other parties to allow this to happen. Sadly, people in other parties will not allow it to happen so we have to make Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: My Lords, I apologise what progress we can. for interrupting the noble Lord, but perhaps he can help me. Is not one of the problems the fact that the Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, I remain very question that is being put is between AV and first past puzzled by the noble Lord’s explanation. Surely, Mr Clegg the post, with no mention of STV, for example? Might simply messed up the negotiation. He was in a very there not be many Liberal supporters who support strong position indeed to get anything he wanted into STV who might abstain because they were not getting the coalition agreement and he missed the opportunity any of the choices that they wanted? to get STV on this ballot paper.

Lord Rennard: My Lords, there are other noble Lord Rennard: My Lords, I can think of a number Lords who favour a two-horse race between the Labour of very good books that are to be recommended, some Party and the Conservative Party. In an ideal world, of which are currently in circulation and more are due I would not favour a two-horse race between AV and out, which will explain the fallacy of that argument. first past the post, as many noble Lords will know, but From personal experience of the 1990s, I know there in the practical politics of not having won the general were clear commitments from the party which the election and having to make compromises, the overarching noble Lord now represents to hold a referendum on principle is to allow the voters to have some say in how proportional representation and to support the outcome their representatives are chosen. People have been of that referendum. In 13 years of trying, no progress appalled in recent years that MPs were able to fix was made. More progress has been made in the past effectively the benefits of being in Parliament. A much six months at least in allowing the voters to have some more important issue is the means by which MPs are say on this key issue of how representatives who serve chosen and allowing people to have some say on that them should be chosen than was made in the 13 years is of paramount importance. Risking giving them a the Labour Party was in office with three good majorities further choice, which would be my first choice, may and a manifesto in 1997 pledging to give people the mean that they get no say whatever. choice between proportional representation and first past the post. I am grateful now that at least some Lord Tyler: My Lords, I am very grateful to my progress is being made and a precedent is being set to noble friend for allowing me to intervene. Is he recalling allow people some say in how their representatives that the Constitution Committee of your Lordships’ are chosen. House has not only said that there should be, Let me briefly address the question of the boundary “a general presumption against the use of voter turnout thresholds review, because it is a very important part of the Bill. I and super-majorities”, think that the consequences of the reduced and equalised but also that, proposals are greatly exaggerated by many people. “the presumption should be in favour of questions posing only Most of the academic research on the issue confirms two options for voters”? that marginally reducing the number of MPs; increasing 625 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 626 slightly the size of the average electorate; and making Lord Hoyle: Does the noble Lord agree or not agree the number of the electors in each seat close to the that there should be an independent inquiry if there average, will not have much benefit or disbenefit. are objections raised, rather than just written objections, I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Wills, is not in which could be ignored? his place, but he made the most effective points psephologically in our debate so far. He pointed to a Lord Rennard: My Lords, the parliamentary Boundary number of factors as to why there is the apparent Commission has always been respected for being advantage—it has been described as an 8 per cent independent. I happen to think that the process of advantage—that the Labour Party holds over the reviewing whatever it might decide might be far better Conservatives in the present voting system. He highlighted conducted openly and transparently online than through a number of reasons why, of that apparent 8 per cent expensive and slow public inquiries, some of which advantage, very little is to do with the different sizes have produced changes. Having been a part of them of electorates in Labour and Conservative-held on many occasions, I also think that many of the constituencies. arguments made by QCs representing the parties, not The highly respected psephologist, Lewis Baston, generally the voters, have had disproportionate sway was also prayed in aid by noble Lords opposite a few in the forum of the public inquiry and that a legitimate hours ago. He has made calculations suggesting that online consultation and proper, open representation perhaps eight or 10 seats may be varied between what may be a much better way of dealing with these issues. the Conservative Party or the Labour Party might But the significant point on which I would like to have as a result of these reviews. Those are figures in finish is simply that if the Boundary Commission was line with all the previous Boundary Commission asked in the next review—as they were in the past, and reviews—and there have been three in the past 27 years. will be in the future—to take into account the existing There is no big change out of this. parliamentary constituency boundaries, a number of To some of those whom I must now call my noble the problems that have been raised in both Houses friends, I must say that the enthusiasm in their party would be more effectively addressed. for making these changes—although I note a little lack of enthusiasm looking at their Benches at the 10.10 pm moment—is misguided, but so is the opposition on the Labour Benches to the changes, because they will Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke: My Lords, I do not not actually have a big outcome in the general election. think that I have ever agreed with the noble Lord, Of course, changing boundaries is never an easy process Lord Lamont, but I certainly agree with that it is for MPs, candidates or parties, but the principle that absurd to suggest that our politics is broken. It is MPs should generally have the same number of electors manifestly not broken, but we are naive if we do not must generally be a sound one. It is the same principle accept that the craft of politics has seldom been held for which the rotten boroughs were eventually abolished in lower regard. I regard this legislation as a wasted by the Great Reform Act 1832. It is not a principle opportunity. Had the constitutional conventions been that is unusual, unfair or undemocratic, and it has adhered to, had we had proper consultation and pre- been at the heart of all the previous boundary reviews— legislative scrutiny, and had we had time to go through perhaps in a less rigid way—conducted under previous the Bill in its entirety, there would have been the Governments. opportunity for cross-party agreement on the issues I close on what is a very important point for me that are raised in the Bill. That would have been for the about the process of the boundary reviews. I think good not only of the country but, especially, of this that the Bill may make the problem of redrawing the House and the other place. Instead, we are left with a boundaries a little more problematic than it needs to shoddy piece of legislation that has been cobbled be. All the previous Boundary Commission reviews together at short notice. The only thing on which I have had a guideline asking them to respect the need agree with the noble Lord, Lord Rennard, is his comment to minimise inconvenience among other logical factors that his party did not win the general election. My when redrawing boundaries. The Bill provides for that party lost the election. No party won the election. In provision to apply in reviews for the 2020 general such circumstances, I should think that it is important election and in subsequent reviews, but it does not do to show humility rather than arrogance; this is an so for the next review to be published in September arrogant piece of legislation. 2013 for a general election in 2015. There will, of It is very notable that in the other place there were course, be significant changes to constituency boundaries very few Liberal Democrat or Conservative Back Benchers when there are significant reductions in the number who supported the legislation. It has also been extremely of MPs. interesting tonight to look at the Benches opposite—the Of course, it would be much easier for the staff in wasteland on the other side of the Chamber. Where the Boundary Commission to start with clean maps are the supporters? Among those who have spoken that do not have existing boundaries marked on them tonight I have counted three who support the legislation. which must be considered as part of the new configuration, I am not sure whether my noble friend Lord Lipsey, but I believe that it would be much better to allow who is not in his place, supports the Bill or whether he the commission to take into account the existing just supports AV. boundaries—at least as far as it sees fit. This would go I support the idea of a referendum on AV, but I also a little way, at least, to addressing the many concerns have to say that, after four and a half years in Australia raised in the debate about the consequences of the watching AV in operation, I have become extremely review in many areas. sceptical about it for one simple reason. Deals have to 627 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 628

[BARONESS LIDDELL OF COATDYKE] interested in such matters, but I have to say to the be struck for AV to work. Some of those deals are noble Lord, who is not in his place, that he needs to done openly and transparently, but some of them are get out more because, where I come from, people done behind closed doors and you get very bizarre are passionately interested in the history of their results as a consequence. The balance of power in the communities—perhaps that is because my constituency Australian Senate is held by the No Pokies party. included 19 mining villages, as we know that miners “Pokies” to people of my noble friend Lord Foulkes’s are passionately interested in history. In that public generation and mine usually means ice cream cones, inquiry, there was great unanimity of support for but in this case it means one-armed bandits. Because retaining Airdrie as one town and a very convincing of the operation of the system of preferences, No case was put for retaining Airdrie’s historic links with Pokies, which is a one-man party, can hold the Australian the towns and villages known as the Fortissat villages—a Government to ransom. That is one of the consequences reference to the 40 who sat with the Covenanters in of AV. those villages. That case was made by John Smith, Australia has compulsory voting. If we had had the who died 36 hours later. As a consequence of the opportunity properly to scrutinise this Bill, perhaps hugely persuasive argument that he put on behalf of we could have discussed issues such as compulsory his community, the constituency of Airdrie and Shotts voting, which would provide a long-term, rather than was preserved and I went on to represent it. short-term, benefit to society. In Australia, the fine for I make that point about local inquiries because, if not voting is peanuts—something like 20 or 30 Australian you come from where I come from—I take my title dollars—but people are so used to going out to vote from the village of Coatdyke, in which I was born and that they do so automatically. You do not have to vote brought up, which lies between Airdrie and Coatbridge for a political party; you can spoil your paper. If we and has been alternately contained in a constituency, had had the opportunity to discuss these matters, we split and quartered in all sorts of different shapes such would have had a real opportunity to advance the that it should probably be renamed “Hokey Cokey”— progress of the legislation. everyone in the communities of Airdrie and Coatbridge I also find it bizarre that the Prime Minister, has a real view about the importance of their community. immediately after the election, went up to Edinburgh Years on—and, like Miss Jean Brodie, I am in my and spoke about respect for the Scottish Parliament. prime—I am still referred to in Coatdyke as Bessie What respect was shown when it was told, not even Lawrie’s daughter, regardless of the fact that I am now consulted, that the referendum would be on the same a noble Baroness, because communities have histories day as the Scottish parliamentary elections? A Motion and those histories are very important indeed. For this has been passed by the Scottish Parliament opposing House and this Government to demean that sense of that, and we have already heard from my noble friend community and involvement is to show contempt for Lord Touhig about the situation in Wales. That lack of society.As we heard earlier, the hypocrisy of a Government consultation does not show respect, nor does it show a who promote the big society to argue against people’s proper understanding of, and respect for, the constitution. faith in society and love and admiration for the society that has forged them, is indeed a travesty. I want to address the issue of 600 seats. I am pretty agnostic about the size of constituencies, but I find it My mother used to say, “Marry in haste; repent at bizarre that in the coalition discussions the Conservatives, leisure”. Here, we are legislating at haste, and the country who have a history of arguing for 585 seats, and the will repent at leisure. I hope that, in the best traditions Liberal Democrats, who have a history of arguing for of this House, we can be a genuine, revising Chamber 500 seats, reached a compromise of 600 seats. How did to save the coalition from what it has achieved with that work out? It is incumbent on the noble Lord, this legislation. There are many Members of the Liberal Lord McNally, when he replies to this debate, to Democrat Benches in this House and in the other explain to us why we are to end up with more seats place whom I count as friends. They have been let than were in the manifestos of the two parties that are down by this legislation. AV is not PR but a miserable now in coalition. It is bizarre. The noble Lord, Lord little compromise, which has been cobbled together Strathclyde, could not keep his face straight—as well only to save skins for the future. However, the electorate he might—when he had to answer questions on these are not daft and will see through it. That is why, in the matters. We need an answer on these matters. days and weeks that lie ahead, we must do our utmost to amend this legislation to make it at least in some way I do not want to delay the House too long as the fit for purpose. As of now, the Bill is not fit for purpose. hour is late, but I want to look at the parliamentary boundary commissions and public inquiries. In the other place, I was privileged to represent the town of 10.21 pm Airdrie, which is even older than the Church of England. Baroness Smith of Basildon: My Lords, this has The first references to Airdrie were in 576, but it was at been an extremely interesting debate. We can tell the the peak of its national significance between 1160 and degree of interest by the number of noble Lords who the middle of the 19th century. Airdrie was a base for wish to speak. I am sorry that the government Benches the Covenanters. In 1832, the town hall became a have been so sparse all evening. I do not want to repeat hospital for the victims of cholera, which is very much the points made by many other noble Lords, other in our minds at the moment. The reason that I make than to say that I have similar concerns about the Bill. those points is that Airdrie is an historic town. In the It seems to be being rushed through and pulled out early 1990s, a proposal was made to split Airdrie right with indecent haste. I take on board the comment down the main street. The noble Lord, Lord Baker, made by my noble friend Lady Liddell about the Bill pooh-poohed the idea of local communities being being a missed opportunity. 629 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 630

The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, with his system. The Government say that public inquiries do perhaps usual modesty may have overstated it when he not add much to the process and they will not be said that his plans for change were the greatest missed. They also argue that there will be few changes constitutional reform since the Reform Act 1832, which and most of them will be minor. That entirely misses we should recognise had deficiencies in itself. But it the point. remains that this legislation is highly significant. It is In the last boundary review, the majority of extremely important for the future of and the legitimacy constituencies remained unchanged, but significant of our democracy. changes in all areas and most likely to most seats will I want to address two issues. The first is the constituency be made in this review. There could be changes in boundary changes and the abolition of public inquiries areas that have not seen any alterations for generations. as outlined in Clause 10. While it may be initially We are setting a hard task for the boundary superficially popular, I have not been convinced by the commissioners. The Bill also seeks to change the ground arguments put forward of the need to reduce the rules by which the commissioners will operate. For the number of Members of Parliament in the House of first time, changes will go across constituency boundaries Commons. If we are to reduce the number of MPs in and, depending on the recommendations, we do not the House of Commons, should there not first be an yet know how they will affect local government or the examination of why it is considered to be the right conduct of and arrangements for elections. The boundary course of action and, if so, what would be the appropriate commissioners are already tasked with seeking to maintain number of MPs? Nowhere have I heard a coherent recognised communities, but this is now subordinate case being made, other than the Deputy Prime Minister’s to ensuring that the electorate is no more than 5 per assertion that the Government need to reduce costs cent more or less than the new electoral quota, along and that this will save around £12 million a year. I do with a limit on geographical size. So, for the first time, not think that factored into that are the additional arithmetic—the physical size of a constituency and costs of the greater workload for MPs with larger the number of electors—will be the dominant features. constituencies. But it has to be said that that reason Those criteria undermine the conviction that constituencies alone is insufficient. It is also an argument that is should take into account communities and their histories. difficult to sustain when the Government are also Given that this is to be overridden by the numbers seeking to increase the number of paid professional game, it will be all the harder for the commissioners to politicians in the second Chamber, the costs of which draw up meaningful constituencies that residents can we do not know yet. There may be a great deal of identify with. Furthermore, it must all be completed in good arguments, but the case has not yet been made. time for the next election, so it will be a mammoth The number chosen seems random, as we have task. heard from other noble Lords. When the Leader of It is interesting to note the views of the boundary the House was asked about this earlier, he should have commissioners themselves. I was struck by the comments been embarrassed to admit, although he seemed quite of Robin Gray, a former boundary commissioner, in gleeful about it, that 600 was “a nice round figure”. I evidence to the Select Committee of the other place. assumed that he was making that comment in jest, but He made the point that having the review system and nothing else came forward. There was no other explanation the opportunity to hold public inquiries enhanced the of why 600 was a good figure. I have too much respect legitimacy of the changes. He also said that even for him to believe that he thinks that 600 is “a nice when representations were minor, that reassured the round figure” and should be used. But he did not even commissioners that they had got right the changes try to give an explanation of why 600 MPs is the right made. He made it clear that even when, as we have number. heard, the political parties played the major and sometimes As a former Member of Parliament for 13 years, I the only role, represented my home constituency. The relationship “they do actually provide some assurance for the public that the between the constituency and its Member of Parliament issues have been looked at, debated and an independent, barrister, is important and precious. It possibly is more so today solicitor, whatever, has come to a view about that”. because the workload of MPs is increasing, particularly That is not to say that it is not possible to improve the in constituency work. I could never support any form system, but it is wrong to abolish the principle. of electoral reform or change which would reduce that I have to ask this because I do not understand it at relationship between an MP and his or her constituency. all: why the haste? This issue is huge and significant, The proposals before us today have the potential to and it deserves to be given the opportunity to be change every constituency in the country—bar two, undertaken properly. For all the talk we hear from the bizarrely—and we have to recognise the enormous Government about the big society, about engaging the upheaval that will bring. The boundary commissioners public and about the public having their say, this Bill will have the duty to define the new boundaries of the does exactly the opposite. Reducing the number of 600 constituencies. Every election sees reviews. At the Members of Parliament takes democracy just that last election, my own constituency of Basildon suffered little bit further away from the public, and the Bill then significant changes; indeed that constituency no longer denies the public the right to be heard at an independent exists in that there is no longer a seat named Basildon. public inquiry. So although the Government talk about Sometimes we get electoral changes we like from the giving power back to the people, on a fundamental boundary commissioners, and sometimes changes that issue that strikes at the heart of our democracy—that we do not like, but that is not the issue. The system in of redrawing the entire constituency map of the place allows representations to be made and in some country—the public are to be denied even the opportunity cases inquiries to be held. It confers legitimacy on the of a public inquiry. 631 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 632

[BARONESS SMITH OF BASILDON] extraordinary opportunity, that they are not allowed It does not matter if people choose not to avail to make the important choice about precisely which themselves of that right, but it does matter if they are voting system they would prefer. not given the opportunity to do so. If they have Like other noble Lords, I voted in the general concerns later and there is no legitimate route to election this year. In past elections I have voted for address them, that undermines the legitimacy of the larger parties and for smaller ones, but I have always entire process. This legislation will mean that the legal maintained the belief that it is unfair that voters for a process does not even allow for the legitimacy of the smaller party are so heavily discriminated against by proposed changes to be tested in a public inquiry. That our current system to the extent that one can consider is fundamentally unfair to the commissioners themselves, some votes to be almost worthless before they are cast. who will see their work and their efforts undermined It is because of this that, whatever would be the by a lack of belief in their independence through no political consequences of the introduction of true fault of their own. It could also mean legal challenges proportional representation, I believe such a system to against the proposals. be inherently more democratic. My final point concerns the implications for the Under the first past the post system, the voter Executive in reducing the number of Members of suffers a difficult internal conflict, often torn over Parliament. It seems illogical, if the size of the House the choice between personality, political party and of Commons is reduced, not to reduce the number of pragmatism. A good voting system should take all Ministers. The Minister, Mark Harper, when asked three of these elements into account. The additional about this by the Commons Select Committee, said member system used all over the world, and now in the that to reduce the number of Ministers in the Commons UK in the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly would increase the number of Ministers in the Lords. and the London Assembly, is not an option within the Some of us may not think that that is a terribly bad Bill, although it should be, as indeed should be the thing, but did he not understand what the committee single transferable vote. AMS is a system that would was saying to him? In his article yesterday in the go a long way towards solving these problems as the Observer, Professor King raised his concerns that, if voter can vote for both the political party of their the Bill was to go through, Ministers would be choice and for their constituency MP. It also preserves selected from a smaller gene pool of MPs. To reduce the geographical link to a single constituency MP, to the number of MPs but maintain the number of which the British public are attached. Ministers would significantly rebalance the role of It is true, of course, that we would not be having this government and the Executive, which goes against referendum if the Liberal Democrats did not themselves everything the Government have said about enhancing want PR in the first place. AV is better, arguably, than parliamentary democracy. It will shift the balance of first past the post on the basis that it is more proportional, power further towards the Government and erode although the fact that it is also more of a consensual accountability. system means that you would probably have fewer Your Lordships’ Committee on the Constitution mavericks in Parliament, which is a shame. raised concerns on both of these issues. It felt that a I would support an amendment to this Bill so that proper assessment had not taken place and that, the public can make their own choice from the alternative “it is an unsatisfactory basis on which to embark on fundamental voting systems available. I am fully in favour of a reform of the register”. referendum, but as it stands the public are forced to I endorse those comments. Once again, the Government play political games. Does a voter who might prefer have got it wrong in their haste to make changes what is in my view the real alternative—a true PR without thinking about the implications or effectively system—therefore vote against AV or does he vote for marshalling decent arguments. it, hoping that AV will be a stepping stone towards that? We know, of course, that this is the political reality, but it is ultimately disrespectful to the public 10.31 pm that they are put in this position of limited choice. The Earl of Clancarty: My Lords, with the Division The second half of the Bill is also a part of another today I would not have wanted to see jeopardised that Bill. I believe in principle that it is a good aim to part of the Bill that I, with reservations, support. On equalise the size of the electorate for every constituency, the other hand, I have various concerns about the but the problem with decreasing the number of MPs other part of the Bill. This is two Bills—or perhaps, at this stage is that we do not know what our end point more accurately, bits of two Bills. My approach is to is likely to be in the overall reform of the other place take the point of view, for the first part, of the voter; and, indeed, of Parliament as a whole. For example, if and, for the second, of the constituent—two distinct we kept first past the post or opted for AV in the long political roles of the individual member of the public. term, I would say that, no, I am not in favour of The first half of the Bill is like being taken to a decreasing the number of MPs, simply because the wonderful expensive restaurant—possibly a once in a larger the number of constituents, the less your MP is lifetime experience—and being offered a starter, the going to be your MP, and the larger the constituency, alternative vote system, but only one out of numerous the larger the workload and the less the local work main courses available, that dish being first past the accomplished. That is as long as there are no other post. It is ludicrous that proper proportional representation kinds of MPs, but if one believed that at some stage in any form is not on the menu. I realise, of course, the MPs would be topped up and we would have that what we have before us is a political compromise, stronger regional government across the whole of Britain, but it is nevertheless insulting to the public, given this it would be a different matter. 633 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 634

If we had true PR, there would be no more political them in isolation. To me, the logic would be first to manoeuvring through boundary changes, which we define the role and working practices of both Chambers, seem to get with every change of government and including their relationship with the Executive. Then whose administration no doubt costs the country we can better determine their size, especially given that unnecessary money. Neither would a Government see we bizarrely are currently considering reducing the fit inflexibly to clamp down on appeals to such changes. size of the elected Commons while increasing hugely This wrangling would simply stop, because it would the size of the appointed Lords. We can then consider become politically irrelevant. We might then concentrate how each Chamber is elected or appointed. At that our minds solely on how a constituency might be point, these principles should be put to the electorate, defined in ways other than by the thought of potential on a day without the distorting effect of other elections, political advantage. in a referendum or series of referenda. Indeed, has the Finally, I share the concern of many others about Minister considered a referendum on the same day as whether the number of Ministers should not be reduced the one on the voting system, on the principle of alongside a reduction in the number of MPs and whether the Lords should be wholly or substantially whether there should not be an agreed formula for elected? Would that not make his job easier in pushing this. This Government have already shown in the Lords reform through this House, if he had such a Public Bodies Bill that they are not afraid to try to mandate? increase the power of the Executive at the expense of With a mandate from a referendum on a voting wider, properly democratic scrutiny and consultation. system, we can then determine whether we have fixed-term Parliaments, how long the term should be and how 10.37 pm regularly the constituency boundaries should be reviewed. Lord Knight of Weymouth: My Lords, for the second Finally, we can then commission the review of new time in seven days I am speaking in your Lordships’ constituency boundaries, with public inquiries at least House as one of a long list of over 50 speakers to talk in the first instance given the scale of change. Given against a Bill with whose principles I more or less that we are talking about 600 brand new constituencies, agree. In both cases, the Government face a very I cannot see any argument for not holding proper critical report from the Constitution Committee. I public inquiries, at least in the first instance. I accept think that, as with the Public Bodies Bill, this is bad that that would take time, but with such huge Bill because of process. constitutional change we should attempt consensus at I favour a fairer voting system for the House of least on process. The current rush seems to be driven Commons, as I favour a voting system for your Lordships’ by a political deadline that would allow the Liberal House. I am therefore very happy to support the Democrats the iconic achievement of electoral reform principle of a referendum on moving from first past within a year of forming the coalition, and give the the post to the alternative vote. Similarly, I cannot Conservatives the prize of cutting the number of Members disagree with the principle of equalisation, although, of Parliament in Labour cities and in Wales and Scotland. like my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer, I The other substantive point I should like to make would favour a figure of give or take 10 per cent rather tonight is around reducing the number of MPs to 600. than 5 per cent. Also like my noble and learned friend, I was intrigued by the Leader’s explanation that it was I believe that these historic changes could be much a “nice round figure”. While he is the embodiment of more easily taken forward on the basis of consensus a nice round figure, that is not good enough to persuade over process. me. Why reduce the number at all? I note that the What has happened on process? Why this ridiculous number of MPs has increased by 25 since 1950. That is rush, which is now causing such opposition? Why, yet 3 per cent increase in 60 years. In the same time, the again, so little consultation? Why no consultation with size of constituencies has increased by 25 per cent and the devolved Administrations? Why not listen to them the volume of correspondence, especially in this age of and avoid the problems attached to holding the referendum e-mails, has exploded exponentially for Members of on the same day as elections to the devolved legislatures? Parliament. That is in part why the 3.5 million unregistered Perhaps the Minister can tell us, when he winds up voters are important. When I was a Member of tomorrow, what estimate has been made of the differential Parliament, until my contract was cut short by the turnout in different parts of the UK as a result of that, electors of south Dorset earlier this year, I did not beyond the confusions that rightly the Scottish Parliament check the electoral roll to see whether a constituent recently legislated to reduce by moving the local elections. was registered. I confess that one of my staff obsessively There are some who argue that this House should did, and would make sure she told me whether the not concern itself with these matters of how the other person had a vote. If she is listening, I am sorry, Lena, place is elected. Indeed, the noble Lord the Leader of that I completely ignored that information. I am absolutely the House pretty much argued as such in his opening certain that if any MP is approached by someone in speech. I beg to differ. This Bill is part of a wider housing crisis, with immigration problems, as a victim parliamentary reform to try to restore confidence in of bureaucratic incompetence in respect of tax credits Parliament as a whole. In that endeavour, we should or benefits, in any of the bread and butter pieces of all work together, particularly given the events of the casework, all MPs will try to help regardless of whether past couple of years. As a Member of your Lordships’ they are electors. The sense of public service is strong House, I am after the bigger picture before we are in Parliament and we should acknowledge that. asked to legislate on these elements, or bits of a Bill, as In my former constituency, I had pockets of significant the noble Earl just said. We should not pluck out bits deprivation in the west, in Weymouth and Portland, of wider parliamentary reform and have to consider and in much more affluent areas in the east, in the 635 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 636

[LORD KNIGHT OF WEYMOUTH] that, we should go through a process where matters Purbecks. There was a great difference in electoral are properly discussed and evaluated, whether by a registration and a great difference in workload between Speaker’s Conference or something of that kind. the more and less affluent areas. On that basis, we I understand, of course, the deal that was done need the Government to do more on electoral registration after the election but I wonder at the reasons being than the Government that I was a part of managed to given for this Bill and for some other Bills which are do, before we move to such a tight prescription on yet to come before us that are being put forward by the equalisation. Deputy Prime Minister in his new role. One of the The Bill’s current position of working off the electoral things being said is that it is about restoring trust in roll as of December this year is untenable, and I Parliament. In my opinion, a number of the best cannot support a review every Parliament. Like others, speeches tonight have been made by former Members I believe in the importance of the community link with of the other place. I say “best”, because they convey MPs, and as someone who lives 400 yards from the that sense of relationship which Members of Parliament constituency boundary, I do not want to do the hokey- have with their constituents, whether they voted for cokey—to use the phrase of my noble friend Lady them or not, and which they have with the area that Liddell—out of west Dorset. they represent. Even when you have been out of Finally, why is there such a hurry? I can only think Parliament for a long time—I live in my old constituency that it is for political gain. Your Lordships’ House —you still go around and remember that that was the adds value by being less political and by ensuring place where there was this or that problem, and you constitutional rigour and, on that basis, I urge that have that feeling of identity. You come to Parliament Part 1 be separated from Part 2 to make two Bills. I as the champion of your constituents. Yes, you are also urge proper time for boundary reviews, with there as Labour, Conservative or whatever, but you are public inquiries on these 600 new constituencies. Ideally, also there as the man or woman for your area. I urge a proper road map of parliamentary reform That is a real and powerful identity, so if you depart that defines the roles of both Chambers before legislating from that principle and if Members of Parliament on their size and how their Members get there. start to be seen as the representative of the party for this block of population in this part of the country, 10.45 pm something disastrous will have gone wrong. Thinking Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: My Lords, at this late back to 1983, one thing that was very sad was that I hour I shall avoid the temptation to repeat many of was a Tory; a third of my constituency had never had the arguments that we have already heard, but I should a Tory since the Twenties; a third had never had a Tory perhaps declare one interest. When I was in the other since before that; and a third had never had anything place it was as Member of Parliament for Stirling, else. There were bits of my constituency where Tories, having been elected in 1983. Leaving aside the birth of particularly with the miners’ strike and so on, were not my children, my marriage and other personal events, very popular. Yet you were respected as the Member arriving at the House of Commons as a Member of of Parliament; you had standing and status. The expenses Parliament was my proudest day. I think that I did so scandal and other things have damaged that, and I with about 35 per cent of the vote when we had four find the extraordinary notion that we can repair that parties fighting that election, so getting 50 per cent of damage and restore the status of Members of Parliament the vote would have been quite an achievement. with this kind of Bill and this kind of reform a little unnerving. At subsequent elections, without the split in the Labour Party and the SDP, it became harder for me to My experience, going around canvassing during the hang on and my majority dropped to around 700 and election, was that people said, “You’re all the same. then to 500. By then, I was Secretary of State and I You’re in it for yourselves. We only see you at the had to sign the order produced by the Boundary election. You say one thing at the election and then do Commission to take Bridge of Allan out of my another”. If we want to counter that kind of cynicism constituency and put it into another; that was probably and distrust, one of the things that we might do is about 4,000 Conservative votes. I did so without any keep the promises that we put in our manifestos. The concern at all, other than for me, because it was a fair Bill fails miserably on that count. The manifestos process with a proper adjudication and inquiry. By made promises about the voting system and the size of the way, it was not just the political parties which put Parliament. The Conservatives campaigned for first forward their views: views were expressed by the local past the post and against AV.The Liberals campaigned community and, in the end, the right decision was against AV. The Labour Party campaigned in favour taken. The result was that I got kicked out of Parliament of AV. Now we have a Bill that puts forward AV, —there were one or two other factors in that as produced by the Conservatives and the Liberals in well—and I found myself in this place. coalition, being opposed by the Labour Party, which campaigned on having AV. This place has a very important role to play. It is the backstop; that is our whole purpose. A Question was asked in the House the other day of my noble friend Lord Bach: Having a referendum. Lord McNally as to the purpose of the House of Lords. If nothing else, it is to protect the constitution. Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: Sorry, they campaigned I feel that the Bill is not Parliament’s finest hour. There on having a referendum on AV. To be fair, it was a has always been an understanding and a convention post-legislative referendum. that on constitutional matters we should try to proceed with consensus and by agreement and, if we cannot do Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Pre-legislative. 637 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 638

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: A pre-legislative referendum, On AV itself, I thought that the 1997 defeat for us rather than the post-legislative referendum that is proposed was an absolutely catastrophic rout. However, the in the Bill. The ordinary voter being faced with the information I have seen suggests that if we had had clips that will be shown during the referendum campaign AVit would have been even worse. AVtends to reinforce of the Deputy Prime Minister describing AV as “a the big shifts of the kind that have taken place. We miserable little compromise”, while at the same time should be very careful about making huge changes to he is promoting the Bill, will do nothing to restore a system that works perfectly well. It is true that there trust in Parliament. are anomalies in the system. However, the Bill has not If trust in Parliament is to mean anything, it must been properly discussed in the country. It is the product mean trusting the voters. The noble Earl spoke eloquently of a political deal and that is no basis on which to in favour of giving the voters a choice. I would prefer amend the constitution of our country. to have the status quo; first past the post seems to work perfectly well. If you are going to open up the 10.57 pm issue of changing the voting system and consult the Baroness Adams of Craigielea: My Lords, like my people, however, it seems strange to choose one system noble friend Lord Grocott, I am quite depressed about and not allow the voters to express a view on it. I look the Bill but I am also now very confused, as I find for forward to amendments to the question in the referendum the first time, sitting opposite the noble Lord, Lord that will enable the inclusion of STV. Forsyth, that I completely agree with him. That certainly The Deputy Prime Minister, as part of this exercise did not happen often in the other place. On the other in increasing trust and the accountability of the Executive, hand, there were elements of my noble friend Lord set up the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Knight’s speech that I completely disagreed with. I do Committee. It was specifically set up to look at the not support AV—I support first past the post—and I work of the Deputy Prime Minister in respect of the certainly do not support elections to this House. It constitutional reforms. Its first report repudiates the would be ludicrous if, while we are reducing elected Bill and the process by which it is being carried out. representation to the other place, we start to increase it How does that help to restore trust in Parliament? in this House. The coalition Government have resolutely refused However, I agree with my noble friend Lord Knight to reduce the size of the Executive in line with the that the Bill should be two Bills, not one. It seems that proposed reductions in the size of the House of Commons. it has simply been cobbled together for convenience. I have put down a Written Question, which I have not The two parts of the Bill bear no relation to each other had an Answer to, asking how many people are now and were made not in a coalition but an unholy members of the Government or Parliamentary Private alliance. The noble Lord the Leader of the House told Secretaries, and what the size of the payroll is. I have us that this coalition was what the country wanted. the feeling that it has gone up substantially. That is not How do we know this? We know that the country did increasing the authority and standing of Parliament. not want the Government that were in place. It did not want the Conservative Party; it certainly did not want In a number of speeches today, people have made the Liberal party. What did we get? Everybody got the point that it seems bizarre that we have Members what nobody wanted—not a consensus but a coalition. of this House sitting in the Gallery that is meant for The electorate might have been telling us that they the public because there are not enough seats to wanted some consensus but what they got was a cobbled- accommodate us, but we are increasing the size of this together coalition, rather like this cobbled-together Bill. House while at the same time justifying a reduction in the size of the House of Commons on the grounds of The noble Lord, Lord Baker, told us that he did not expenditure. support AV but it was a price worth paying. I am sorry he is not in his place now because I would tell him There is another thing: it was my party’s policy to about a price that the Labour Party thought was reduce the size of the Scottish Parliament. That has worth paying in relation to the Scottish Parliament. 129 Members. It is hard to believe that you need Before the legislation for the Scottish Parliament there 129 Members of the Scottish Parliament if you are was something called the Scottish Constitutional proceeding on the basis of having 55 Members at Convention, in which the Labour Party, the Liberal Westminster. The public will find it difficult to understand party, several other parties and parts of civic Scotland— why, having previously been in favour of reducing the such as churches and trade unions—took part. We size of the Scottish Parliament, we now want to keep came to an agreement before the legislation that we, the Scottish Parliament at its present size while reducing the Labour Party, would support a system of PR for the size of Westminster. the Scottish Parliament if the Liberal party supported I am conscious of the time. It has been suggested a gender balance for the Scottish Parliament. Subsequent that this is all being done for political advantage. I to the legislation, the Labour Party tried to deliver a have a cautionary tale. The Members opposite may gender balance within its own rules. I am sorry to say not recognise this view of events. I remember the that the Liberal party at no time tried to deliver that noble Lord, Lord Robertson, who I am sorry is not in gender balance. So I say to the noble Lord, Lord his place, telling me that devolution would kill nationalism Baker, be careful what you wish for here as you might stone dead. I remember people believing that, if they get something completely different from what you set had a Scottish Parliament, Labour would dominate out to achieve. Scotland’s politics for ever. It did not quite work out The noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, was right again; the that way.Constitutional change to secure party advantage Labour Party did go forward with AVin our manifesto, seldom does. The unexpected has a habit of happening. but we lost the election with that in our manifesto. I 639 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 640

[BARONESS ADAMS OF CRAIGIELEA] I know that area very well as it is where the other half am astounded that the coalition is taking up what we of my family come from. If I go from my home in the lost. If there is genuinely to be a referendum on PR outskirts of Paisley to Argyll, I have to take a three or systems— four-hour car journey, because there are few flights and I cannot rely on them, and then I have a two-hour Lord Rennard: The noble Baroness has explained ferry crossing. The Member for Argyll leaving here to that some people in the Labour Party might now go to a surgery in Port Ellen on Islay would take four abandon their commitment to AV because they lost hours to get to Glasgow Airport. He would then take the election, but why did they abandon their commitment another four hours to get to Kennacraig on West Loch to a referendum on PR given that they won the elections Tarbert. The ferry crossing would be two hours before in 1997, 2001 and 2005? he got to Port Ellen—and that is provided it is all Baroness Adams of Craigielea: I personally was going well and the weather is okay. Argyll at the never committed to AV but we are not abandoning it. moment is half the size of Denmark. What size will it Many on this side still support it. I happen to be one be when we have to put 76,000 electors into that of those who do not. The noble Lord did not support constituency? It is not manageable and it would certainly AV before the election. It was not in the Liberal miss the constituency link with the MP. If he wants to manifesto. It certainly was not in the Conservative go on to Jura for another surgery, he has to cross Islay manifesto, so why is he supporting it now? He should and take another ferry. There are only 120 people on explain that to me rather than the other way round. Jura, but are not those 120 people just as entitled to their MP’s time and representation as the person who First past the post appeals to me, as it does to the lives across the road from the House of Commons, noble Lord, Lord Grocott, because the electorate know here in the West End of London? I would contend that where they are with it. They know that the first person he was. past the post has won the race, like the horse that he told us about, and that we do not end up with the third When we are drawing up these boundaries, we horse wearing the rosette at the end of the night. should ask ourselves: why are people disinterested in politics? If we tell them that they are just a number, The first election for the other place in which I just another brick in the wall, and we really do not stood was a by-election. I got 42 per cent of the vote. want to go to inquiries, find out what their constituency In three subsequent elections, I got 61 per cent of the links are and what there community ties are, then no vote. I was very fortunate indeed, no doubt, but I was wonder they say to us, “You are all the same”, because part of the community. What really concerns me about that is what we are doing. We are totally discarding the the second part of the Bill is the loss of community. I electorate when we tell them that their communities am surprised at the Conservatives going forward with no longer matter—that it is just the number that this because they consistently tell us that the family is matters. paramount to society. But where does the family fit, if not into a community? I came from a community where I can trace one side of my family back as far as 11.06 pm records go. I was very much part of that community Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: My Lords, that and was fortunate to represent it. was a very thoughtful and honest speech, which I am Unlike the noble Lord, Lord Baker, any time that I sure the House followed with interest. However, I attended a boundaries inquiry the place was full, and found the beginning of it and the previous speech not just with political parties. Given that the Conservative rather interesting examples of the cross-dressing that Party came fourth in my constituency and had only seems to be going on in this House. There have been about 12 members, it would have taken a lot of them some very powerful speeches against the Bill, but none to fill the hall. The 1,500 or so people who were there more so than that of the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth. I were not just political parties, agents, sitting Members, am sure that, with friends like him, my noble friend candidates and councillors but came from all parts of Lord McNally will feel when he winds up that he does the community.Community cohesion was very important not need enemies. to them—and so it should be. People do not want to I, too, want to talk a little about islands. I cannot become just another brick in the wall—a numbers believe that the Isle of Wight has ever been mentioned game whereby we draw a square and say, “You 76,000 so often in one day in this House before. I should start over here; you 76,000 over there”. Again unlike the by admitting that I am not an islander but an overner—as noble Lord, Lord Baker, I never went to a Boundary they are called on the Isle of Wight—although I am Commission where there was not substantial change Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay. However, we have in the outcome of the original boundaries, and I gave happily had a holiday cottage on this beautiful bay for evidence to three Boundary Commissions. Only recently many years, and my wife’s family has had connections as regards the Scottish parliamentary boundaries it there for nearly a century. The Isle of Wight Liberal was proposed that my former constituency should span Democrats and many local people of all parties and the River Clyde with Renfrew on one side and Clydebank none have asked me to help their campaign to keep the on the other. Those areas are only a river apart but are island as one seat. very different with very different local ties. The local If it is kept as one seat, the Isle of Wight’s electorate communities gave evidence to that commission and of 110,000 will be 34,000 more than the new quota of their evidence was accepted but later rejected. 76,000. That is much closer to the quota than either of I agree that Orkney and Shetland and the Western the two constituencies preserved in the Bill as it stands. Isles should be excluded because of their geographical Orkney and Shetland, with 33,100 electors, is nearly position but am astounded that Argyll is not included. 43,000 below the quota, while the Western Isles, with 641 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 642

22,200 electors, is no less than 53,800 short. To put it the post on out of date boundaries is simply a fix. another way, the Isle of Wight would qualify for Labour’s two worst performances at general elections 1.45 seats, whereas Orkney and Shetland would be on since the First World War were in 1983—as has been 0.44 of a seat and the Western Isles would be on only referred to already—and 2010. Each time, it got less 0.29 of a seat, which is barely a quarter of the quota. than 30 per cent of the vote. I remember the 1983 I support the exceptions made for the two Scottish election well, as I came close to winning Cambridge island seats, but there is an even stronger argument for on first past the post and certainly would have won on adding the Isle of Wight as a third preserved seat. I AV. However, in the national election Labour beat us intend to move an amendment to that effect in Committee. by a whisker—8.5 million votes to 7.75 million—but it The island, as local people call it, has a strong sense of got 209 seats to our 23, or 34 per cent of the seats to identity and is clearly divided from the mainland, our 4 per cent. This year, Labour received only 25 per physically and psychologically, by the Solent. If a cent more votes than we did, but it still got 4.5 times as third of the island had to be joined to a mainland many seats, or 40 per cent of the seats to our 9 per cent. constituency, those islanders would consider themselves Our hopelessly slow system of boundary reviews to be second-class citizens. There are three main ferry also has the effect of loading the dice in Labour’s crossings, so either Ryde would be joined to part of favour. As Balinski, Johnston, McLean and Young Portsmouth, the Cowes area would have to link up to point out in their very useful report for the Royal Southampton Water, or West Wight would be linked Academy, Drawing a New Constituency Map for the to the New Forest. What would be the names of these United Kingdom, if Labour and the Conservatives had seats? I suppose that you would probably have to received the same number of votes nationally, Labour name them after ferries. You might be the MP for would have had 185 more seats than the Tories in Solent Hovercraft, Solent Red Funnel or Solent Wightlink, 1997, 142 more in 2001, 111 more in 2005 and 54 more but those would be highly hybrid constituencies. in 2010, even on the new boundaries. That cannot All the main political parties on the island support be right. the “One Wight” campaign, led by our excellent weekly We must move now to a fairer voting system. As my paper, the Isle of Wight County Press. The island’s noble friend Lord Rennard pointed out, to be fair to MP,Andrew Turner, and the Liberal Democrat candidate Labour, it did at the end of its term at least open up to at the general election, Jill Wareham, presented a that—and thank goodness for that. We must now petition to Downing Street with 17,000 names. People move both to a fairer voting system and to fair and of no party feel equally strongly that they should keep much more frequently updated parliamentary boundaries. a single MP. Last time I had a pint at the Pilot Boat in Bembridge, the customers were all signing the “One 11.14 pm Wight” petition on the bar. That must be a first in popular participation in parliamentary redistribution. Lord Anderson of Swansea: My Lords, I recall a The Isle of Wight is nearer the electoral quota than veteran US Congressman stating that we have reached the two Scottish island seats. The other key reason the stage of the debate where everything that can be why the Isle of Wight has an even stronger claim to said has been said, but not everyone has said it and I preserve its status is that it is asking not for special propose to make what I hope are one or two new treatment, through extra representation at the expense points. of other constituencies, but quite the reverse. The island I start with a confession. I have a considerable wants fewer MPs, not more, than it is entitled to. degree of sympathy for the Liberal Democrats. Indeed, Although the mood of most islanders is clear, that could I am sorry for them because I feel that they have raise a theoretical problem if some people were to argue reached, with the Conservatives and the coalition, a that petitions do not prove what voters want and that sort of Faustian pact, but in my judgment the result they should not be deprived of extra representation by will be a tragedy for them of Greek proportions and having just one MP serving 110,000 constituents. one of their own making. However, there is a simple and cheap answer to AV is an orphan concept—it is unloved by all and that. The Bill provides for an AV referendum to be cherished by none. No one wants it, and the Conservatives, held everywhere on 5 May. Why not have a second, as the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, said very well, prefer local referendum on the Isle of Wight on the same day first past the post. They do not want any change. to ask electors whether they want the island to stay as Many of my Labour colleagues, like me, were rather a single seat? The extra cost of printing and counting unwillingly led to accept it as part of a pre-election the second set of ballot papers would be very modest matter, but after the general election defeat they no as the polling stations would all be open anyway. I longer feel any obligation to support it. The Liberal have no doubt that the vote would be overwhelmingly Democrats do not want it; they prefer a full multi-member for one Wight, but it would be only fair to let that be system. For them, therefore, AV is second best and of confirmed if electors were being asked to give up some course ultimately the electorate will reject it. theoretical representation. Island people feel different. The debate is, in part, about the Liberal Democrats’ They want one clear island voice in Parliament, not towering obsession with constitutional reform. It is, mixed messages from an MP with divided loyalties for them, an all-pervading priority and they are willing across the Solent. I hope that the anomaly of the Isle to dump long-held principles for it, whether it be of Wight will be sorted out sensibly. tuition fees, where their leader was going to die in a This is a fair Bill that is long overdue for our ditch, or welfare reform and housing benefit. If one democracy. For many years past, Britain’s electoral were asked to say which policy has been most distinctive system has been skewed in Labour’s favour. First past for the Liberals over the past decades, it has surely 643 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 644

[LORD ANDERSON OF SWANSEA] and went to university there and I am the only member been a devotion to the European Union, yet the Liberal of my family ever to leave there. I know very well all Democrats appear willing to abandon even that, as parts of that constituency. Currently, it is divided into they have tamely accepted the EU sovereignty Bill, three seats, Swansea East, Swansea West and Gower, which is populist and against all their instincts. It is each with an electorate of about 60,000. If the electoral designed to block possible changes in the European quota is to be 76,000, we will have two and a half seats, Union—even those, such as matters relating to QMV, and how one divides a proud city, composed of a which are manifestly in the UK’s national interests. series of villages held together by gossip, into two and Therefore, the Liberal Democrats appear willing to a half constituencies I do not know. yield most of the field to the Conservatives to achieve On broader Welsh issues, I adopt the concerns of their aim of constitutional reform, which for some, I the Select Committee which I quoted earlier and which suppose, is the enduring legacy of Lloyd George. I shall not quote again, but England will lose about However, now we come to the Greek tragedy element 5 per cent of its seats; Scotland about 16 per cent; and of this—that the Liberal Democrats will not achieve Wales 25 per cent, probably falling from 40 seats to 30. their aim. They will be left with nothing because, in In the past there has been a compact—even in 1832— my judgment, the public will vote against AV.Therefore, which meant that Wales was somewhat over-represented all these concessions and the dropping of long-held with 35 Members, but that compact has now been principles will be in vain, and equally the public will broken. Welsh weight at Westminster will be reduced punish them because of the unpopular policies and and very possibly encouragement will be given to cuts that they have accepted. That is bound to lead to separatists by the so-called unionist party. conflict within their ranks: those in government will Finally, the government juggernaut has moved on wish to keep the trappings of office; the rank and file from the other place to the House of Lords. There has will feel betrayed. I think there is an old US saying been no amendment. When I lecture to schools about that a platform is something to run on, not to stand this place, I talk about the traditional role of this on. That is perhaps what has happened with many of Chamber as being a chamber for second thoughts and the promises made prior to the election. for thinking again, based on the fact that no one party I have one further thought on AV. There is a real holds a majority. The fact of the coalition has overturned danger that there will be a low turnout in the referendum. that presumption—a safe majority now, as we saw in The public do not share the obsession with constitutional last week’s debate, which is to be increased within a reform; it is very difficult to motivate people in such few weeks by the new coalition appointments. In my areas, as former Members of the other place will judgment, this is a bad day for democracy. confirm; and the Electoral Commission found very low levels of public understanding about voting systems. 11.23 pm This does therefore back the argument for at least a threshold in the referendum. Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: My Lords, this Bill So far as concerns the reduction in the number of is a serious disappointment to me too. I think there is a constituencies, the Government are determined to press need for constitutional reform and I have campaigned ahead. No amendments were made to the Bill in the for such reform over many years. It needs more careful other place and there is a whiff of gerrymandering. consideration than that which has produced this Bill. I The number of 600 has clearly been chosen deliberately have always believed that the public should play an as the most disadvantageous to the Labour Party. active part in choosing the kind of reform they want What is the aim if not party advantage? In one sense, when dealing with the architecture of the political the Government have sold the pass in terms of community system. This Bill does not trust the general public. by recognising the special nature of the two islands If you believe in representative democracy, it follows constituencies. As has just been said very well, what that you believe that Parliament should be representative. about the Isle of Wight, what about Ynys Mon, and Yet it is remarkable how efficient our political system what about other areas with clear community has been in placing individuals in key positions of identification? The Boundary Commissioners will, power who simply do not accept that argument or inevitably, have to divide communities and the disparity come up with convoluted arguments for how, magically, should be 10 per cent and not 5 per cent. Perhaps the first past the post delivers representative democracy. Minister will confirm that there will be only one You can look at any election over the past 30 years central Boundary Commission. The joy of these local and see the distortions at work. With only a third of inquiries, as I have witnessed, is that the views of the the votes, a political party can win an overwhelming Boundary Commissioners can be tested and challenged majority in this country. To make it clear that I am not by local opinion because a central body will not being partisan, I shall use an example where it was my understand the intricacies of local identity. All will be party that was the beneficiary, but it can work in sacrificed on the altar of mathematical correctness different directions. In 2005, six voters in 10 supported and precision. As the right reverend Prelate the Bishop parties other than Labour, yet Labour won six in 10 of of Blackburn said, there is a danger of in-and-out the seats in the House of Commons. My party was the communities. beneficiary on that occasion, but was it fair? Only I wish to make two brief points on Wales and they 35 per cent of those who voted cast their ballot for were made very well by the noble Lord, Lord Elystan- Labour. More people abstained than voted for the Morgan. My old constituency, Swansea East, I know party that came to govern with a majority of 60. A very well. I like to think that I share the prejudices of system which can deliver such a result cannot be my community. I was born there, went to school there described as rational or fair. 645 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 646

What shocks me is that members of the Conservative greater victory, as the Conservatives would have lost a Party still refuse to see the urgency of changing the further 55 seats if AVhad been in place. Labour would voting system, because they hope that, next time, the have won 17 more seats and the Liberal Democrats unfairness of the system will work in their favour. I say would have doubled their number of seats in the 1997 to the Liberal Democrats across the way that they may election. In 2005, Labour’s majority would have been at the moment be enjoying their period in the sun, but even greater than it was despite the low turnout and the reforms in the Bill will not work to their advantage despite the fact that it got only 34 or 35 per cent of the in the long run. vote. So the research shows that AV can exaggerate When research was conducted into why people are outcomes, particularly where comparatively few people not voting in the numbers that they once did—we go to the polls. When you have a low turnout, you get should not be happy that only 60 per cent, and sometimes these exaggerated results, so we should not regard AV less, of the people who could vote do vote—the reasons as a satisfactory way to move forward with reform. were not about apathy, or about people feeling contented However, it is still better than first past the post, with their lot, as some people will tell you. Those and if push comes to shove I will end up voting for it. I explanations are wide of the mark. The explanations think that it might concentrate political minds on the are much more complex. When you are gathering importance of getting the vote out, and I think it will evidence on this, people say that they do not feel that stop many candidates falling into complacency and there is any point in voting because, in their constituency, overconfidence about winning, which is no bad thing. the same party always wins, so what is the point of But I am not sure that we can say that this is the start voting? That is a constant refrain. They also feel that of a journey towards a better system. I hope it will be. they are not being listened to; they have little choice; Constitutional change has to be holistic. Consideration and they distrust a political system where politicians of any reform of the electoral system of the House of say one thing but do the opposite. I urge that on the Commons has to be part of a bigger picture. If the Liberal Democrats at this moment, where people are House of Commons is being looked at with regard to feeling strongly about student fees and other things. constituency boundaries, should we not have considered People are becoming increasingly aware of the unfairness reducing the size much more considerably than is of the system. It is not, as one of my noble friends has being done here, down to 600? If we had gone down to suggested, that people know where they are with the a lower figure, we might have found that it did not system as it is. They do not, and that is one of the have that whiff of the numbers being chosen to advantage reasons why many are not voting. particular parties. The membership of our House of Commons should The other factor which has been raised by many in some way reflect the way that votes are cast, so that other speakers is the concern about holding the Executive people feel that there is a purpose in voting, even in a to account. This is one of the concerns expressed safe seat. Indeed, the very idea of a safe seat should be generally about recent failures in our political system. rattled. In the 21st century, we should be moving from The payroll vote is now far too large, and it will be majoritarian to pluralist democracy.It has been mentioned even more disproportionate when the size of the House already that we get only one chance for certain kinds is reduced as recommended here. We should be concerned of reform in a generation, and we could easily be about that. It is an important element that we should missing a very important opportunity here. The alternative have in mind in any period of reform. vote system is not proportionate, as so many people have said. Indeed, the reason why it is being promoted I also think that we should be concerned about this is because it is the least voting reform possible. I business of reforming the constituencies without support a much more radical change and would like to communities having the opportunity to argue their see a proportionate system. I strongly support the case for keeping things as they are. It is an issue of position presented by the noble Lords, Lord Campbell- principle that people should be involved in that. People Savours and Lord Alton, that AV+ or STV would be a in an area may well feel that they value their community far better reform. of interest more than they do having a greater voice. It is important that we should have that in mind. A I also believe that we are incredibly patronising failure to give people the opportunity to be heard on about the general public, believing that they are incapable this would disappoint many across the country. I also of making sensible decisions. They make sensible decisions think that we are risking the disfranchising of large when they are given good evidence and information. I numbers of poor people in our inner cities. I hope that would be happy for a number of choices to be presented there will be some rethinking in the weeks to come. in a referendum, but I would like deliberative processes enriching the discussion, consultation and debate before This reform has all the hallmarks of a reform that any such referendum took place. consolidates old inequities and could add new unfairness. Constitutional reform is important. It is too important I recommend that the House look at the work of to be gone at in a way that will ultimately undermine Helen Margetts, Stuart Weir and Patrick Dunleavy, a trust. That is the risk that we are currently taking. group of political scientists already mentioned, who have examined the workings of AV over a long period. 11.33 pm They conducted simulations, one in 1992 and another in 1997. In the 1992 simulation, the outcome is changed Lord Dubs: My Lords, I agree very much with my in 28 constituencies, creating improved proportionality noble friend Lady Kennedy about the importance of of only 3 per cent, so it will not improve proportionality. being deliberate in approaching constitutional reform In 1992, though, it would have denied John Major his and not rushing at it pell-mell. I think that we are majority. In 1997, Labour would have had an even making a lot of mistakes. I do not disagree on some of 647 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 648

[LORD DUBS] There is something anomalous in the fact that these issues, such as equalisation; but because of the Members of this House can vote in a referendum that way in which it is being done, it has all the hallmarks will determine how the next general election is to be of being a first-class mess. conducted, even though we do not have a vote in that I think there is widespread agreement on the general election. It is ridiculous. I think there is a way importance of the constituency link, which is fundamental. of moving an amendment to the Bill that will sort that One of the key challenges in our politics is to improve out, and I trust it will have widespread support. However, the relationship between MPs and the people they people have died for the right to vote. The suffragettes represent. I judge this Bill, at least partly, in terms of campaigned for years for the right to vote. Some whether it succeeds in improving that position, and I Members of this House say, “Oh, it’s not important contend that it does not. whether we have the right to vote or not”. Since I have been in this House—and it is a privilege to be here—every I do not want to spend my time talking about the time there has been a general election, I have felt a real merits or demerits of AV except to say that AV does twinge of unhappiness that I could not vote, even keep the constituency link. In assessing the effect of though I was shepherding voters to the polling stations AV or any other change, it is no good looking at it in the constituencies where I was helping. I think there statically; one has to look at the dynamic effects of a is something wrong in principle. If we are going to give change in our voting system as well. I believe that prisoners a vote, it will leave us even more out on a some of the issues to do with AV are a result of the limb. The people of this country are not going to fact that there will be a dynamic effect which is harder demonstrate in Parliament Square to give us the right to calculate, but which I am sure will be there. to vote, but I think it matters and represents an However, to go back to the heart of the Bill, as important point of principle. other noble Lords have said, it is very difficult to I move on to the plans to reduce the number of reconcile reducing the number of MPs in the Commons MPs to 600. I made a gesture earlier on that the noble with increasing the membership in this place. We will Lord, Lord Strathclyde, thought was a comment but, have other chances to debate that, but it seems to me frankly, there has been no argument at all about why it that it is an indication of how badly things have been is 600, except the view that looking at it, it will damage thought out. the Labour Party and the Conservatives will gain. The Let me turn to the referendum in particular. I am noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, is shaking his head, but concerned, as are other noble Lords, that the referendum the fact is that if one took an average between the is to be held on the same day as local or devolved Conservative plans to reduce the Commons and the elections. It is difficult to see how the campaigns will Lib Dem plans, we would have had an even lower go. If all the attention in, say, Scotland, is on getting a figure. There is no logic to this, except that 600 is a majority in the Scottish Parliament, the arguments in figure that somebody thought of. It is too arbitrary for favour of the referendum taking place at all and its us to be happy about it, and unless there is a reduction content will be swept aside. However, there is another in the size of the Executive, it will simply mean that an difficulty that has not been mentioned which is that it even larger proportion of the Commons will be on the is likely that where there is a hotly contested election—I payroll. think it will be in Scotland—turnout will be higher, The noble Lord, Lord Oakeshott, mentioned the which will pull up the turnout in the referendum, even Isle of Wight. My mother lived there for a time, so I if people have no particular interest in it. Contrast know it fairly well. However, it is not just the Isle of that with what will happen in areas where there are no Wight; there are also serious concerns in Cornwall, local elections—I believe London is one of them—where Cumbria and many other parts of the country that the the turnout will be lower. We will have a very skewed sense of local community will be damaged. I think result for the referendum. There will be a high turnout that that is absolutely crucial. Anyone who has represented in some parts of the country and a low turnout in people, whether at a parliamentary level or at local others, which will make a nonsense of trying to evaluate government level, will know that the local community the result. It is not right as an approach. is crucial. It is the bedrock of our political system, and I agree that the timing is far too tight. The Electoral the bedrock of the relationship between elected politicians Commission has said that it is just about okay, but if and local people. I contend that under the Government’s there is any slippage, it will spell doom for having a timetable, there would be very little time at a local level properly conducted referendum. I therefore agree with for the parties to prepare for boundary changes. Anyone those who have suggested splitting the Bill in two and who has been a constituency MP and has gone through dealing with one part first and then the other. I fear the agony of boundary changes will know how everything that it has not been thought through very well and all gets upset. The local parties have to be reorganised. the signs are that we are going to get ourselves into One’s whole political sense of who one represents is some difficulties. altered if there are significant boundary changes. In I am very concerned that there has been no consultation 1983, I went through it in Battersea and I had to on these proposals, especially with the devolved contest the seat against a candidate from the other Administrations. Nobody has mentioned Northern part of the constituency. There is a lot of turmoil and Ireland yet. If the devolved Administrations are all difficulty. unhappy about the referendum being on the same day, Eighteen months is barely time for the local parties they should be listened to. It is important because they to sort out any changes. If by some chance there were are the people who know what is going on on the to be an earlier general election, say one year earlier, ground. there would be only six months in which to sort things 649 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 650 out, which is patently ridiculous. I do not know whether schools because we wanted to get on with our lives”. It the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, has fought elections—no meant that people felt then that politicians were too doubt, he probably has—but I am sure that some far apart from them. members of the Government have not. I say to those When I was asked to try for the nomination for my people that it is not workable. The local constituency old seat of Glasgow Springburn, the first thing I did party associations need time to sort out the effects of was sit down with my wife Mary and talk about it. I boundary changes, which will be much more dramatic remember her saying, “Michael, your father was a and widespread. Because they will bear little relationship merchant seaman and your mother told all her boys to existing communities, they will be even harder to and her daughter never to take a job away from manage. It will be hard to ask local parties to do it and home”. I said, “Mary, I am not going to win the to ask local communities to accept it. nomination”. I won by one vote, and to this day Mary The Government have not thought this through. says that I knew I was going to win, but I did not The Bill has all the hallmarks of a Bill which was know, and that is the way it turned out. But Mary and rushed in because they said, “We have got some deadlines. I did not need to up sticks and get our children into Anyway, there is no legislation, so we have to find another school or move to another part of the country. something to fill this long time”. After all, we have had The culture I am so proud of and wanted my children no legislation in this House pretty well since the election, to be brought up in would be different. except for the Public Bodies Bill, which has been an Some of the many Members of Parliament who equally botched effort. I just wish that the Government came in with me in 1979 came from Edinburgh and would say, “Let’s slow down on this. Let’s think this had been fortunate enough to win English seats. The through. Let’s consult on it”. We would end up with a whole family would move and change jobs because better system than we will get now. they had to bed themselves into the new communities they were representing. With five-year Parliaments 11.41 pm and five-year boundary reviews, if a young couple in Lord Martin of Springburn: My Lords, it is not my the same position that Mary and I were in 35 years ago wish to block legislation that has come out of the were asking whether to go for a nomination, they House which I served for more than 30 years. But I might say no, especially women being encouraged to think that I am entitled to make some constructive come in to Parliament. They would see that they were criticism, perhaps in the form of amendments. I was doing well in their careers, but would have to leave to interested when listening to the noble Lord, Lord serve for one term. It is one thing to take a chance with Forsyth, who brought back memories. It was very the electorate, but you will have to take your chances commendable of him when he had to sign the Boundary with the boundary commissioners as well. Commission report and get it put down on the Floor I know what the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, was of the House for debate knowing that it would cause talking about when he mentioned the difficult situation great difficulty for his local constituency. I remember a where two seats are merged and two Members of Conservative MP, Phil Gallie, who always fought his Parliament have to go to selection conferences. Frank corner for the Conservative Party. The boys, like myself, Dobson is still down at the other end, but Jock Stallard and the girls who sat under the Gangway used to have came into this House and served it well. It was a great some banter with him. pity that those two parliamentarians had to fight it out Doonfoot is a community I know well. I think it for one seat. We are going to get that every five years. would be safe to say that it was a traditionally Conservative If you go for eight years, at least people will say, “The area. It was put into South Ayrshire, which was at that chances are that we will get 10 years out of this time the constituency held by George Foulkes, now my Parliament, so why not try for it?”. But let me say that noble friend Lord Foulkes. That meant that Phil was when the Boundary Commission has finished, the fun fighting a seat that would go from Conservative to starts because the new boundary has been taken up. Labour. No words of bitterness or rancour came from An MP might have two wards that he has his eye Phil Gallie. He took it with dignity when he lost the on, but his adjoining neighbour might think they seat, and everyone admired and respected him. belong to him. When I was Speaker in the other place, My noble friend Lord Dubs touched on the problems I had to hold the jackets over a dispute about sending of boundary changes. We should forget about reviews out leaflets. Someone would say, “Those two wards every five years. I would like to see an amendment to are going to be mine under the new boundary review, make it eight years. We have done a great deal in this so I want to put leaflets out”. I will have to check House to educate young people. I do not know a noble Hansard, but I recall making a Statement from the Lord who would refuse to go along to a school or Chair to say, “Look, Members of Parliament in this college to talk to children and young people about the House represent their old boundaries, not the new value of serving their country in politics. That goes for ones that the boundary commissioners have produced”. the other place. That kind of fighting is going to get worse because if a I was asked whether I would go to Northern Ireland Member of Parliament takes on a ministerial job in to speak and I said, “Of course I will. We are talking those circumstances, they will have to be in their to young people”. I remember my noble friend Lord department on a Friday. But the adjoining neighbour Healey saying, “You know Michael, our generation has none of those responsibilities. I know who is going neglected our young people. We had to spend six years to turn up at the Women’s Institute, the Union of in the war and those of us who were lucky enough to Catholic Mothers and the bowling club. They will ask, get back wanted to get on with our own careers. We “Where’s Michael?”, and the answer will be, “Oh, he’s forgot about going into colleges and universities and awful busy. He’s a Minister and he can’t make it”. 651 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 652

[LORD MARTIN OF SPRINGBURN] Bill as set out by many noble Lords, particularly by my There will not be a word said against the colleague, noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton, but a hint will be put out that if you get me under the and put crisply by the noble Lord, Lord Alton. However, new boundaries, I will be your man. I do not want to I shall leave that on one side and concentrate on the know about being a Minister. issue of the referendum and electoral reform. I have many friends in the Liberal Party, but maybe If there is going to be a referendum there obviously the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, could pass the word needs to be a case for reconsidering the voting system, along. Sound bites fall off the tongue, and the sound and that case has to be set out in terms of looking bite is this: no one should have a job for life. The at wider social and political change. Usually, the implication is that no one should have a safe Labour considerations adduced by reformers cover some of seat. It has been said a few times tonight that nobody the following issues. First, they claim that we live in a should have such a thing as a safe Labour, Conservative more diverse society but that that diversity is not or Liberal seat. properly reflected in Parliament. This argument is When I represented Glasgow Springburn, I always used mainly by those in favour of a form of proportional cringed when someone said, “You’re all right, Michael, representation. There is also—the noble Lord, Lord you’ve got a safe Labour seat”. I worked just as hard Alton, spoke powerfully on this from his experience to ensure that my electorate were well looked after as in Liverpool—a sense of alienation from politics. It is the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, in his marginal constituency. not entirely clear to me that the voting system is The worst thing that anyone can do is take their necessarily the best solvent of that alienation, but I am electorate for granted. The only branch of Marks & pretty sure that that sense exists and we need to be Spencer that could beat the store in Argyle Street was alert to it—perhaps the voting system can play some the one at Marble Arch. I can remember the manager, part in ameliorating it. Aubrey Green, saying, “If a customer says to one of my assistants that he or she is displeased about the The third point that is often made is that people service or the product, I want that customer to come have lost a lot of confidence in the effectiveness of in for a coffee and a chat about why they are displeased”. political processes and perhaps look to civil society This was a very successful company and yet he had it organisations in particular as an alternative to political in mind that that one customer fitted the parable of involvement and even voting. It is certainly true that the lost sheep. That was the view I took about my many civil society organisations have much larger constituents regardless of the majority that I had. memberships than political parties. I think that I am right in saying, although I would not want to go to the I know that the night is getting on and that other stake over it, that the Royal Society for the Protection noble Lords wish to speak. All I can say about public of Birds has more members than all the political inquiries is that they are very fair. I can tell the noble parties in Great Britain and Northern Ireland put Lord, Lord Baker, that I went to a public inquiry together. which was held in Glasgow in about 1981 in preparation for the 1983 election. The people who turned up there There has also been a sharp decline over the years came from every walk of life, some of them with no in party identification and party loyalty. People vote political axe to grind. Scotland would have lost a seat far more instrumentally now. First past the post in a had we not put our argument—which was accepted—to largely two-party system was a good vehicle for mobilising the Boundary Commission. It was not a case of QCs party identification and party loyalty. However, if arguing in front of another QC, the inquiry chairman, people vote more instrumentally and in a multiparty but of men and women coming from their communities system, that feature of first past the post seems far less and saying, “This should not happen and this is why salient. In addition, it is argued that first past the post we wish to give evidence”. So inquiries are worthwhile. has worked well enough in a two-and-a-half-party Sometimes when inquiries were lost and the person or system, but we no longer have such a system. The Lib the party did not win their case, they always went away Dems no longer fit in a telephone box or a taxi—the feeling that they had had a good hearing. That is very party is larger than that—and we have the growth of important. the nationalist parties as well. We no longer have that The noble Baroness, Lady Adams, mentioned Argyll kind of two-and-a-half-party system in which first and the islands of Jura and Islay. I advise noble Lords past the post worked effectively. to visit the area, particularly Islay. I am a teetotaller It is argued that first past the post has often been but it has some lovely distilleries there if anyone likes a supported by the doctrine of the mandate: a single whisky. It is a widely spread out area. However, on the party would be elected under first past the post and mainland, if the Member of Parliament representing would have the right to carry out its mandate. However, Galloway arrives at Glasgow airport, he will have to this idea of the mandate and the right to carry it out in travel further south than Carlisle in order to get to the full has been eroded by the declining percentage of Mull of Galloway; and to get from the Mull of Galloway people supporting the successful party at an election, to Carlisle is a job and a half because in some of these which was a point made very effectively by my noble isolated places there are only one-track roads. friend Lady Kennedy of The Shaws. The doctrine of Consideration should be given to these communities. the mandate is less secure if a governing party gets a substantial majority of seats from a very low percentage 11.54 pm of the vote. Lord Plant of Highfield: My Lords, I want to Some people have said that first past the post was concentrate my remarks on the proposals for voting good at preserving a sense of political identity and reform. I agree with the criticisms of the rest of the differentiation. There would be a Conservative Party, 653 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 654 a socialist or social democratic party and a Liberal partners would be. That would make the whole process Party and this sort of differentiation between parties, of forming coalitions, if they were indicated by the which fitted in with first-past-the-post politics rather results, much more transparent and open. well, mobilised party members and offered clear-cut It is sometimes said that one great advantage of alternatives to the voters. However, the criticism is—there first past the post is that it creates strong government, is a lot of academic evidence on this—that the winner- and no doubt it does. We can all think of examples takes-all system, which first past the post is, gives over the years where governments have acted in a very parties a strong incentive to move towards the position strong and decisive way, but it is not necessarily the of the median voter or, to put it more colloquially, the same thing as effective government, whereby a decision centre ground. This has clearly happened. It has happened sticks and has wide consent behind it. There is nothing since 1982 with the Labour Party and the invention of particularly partisan about this; the Suez invasion, the new Labour as a vehicle for getting to the centre poll tax and the Iraq war were examples of strong ground. It has also happened with the Conservative government, but I am not sure that they were clear Party since 1997. The idea has been attributed to the examples of effective government. It would be absurd Prime Minister, although I do not know whether he to say that Germany, which has a coalition, has not used the exact phrase, about detoxifying the Conservative had effective government over the whole time of its brand. That is because of the pressure to move towards existence as a federal republic. So we need to be wary the centre ground for which the winner-takes-all system of assuming that single-party government is the same provides the incentive. thing as effective government. If we have this referendum The struggle is now over the middle ground and not and it goes in favour of the alternative vote or if there ideological purity, whereas first past the post was a is a proportional option on the agenda, we have to kind of defence of ideological identity. The expenses accept that coalition will become the norm and not scandal in the House of Commons has weakened the the exception. We would therefore need to think much authority of that House, which is not helped by the more clearly about the processes of coalition formation, fact that many MPs, as critics say, are elected on much rather than the protracted and not very edifying experience less than 50 per cent of the vote. Perhaps the final that we had earlier this year. point in favour of some kind of consideration of the electoral system is one not often put, but is quite a 12.05 am powerful one. In a position where we are likely to be Lord Norton of Louth: My Lords, in a few hours I devolving more power to the devolved Parliament in am catching a train back to Hull because I am teaching Scotland and the Assembly in Wales, it is very important in the morning before returning tomorrow afternoon. to increase the authority of the House of Commons I mention that because I have just worked out that and of Members of Parliament within it, as the national I will have a bigger audience in my seminar in the Parliament. If people elected in the devolved bodies morning than I have here this evening. are seen to have greater legitimacy compared with As various speakers have noted, this measure is two MPs in the national Parliament, we are in for some Bills in one. I deprecated the practice of the previous problems. Government of bringing forward omnibus Bills and I Let us assume for a moment that these are good do not endorse its continuation under the present one. reasons to re-examine the electoral system and consult I shall address the two parts of the Bill. I start with people, should the choice be between first past the two overarching concerns, the first of which has been post and AV.There is a case for saying that it should be variously mentioned this evening. Unrelated to the a broader choice, because both first past the post and merits of the particular proposals, it is the speed with AV are majoritarian systems, whereas many criticisms which the Bill has been brought forward. As the of first past the post embody the idea that representation Constitution Committee has noted in its report on the should be more proportional. Yet there is no guarantee Bill, and I declare an interest as a member of that at all, and quite a lot of evidence to the contrary, that committee, it is to be regretted that there was not time AVwould produce more proportional outcomes. There for consultation or pre-legislative scrutiny. I know is a case for saying that the choice should be between a there are reasons why Bills cannot always be subject to majoritarian principle and a proportional one or between such scrutiny, not least in the first Session of a new two majoritarian systems like first past the post and Parliament under a new Government, but Bills in such AV, with the option of a proportional system. But of a situation have usually been contemplated and worked course that makes any referendum far more complex on prior to the general election. In this case, because and the results of it much more difficult to determine. the government manifesto or programme was a post- AV is more pluralistic than first past the post, election product, there is a somewhat greater case for which allows the elector to choose more widely, should rigorous scrutiny. he or she wish to do so. While being pluralistic, it is The second concern is the relationship of the Bill, also more consensual, which I suppose is an advantage primarily Part 1, to the stated aims of the Government. to it, and it preserves the constituency link, which in I am uncertain about how a referendum confined to the light of the expenses scandal is a very effective the alternative vote relates to the principles enunciated form of political accountability, to the electorate and by Ministers as underpinning proposals for constitutional not just to the party. Of course, it makes coalition change. Voters are to be offered a referendum but on a government much more likely, but the pressures from restricted choice, which derives from a compromise; the media in particular at an election run on those I understand the politics. My concern is how electors lines would be such as to require political parties to will feel about being offered such a choice. It does not indicate before the election what their preferred coalition necessarily deliver on the Government’s stated aims, 655 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 656

[LORD NORTON OF LOUTH] resulting in a House of 500. In our view, that would and I have problems with the premise that underpins leave us with constituencies that were still quite viable— the proposals for change. Like my noble friend Lord some MPs already serve their constituents well in seats Lamont of Lerwick, I do not accept that our political with electorates in excess of 90,000—and not damage system is broken. There has been a crisis of confidence, the capacity of the House of Commons to fulfil its but it has been in politicians rather than the political functions effectively.Indeed, we believed it could enhance system. Electing the same people by somewhat different the efficiency of the House, given that we identified means will not restore confidence. The answer lies in the current number as contributing to the strain on the behaviour and not in institutional change. I regard House’s resources. Better resources for fewer Members what we are engaged in here as a form of displacement would, in our view, aid rather than hinder the efficiency activity. of the House. We also took the view, though it may On Part 1, I have a principled objection to referendums. seem counterintuitive, that larger constituencies may However, the Government, like their predecessor, do facilitate a closer, longer-term relationship between not. As the Constitution Committee notes, if there are Member and constituents, in that less radical changes to be referendums then reform of the voting system is would be required to constituency boundaries to take a constitutional issue that merits being subject to one. effect of demographic changes. However, the proposal raises two basic problems. Reform I accept that there is no magic number. As I say, our of or, as is proposed, abolition of the House of Lords view was that a House of 500 could deliver efficiently is also a major constitutional issue. Why a referendum what is expected of the House of Commons, but one on one but not the other? The other problem is the could make a case for a smaller or even a greater provision to give effect to change if more electors vote reduction. The principal point is that there is a case for yes than no. If there is a turnout of only 20 per cent of reducing the size of the House. However, there is a electors and they split 51 per cent to 49 per cent in necessary corollary to such a reduction—that there favour of change, to what extent can one claim that must be a corresponding reduction in the number of the change enjoys legitimacy through endorsement by Ministers. Indeed, in our report we argued that there the people? I appreciate that there are problems with was a case for having fewer Ministers, even if the size thresholds. One has a choice between having some of the House of Commons remained unchanged. Various form of threshold, be it in terms of turnout or the people who gave evidence to our commission, including proportion of those voting yes, or omitting or amending former Ministers, argued that there were too many Clause 8 so that the implementation of a yes vote is Ministers. We recognised that Ministers were seen to not automatic but instead is left to Parliament to be busy people but, as Frank Field put it to us, the determine what to do in the light of the turnout and amount of work increased to occupy the time made outcome. available by Ministers. The case for a reduction in On the second part of the Bill, I shall focus on the numbers was well put to us by my noble friend Lord reduction in the number of MPs rather than on Hurd of Westwell, who told us that, constituency boundaries. On the provisions for boundary “a decision by an incoming Prime Minister to abolish twenty changes, I confine myself to endorsing some of the ministerial posts at different levels would not only be popular but proposals embodied in the report by the British Academy would be followed immediately by an adjustment of workload. Policy Centre entitled Drawing a New Constituency The Whips and those who enjoy exercising or receiving patronage Map for the United Kingdom. In particular, I see the would be dismayed, but the benefits would be great”. case for providing for an extra period of consultation, A reduction is not only desirable but also essential following publication of representations received in if the number of MPs is reduced. So far, the Government the initial 12-week period, in order for counterobjections have resisted attempts to amend the Bill to provide for to be made, thus following the practice of New Zealand a reduction proportionate to the reduction in the size and Australia. I also endorse the proposal for more of the House. The Minister in the other place, David assistant commissioners to be appointed, not least for Heath, argued that the demands of government dealing with the representations made on boundary necessitated the number of Ministers. If my noble proposals. friend wishes to argue that when the debate finishes, I I turn to Clause 11 and the provision that the will be interested to see what empirical support he is number of constituencies in the United Kingdom able to provide. shall be 600. I support a reduction in the size of the The other argument advanced is that the issue House of Commons. I chaired the Conservative Party’s could be considered later and does not need to be Commission to Strengthen Parliament, which reported addressed in the Bill. I do not accept that argument. I in 2000; my noble friend Lord Forsyth was a member. do not regard reducing the size of the House of We were more radical than what is proposed here in Commons by almost 10 per cent to be a matter of terms of numbers, though less ambitious in terms of greater importance than the fundamental relationship timing. We favoured a staggered reduction in the number between Parliament and the Executive—in this case, of constituencies. That would give time for not only between the House of Commons and the part of it the Boundary Commission to prepare, but also the that forms the Government. I do not wish to see the parties and the Members themselves. Government strengthened through a reduction in the My noble friend the Marquess of Salisbury introduced number of MPs. The so-called payroll vote—or rather a Parliamentary Government Bill in 1999 providing the jobsworth vote, as it includes unpaid PPSs—is for a staggered reduction over a 20-year period. At already too large. It will be even more so if the Bill is the end of that period there would be a House of enacted. I know that providing for a reduction in the 400 members. We recommended a staggered reduction number of Ministers in the other place does not then 657 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 658 deal with the number of Ministers in this House or proposed the model for Parliament that we have followed with PPSs but that is not an argument for not amending for most of the past few centuries, Parliament’s the Bill. There is a compelling case for reducing the representation—or that of its lower House—has been number of Ministers and for doing so now, and then based on the boroughs and shires of this country. for addressing the other elements of patronage. There They were definable communities that knew where are too many PPSs, for example, and their independence they were. The nation is an aggregation of those has been eroded over time, but that fact is not a reason communities, and Parliament should be the aggregation not to move now in respect of the number of Ministers. of the representatives of those communities. When we published our report, the then party In one sense, this issue is irrespective of the nature leader, William Hague, described it as a route map of the voting system. You can have one, two and for a future Conservative Government. I hope the three-member constituencies—or even subregional Government will now revisit this issue with some constituencies—but the members must come from a urgency. It is a matter of constitutional significance. definable area where people understand what that community is—as the noble Lord, Lord Martin, and 12.15 am others have underlined in the course of this debate. If we move away from that principle and provide as the Lord Whitty: My Lords, at one point I felt that I overriding principle for setting constituency boundaries would give up on this debate and go home, but I am a given figure plus or minus 5 per cent, that will glad that I stayed. The last two speeches, by the noble override not only the sense of community but other Lords, Lord Plant and Lord Norton, bear serious layers of government—in particular local government— assessment by the Government and by this House. It is and the way in which people approach the political regrettable that the Bill before us is very partisan, but process. Noble Lords have talked about the way in it purports to address big issues: the nature of our which people became involved in inquiries. That is democracy and the standing of Parliament. We all true in some cases but not so true in others, but people know that neither of those can be entirely resolved become involved on the basis of the communities in simply by fiddling with the system, but we also know which they operate, whether they belong to voluntary that the system at present neither achieves a democratic organisations, political parties or churches. All sorts result nor improves the standing of our elected of people turn up to those inquiries because they wish representatives. to know who their representative is and how well the Unlike some of my colleagues, I do not have a firm community will be represented as a constituency. view on what the correct size of the House of Commons Of course the total number of voters in a constituency should be, and I am a supporter of some form of is important and of course we should not depart electoral reform on the grounds that my noble friend dramatically from that except in a few exceptional Lady Kennedy outlined earlier. However, the Bill is circumstances, but allowing a variation of 5 per cent is not suitable to address either matter. For example, far too tight a definition. A figure of 20 per cent would surely the size of the House of Commons must take be closer. The number of voters is not the most account of what other elected representatives exist, important factor either, because the total population both here—when we have reformed this House—and of constituencies can differ dramatically from those in the devolved Administrations, and the number of that are on the register, as other noble Lords have councillors that we have. If we look at international pointed out. Therefore, as well as the numbers on the comparisons, it is clear that we have roughly the same electoral roll, the boundary commissions should take number of MPs as France and Italy and rather more into account other considerations such as the total per head of population than Germany. However, if population, community identities, local authority you take the total number of elected representatives, boundaries, the views of local individuals and institutions we have far fewer. Unless you take this big picture into and the whole question of sparsity and accessibility account, there is no answer to the question of how for constituents. Many such issues need to be balanced many MPs there should be. out. To present this House with a system that has one On voting systems, I said that I am in favour of overriding concept does not serve democracy well and reform, but AVis not my favourite form of reform and certainly does not serve representative democracy well. I do not believe that it will achieve the objectives that I wish to make two points from a party point of the Liberal Democrats have been pressing on us for view. First, if you base this issue simply on communities, many years. AV reinforces swings and, by and large, you may get a distorted aggregate picture but you region by region, reinforces the position of the top two adjust that by having a proportionate element built in parties. The Liberal Democrats might gain a few seats as well, as happens in Scotland and Wales and in the in the south-west, but in most places they would not post-war’s most successful democracy in Germany. If gain. If the Bill is being put forward to keep the we do not do that but base constituencies simply on coalition together or to provide some advantage to the electoral size, which can change significantly over five Liberal Democrats, I am afraid that that party’s Members years, we will have a situation where—to end up on a will be seriously disappointed. slightly cynical note—all parties will have Members of One central flaw in the Bill on which I want to Parliament looking over their shoulder at how their concentrate is the way in which its approach to deciding constituency may change. A chicken run will develop the boundaries and number of MPs will, in effect, and colleagues will fight each other over the nature of sacrifice the concept of community and replace that boundaries and over seats. In those circumstances, with one of statistical mean. Ever since the late Earl of good government will suffer and I suspect that good Leicester, otherwise known as Simon de Montfort, coalition government will suffer even more. 659 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 660

[LORD WHITTY] I would urge the Government to think again about I plead with the Government to look at the provisions reducing the number of MPs. again, both in terms of the principles of democracy I would also suggest that more thought be given to and localism that the Government have enunciated the very rigid new rules which the Bill proposes for and from the point of view of good governance. This drawing constituency boundaries. As I said, I am not Bill matches none of those objectives. I am sure that against the idea of a more equal distribution of voters the House of Lords will give it detailed consideration, per constituency; indeed the principle has long been but the Government should think again. written into the law. However, the inflexible rule that 12.23 am no constituency can be more than 5 per cent above or below the arbitrary figure of 75,800 does not make Baroness Healy of Primrose Hill: My Lords, I wish allowances for natural boundaries, local authority areas to focus my remarks on Part 2 of the Bill as I am or regional and community identities. As a Londoner, concerned about the proposals to change constituency I may have difficulties recognising the important differences boundaries and reduce the size of the Commons from between Devon and Cornwall, but I am absolutely 650 to 600 Members. I want to make clear at the outset sure that those living there do not, as my noble friend that I am not against the principle of equality and Lord Myners so eloquently confirmed earlier. therefore can see the need for more equal numbers of voters per constituency, but I am worried that the Bill Mention has already been made that more than pursues that objective in a partisan and inflexible way, 3.5 million eligible voters are likely to be missing from which may do as yet unforeseen damage to our the 2010 electoral register. The Electoral Commission parliamentary system. I also believe that its proposals says that the missing millions are largely younger, to cut the number of MPs are not based on a true poorer people, ethnic minorities, people living in private understanding of the nature of how constituencies rented accommodation, and predominantly located in work and the way the public engage with their urban areas. The commission also reported in March representatives. that there were 100,000 unregistered voters in Glasgow alone. If they were all counted, the city would warrant I should be interested to hear why the figure of 600 at least one extra seat, but that will not happen under has been chosen as the right number adequately to this rushed timetable. If these missing millions are represent the United Kingdom—it was not a figure ignored in the redrawing of boundaries, it will have a suggested in either of the two parties’ manifestos that distorting effect on the electoral map and unforeseen now form the coalition, nor was it included in the social consequences whereby government bodies do coalition’s programme for government. That is a serious not recognise the true nature of the communities they omission because the proposed reduction of 50 seats is should be supporting with grants per head, and so the most dramatic shake-up of Parliament since Irish on. Where these people are not missing is in MPs’ Members were removed from Westminster following surgeries up and down the country, seeking help, the partition of Ireland in 1921. advice and advocacy. Just because they are not on the I believe that this drive to cut the number of MPs electoral register does not mean that these people do somehow diminishes their work. The Commons has not exist—they do. not in fact grown disproportionately in recent years. It In conclusion, this Bill needs to be revised to make has increased by only 25 Members—just over 3 per it fairer and more practical. It needs to be more cent—since 1950, but the electorate has increased by responsive to the level of parliamentary representation 25 per cent over that time. This has dramatically that citizens want. It needs to strike a better balance increased the caseload of MPs and I do not believe that between the speed of a boundary review, the strictness fewer MPs will reduce the demand for their services. of an adherence to electoral equality, and the strong This Bill fails to recognise the real work of MPs—not tradition of public involvement in boundary reviews only in Parliament but in their constituencies. MPs are that underpins the legitimacy of our widely admired vital to the communities they represent, often as the system. last port of call for those in severe difficulties in regard to their housing, health, education, anti-social behaviour 12.28 am harassment, immigration status and every other issue where people find themselves up against the brick Lord Jones: My Lords, if the lecture of the noble walls of inflexible bureaucracy. I know of offices that Lord, Lord Norton, is half as good as his shrewd receive an average of 200 e-mails a day on top of the speech, his lecture room will be full to overcrowded letters, phone calls and face-to-face surgery cases, all later today. There have been many twists and turns in asking for their MP’s help. this debate, and one thing that remains in my mind is the rather elegant point made by the noble Lord, Lord MPs are often the focal point of community activities, Forsyth, who said that we are legislating to denude too—the pensioners groups, the school prize giving membership of the other place, the House of Commons, and the veterans’ fundraising. This surely is the big while here we are facilitating ever-more overcrowding society at local level. The 7th report of the Select by receiving and introducing more Barons and Baronesses. Committee on the Constitution on this Bill, published I do not think that you should have two Bills in one. just last week, shares my concern about the proposals This is an error and it may become more obviously an to cut the size of the Commons. In paragraph 29, the error as the stages of the Bill proceed here in your committee states: Lordships’ House. “We conclude that the Government have not calculated the proposed reduction in the size of the House of Commons on the In his wise speech, my noble friend Lord Plant referred basis of any considered assessment of the role and functions to the advance of the nationalist parties. I find it of MPs”. astounding that they are in office in Belfast, in Cardiff 661 Parliamentary Voting System Bill[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Parliamentary Voting System Bill 662 and in Edinburgh—and rather speedily so. Perhaps One thing that comes out of the Bill is that there are that reflects discontent with some processes, but I will a number of electoral commissions in the United not argue strongly on that point at this hour of the day. Kingdom and, because of that, Scotland, Wales and To debit 10 seats from Wales’s parliamentary account Northern Ireland will not have the problem of is unjust. Wales’s MPs do a sound job of propelling parliamentary constituencies crossing those boundaries. Wales’s needs to the forefront of proceedings in the I want to come back to the issue of natural mother of Parliaments. We are talking of Wales’s communities, mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord parliamentary birthright. Our people in the constituencies Myners, and the opposition Front Bench. Although I look to their MPs for help. They get it—and they get it believe that constituencies should be roughly the same in the constituencies. The modern MP of whatever size, as that is important for electoral democracy and party gives constant service to the underprivileged, to equity, I do not think that the notion should be so the poor and to local groups and bodies who make firmly adhered to that it destroys or breaks away from their often bewildered and exasperated way to advice natural communities. That is why, as someone who bureaux and MPs’ surgeries. This is not the time to lives in Cornwall, I would also support a limited denude Wales of Westminster champions. Throughout change to the second part of the Bill so as to allow the debate, the sense of community has been heavily some of those natural communities to be represented emphasised. I would be dismayed to see the two Flintshire properly. I agree with my noble friend Lord Oakeshott parliamentary seats hacked about: that would not be a about the Isle of Wight—that seems to be a sensible good thing. proposition—and it seems that a proper case can also Westminster too often legislates first and later picks be put with regard to Ynys Mon in Wales, as well as up the unintended consequences of careless, hasty some additional ones in Scotland. legislation. Our contemporary parliamentary history I thought it was a pity that the noble Lord, Lord is littered with depressing examples of legislative mistakes. Myners, brought a very party-political angle to the I suggest a pause for thought and a rethink—in this Cornish issue. If he were here—unfortunately, he is instance, to Wales’s advantage. To the coalition, perhaps, not in his place at the moment—I would say to him, as the concepts of the Bill are beguiling, but in the cold someone who co-ordinated the Keep Cornwall Whole light of day, despite this miserable hour, it is clear that campaign in Cornwall, that that campaign goes across Wales needs every Member of Parliament that it has. all political parties, including the Conservatives, the The economy of Wales is under major pressure. The Liberal Democrats, the Labour Party, Mebyon Kernow society of Wales is undergoing rapid change. We should and the Greens. We are united in trying to protect the draw back from striking out 10 Members. Now is not boundary of the Tamar and therefore its historical, the time to shrink the Welsh parliamentary forces. cultural and community regions. That is something that I would like to bring forward in amendments to 12.32 am the Bill as it progresses through Committee. Lord Teverson: My Lords, I thank all noble Lords With regard to referenda and electoral change, I say who have stayed here for so long to enjoy my two and “Bring it on”. It is time that we changed the way that a half minutes of fame in this debate. The bad news is the country votes for its Members of Parliament. How that, having already missed my last train, I might as can I as a democrat argue against giving the people well stay here and speak until at least three o’clock in that choice rather than just parliamentarians? Let us the morning, or until whenever the café downstairs reduce the number of parliamentarians and spread opens for breakfast. power down through national Assemblies and national Parliaments and to principal local authorities. I speak I have enjoyed much of the debate so far. In terms as a member of the unitary authority of Cornwall. of the Bill generally, I agree absolutely with the idea of reducing the size of the House of Commons. I have I shall finish there. It is time that we all had our never been a Member of that particular House of cocoa, headed for the trains and went to bed before Parliament, although I have been a Member of another resuming this stimulating debate tomorrow. I rest Parliament. However, it seems to me that, as has been my case. said, a reduction to 600 MPs may be rather modest. I should have thought that reducing the number to 500, staged in the manner suggested by my noble friend Debate adjourned until tomorrow. Lord Norton, would be a good approach to the issue, although that is not really the matter on which I wanted to speak. House adjourned at 12.37 am.

WS 27 Written Statements[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Statements WS 28

Next the council discussed the sixth report from the Written Statements Commission on the maintenance of visa requirements with third countries. Commissioner Malmstrom said Monday 15 November 2010 progress was being made on the lack of Czech-Canada reciprocity. The council then adopted an amendment to the common visa list to grant Albania and Bosnia- Herzegovina nationals access to the Schengen area EU: Justice and Home Affairs Council without an EU visa, subject to a strengthened monitoring Statement mechanism to allow for a rapid suspension in the event of a sudden inflow. Ministers from Albania and Bosnia-Herzegovina joined the council for this item to The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord welcome the decision. The UK will not be affected by McNally): My right honourable friend the Lord changes to the regulation on the common visa as it Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice Kenneth builds on elements of the Schengen acquis in which we Clarke, my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under- do not participate. Secretary for Crime Prevention James Brokenshire Following mixed committee, the presidency gave a and Kenny MacAskill the Scottish Secretary for Justice progress report on those dossiers being prioritised by attended the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 8 and the Belgian presidency under the common European 9 November in Brussels. asylum system noting that the council was close to The council began with mixed committee with Norway, agreement on the Dublin and Eurodac regulations, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland (non-EU Schengen although several delegations intervened to argue for states). The Commission provided an update on the the inclusion in the latter of law enforcement access. progress of the second generation of the Schengen The UK acknowledged the presidency’s determined Information System II (SIS II). Since there were no efforts to reach agreement on these measures, but major developments reported, it was suggested it may thought the EU’s emphasis should be on practical not be necessary to discuss SIS II at every council as co-operation. The UK highlighted that support for was the present standing commitment. Greece was vital, that the Greek action plan was a real Next the council noted progress towards an amending step forward, but there was an urgent need to act with regulation on FRONTEX, the EU external borders strong leadership by the Commission. The UK stated agency. The new regulation is intended to increase the that in the right circumstances we could send asylum capacity of FRONTEX to strengthen the security and caseworkers to support Greece, but there had to be a surveillance of the external Schengen borders, to develop proper funding source at EU level. The UK highlighted relationships with third countries, and to better assist that Dublin should be supported, not suspended. Rather member states to return those with no right to remain than legislation that would increase the rights of all in the EU. The UK is not directly affected as the asylum seekers (whether or not their claims were valid), amending regulation relates to those elements of the member states should provide faster protection for Schengen acquis in which we do not participate. However, those in need, whilst protecting EU asylum systems the Government support the extension of FRONTEX’s from abuse. remit to allow it to handle the personal data of those Over lunch Interior Ministers discussed solidarity suspected of involvement in criminality at the border. in the field of immigration and asylum and, at the We believe that being able to gather and share these request of Germany, the aviation security incident, data with other agencies, such as Europol, is vital to involving cargo freight originating in Yemen. The UK FRONTEX’s contribution to the fight against human updated on the current threat and its response to date. trafficking and smuggling. The Commission confirmed The UK also raised the importance of an EU PNR that it had dropped its opposition to FRONTEX directive that included intra-EU flights. handling personal data, but emphasised that the purpose should be limited, with necessary safeguards on data The French Minister also informed the council of protection and the respect of human rights. the establishment of a Mediterranean Office for Youth The Commission updated council on the draft in 2011; an intergovernmental initiative to improve regulation establishing a network of immigration liaison mobility for young people through, for example, work officers, with a view to reaching agreement between experience opportunities. council and Parliament before the end of the Belgian After lunch council conclusions on the creation and presidency. The amended regulation is intended to implementation of an EU policy cycle on organised strengthen the EU’s capacity to address illegal migration, crime (project Harmony) were adopted. The mechanism and seeks to achieve greater benefit from immigration should allow an intelligence-led approach to prioritising liaison officer (ILO) networks for FRONTEX and the and tackling agreed threats from serious organised Commission. The UK supported the proposal’s aim to crime. strengthen partnership working on illegal immigration, but objected to the failure of the text to reflect the The presidency then sought a firm political steer application of the UK and Irish opt-in protocol. The on the way forward for implementation of the UK had a right to opt in to measures pursuant to this Prum council decisions. The UK stated that it would part of the treaty and highlighted that a recital should not meet the August 2011 deadline for implementation. be inserted to reflect the Government’s decision to opt The UK acknowledged the offer of EU funding and in. The UK would not be able to support agreement suggested the deadline should be reconsidered. The until that amendment was made. UK could not support harmonisation of post-hit WS 29 Written Statements[LORDS] Written Statements WS 30 operational business rules. The presidency called on Over lunch Justice Ministers received a presentation all member states to fulfil their commitments and from the presidency on whether EU action was required make use of the support available. to enhance cross-border co-operation in border regions: this was intended to give guidance to the EU prosecutors Under AOB the Commission presented its initiative forum at the end of November. for a regulation on the marketing and use of explosives. The regulation proposes to limit access by the general Pensions public to specific chemicals that can be used to manufacture home-made explosives by restricting their Statement use and possession above set concentration thresholds. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department There was no discussion. for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): My honourable The Hungarians called on the presidency and friend the Minister for Pensions (Steve Webb) has Commission to focus on the eastern partnership and made the following Statement. on delivering a migration dialogue with the Russian I am pleased to announce that for 2011-12 the rates Federation during discussions on the Prague Process- for both the PPF administration levy and the general Building Migration Partnerships. The process is intended levy will remain at the same levels set for 2010-11. to implement strengthened practical and operational Some of the administrative resource costs of the co-operation with main countries of transit and origin Pensions Regulator (tPR), the Pension Protection Fund based on the global approach to migration—specifically (PPF), the Pensions Advisory Service (TPAS) and the the eastern migration route, which includes the Czech Pensions Ombudsman (PO) are recovered through Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. levies raised on pension schemes. The rates for these On the justice day the Commission presented its levies are set in regulations. proposal for a directive on attacks against IT systems Levy rates in year are set to avoid frequent changes which would replace the existing framework decision, and do not directly reflect forecast future costs but which was part of a broader package of measures to also take into account accumulated deficits or surpluses combat cybercrime. The presidency looked forward to in expected levy collection. In holding rates stable, the negotiations under the Hungarian presidency. The Government are seeking to avoid additional cost pressures Government are considering whether the UK should on pension schemes. The rates have remained unchanged opt in to this proposal. since 2008; this stability will be welcomed by levy payers, pension scheme trustees, members and sponsoring There was an orientation debate on the European employers. Investigation Order (EIO) which deals with cross-border requests for evidence in criminal proceedings. The UK Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for supported the proposal but highlighted that some Pensions (Steve Webb) has made the following Statement. issues needed further debate at working group level, in Starting from today, the Government are running a particular grounds of refusal. We needed to look study exercise to look at ways of making better use of further at cost, proportionality and dual criminality, the data they hold about individuals, both from DWP in particular in relation to coercive matters. Proportionality administrative records and those of Her Majesty’s must be a consideration in both the issuing and executing Revenue and Customs in order to help improve take-up state. The presidency concluded that it would report of pension credit. on progress in December after further negotiations. This study has been designed to meet the following The presidency then provided an information point objectives: on the directive on the right to information in criminal provide information about how people might feel proceedings. This is the second measure in the road about a system which makes more use of personal map for strengthening criminal procedural rights and information that the Government already hold to it aims to set common minimum standards and improve pay people pension credit without the need for a the rights of suspects and accused persons by ensuring claim; that they receive information about their rights. The evaluate ways of using the data available to the presidency stated that while progress has been made Government to improve take-up under the current on this directive, it was essential to take account of the pension credit regime; common law systems. The Commission reiterated this deliver evidence about how in the long term a and encouraged member states to support the presidency reshaping of the benefit or acquisition of better in finding a solution that worked for all. The presidency data might enable the Government to radically will seek a general approach on this directive at the streamline the process for awarding pension credit. JHA Council on December 2 and 3. This study will involve making awards of estimated The Commission presented the mid-term review of pension credit to a randomly selected group of some the drugs action plan and stressed the seriousness 2,000 pensioners who, based on the personal information of the drug abuse problem in Europe and the need for held, appear to be entitled to pension credit but not implementation of the plan. It accepted that it was not claiming it. These payments of benefit will be made the right moment to expect higher investment in drug for 12 weeks without those selected first needing to prevention and treatment programmes but it was also have made a claim. The first payments will be made in not the moment to cut investment. The European December and conclude in March 2011. Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction At the end of the study there will be a thorough (EMCDDA) presented its annual report which was evaluation, with initial findings expected from summer published on 10 November. 2011. WS 31 Written Statements[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Statements WS 32

Sport The Terrorism Order 2009 contains a provision that designations made under the previous Terrorism Orders Statement 2001 and 2006 expired on 31 August 2010 and that beyond 31 August, freezes can only be made, or renewed, Baroness Garden of Frognal: My honourable friend under the 2009 Order. All persons subject to domestic the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, terrorist asset freezes in the UK are now subject to the Olympics, Media and Sport (Hugh Robertson) has 2009 order and benefit from the additional safeguards made the following Written Ministerial Statement. set out in that order compared to the previous orders. Following my Statement of 20 July (Official Report, Licensing col. WS 62-64) on the coalition Government’s priorities Maintaining an effective licensing system is important for sport, I am today announcing the community to ensure the overall proportionality and fairness of sport and mass participation Olympic legacy programme, the asset-freezing regime, whether the individuals Places People Play. concerned are subject to an asset freeze in accordance Places People Play will be delivered by Sport England, with a UN or EC listing, or domestic terrorism legislation. in partnership with the British Olympic Association A licensing framework is put in place for each individual (BOA), the British Paralympic Association (BPA) and on a case-by-case basis. The key objective of the the London Organising Committee of the Olympic licensing system is to strike an appropriate balance and Paralympic Games (LOCOG.) It is a £135 million between minimising the risk of diversion of funds to lottery-funded initiative that will help build and upgrade terrorism and meeting the human rights of affected sports facilities, protect playing fields and create sporting individuals and their families. Licences contain appropriate opportunities and challenges to encourage people up controls to protect against the risk of the diversion of and down the country to get into sport—whether that funds for terrorist finance. be as a participant, leader or volunteer. This investment Eighteen licences were issued this quarter in relation has been made available through the Government’s to 15 persons subject to an asset freeze under the lottery reforms that have resulted in more lottery al-Qaeda and Taliban and domestic terrorism regimes. money going to sport. Of these 18 licences, 11 revoked and replaced earlier This programme will help to deliver Lord Coe’s licences. There were no variations to licences this commitment to a lasting sports legacy to the London quarter. 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Over the coming Proceedings months Sport England will engage with the national governing bodies of sport and other key delivery In the quarter July to September 2010, no proceedings partners to ensure that this commitment is realised. were taken for breaches of the prohibitions of the Terrorism Orders or the al-Qaeda and Taliban (Asset- Terrorism: Finance Freezing) Regulations. Developments Statement The Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc Bill—The Bill has The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord completed its passage through the House of Lords Sassoon): My honourable friend the Financial Secretary and Second Reading in the House of Commons takes to the Treasury has today made the following Written place on 15 November 2010. Ministerial Statement. Kadi v Commission—Yassin Abdullah Kadi was The Government are committed to reporting quarterly listed under EC Regulation 881/2002. This Regulation on the operation of the UK’s terrorist asset-freezing gives effect to the UN al-Qaeda and Taliban asset regime. We believe this is essential to ensure transparency freezing regime (UNSCR1267) in the EU. Mr Kadi and accountability of the regime. The Terrorist Asset- challenged his listing under this regulation, arguing Freezing etc Bill will enshrine the commitment to that it breached his fundamental rights under European report quarterly to Parliament in law. law. This report covers the period July to September On 30 September the European General Court 2010.1 upheld Mr Kadi’s challenge, annulling the EC regulation, Asset-freezing designations in so far as it applied to Mr Kadi. The judgment will take effect on 10 December unless an appeal is lodged, In the quarter July to September 2010, the Treasury in which case it will be stayed until the appeal has been gave no new directions under the UK’s domestic terrorist decided. asset-freezing regime. The Kadi case concerns how EU member states During this quarter, the EU added seven people to implement their obligations to freeze the assets of EC Regulation 881/2002, implementing the UN al-Qaeda sanctioned individuals under the UN al-Qaeda and and Taliban asset freezing regime established under Taliban regime. It does not concern the UK’s domestic UNSCR 1267. terrorist asset freezing regime. As of 30 September 2010, a total of 205 accounts 1 The detail that can be provided to the House on a quarterly 2 containing just under £290,000 of suspected terrorist basis is subject to the need to avoid the identification, directly or funds were frozen in the UK. indirectly, of personal or operationally sensitive information. Reviews under the Terrorism Orders 2 This figure reflects account balances at time of freezing and The Treasury keeps domestic asset-freezing cases includes approximately $58,000 of suspected terrorist funds frozen in the UK. This has been converted using exchange rates under review and completed 34 reviews in this quarter. as of 15.10.10. Future fluctuations in the exchange rate may From these 34 reviews 13 persons had their designations impact on the contribution this sum makes to future totals of revoked. suspected terrorist funds frozen.

WA 149 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 150 Written Answers BBC: World Service Question Monday 15 November 2010 Asked by Lord Laird To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the 1999 School Premises Regulations total expenditure of the BBC World Service last Questions year. [HL3532] Asked by Baroness Tonge The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): According to the they have made towards finalising the updated 1999 BBC World Service annual review, the total operating School Premises Regulations which were awaiting costs of the BBC World Service for 2009-10 were Ministerial sign-off before the general election. £280.6 million. [HL3537] To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures they are taking to consider as a matter of urgency Benefits the updated 1999 School Premises Regulations. Question [HL3538] Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): As part of its work to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment streamline and consolidate existing legislation, regulations they have made of the effect of continuing to pay and guidance affecting school buildings, the capital universal child benefits irrespective of income if the review team led by Sebastian James is reviewing what benefit (a) ceased to be payable at age 16, (b) was is currently in place with a view to developing a new paid in respect of only two children in any household, and simplified structure for the way ahead. This work and (c) was taxable. [HL3558] encompasses the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999 and earlier recommendations to update them. The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord The capital review, a comprehensive review of capital Sassoon): The Government consider a range of options investment in schools, was announced by the Secretary when formulating policy. The Chancellor announced of State on 5 July. We expect to receive its main that child benefit will be withdrawn from families recommendations at the end of the year and this containing a higher rate taxpayer from January 2013, should include proposals for new, improved regulations as it is not fair for those earning just £15,000 or and guidance on school buildings. £30,000 to go on paying the child benefit of those earning £50,000 or £100,000. The Chancellor also announced that no further changes to child benefit are Autism to be made. Question Asked by Lord Touhig Bolivia To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures Question will be set out in the forthcoming statutory guidance on autism services Implementing Fulfilling and Asked by Lord Ashcroft Rewarding Lives to ensure that all community care assessments of adults with autism are carried out To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they by those with training in autism, in light of the have made a decision regarding the ceasing of aid recommendations in the House of Commons Public to Bolivia. [HL3757] Accounts Committee report Supporting Adults with Autism into Adulthood, published in October 2009. Baroness Verma: The Department for International [HL3681] Development (DfID) does not have a bilateral development programme with the Government of Bolivia. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, DfID’s office in Bolivia (covering the Andean region) Department of Health (Earl Howe): In preparing draft closed in September 2008. In 2008, DfID adopted a guidance for consultation, account was taken of all twin-pronged strategy of supporting civil society available evidence, including the work and findings of organisations (CSOs), alongside core contributions the National Audit Office. to multilateral agencies such as the World Bank, The national consultation on the statutory guidance Inter-American Development Bank and European closed on 22 October 2010. We are currently in the Commission, to assist poor people in Bolivia. process of analysing the response, which will inform DfID is undertaking a review of its multilateral and the further development of the statutory guidance. bilateral aid programmes. The two reviews aim to Ministers will then consider a revised draft and take ensure that UK aid is focused on areas where it can final decisions on content. We would not wish nor have maximum impact. The reviews will be completed would it be appropriate to anticipate this process. in early 2011. WA 151 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 152

Burundi Access to Diego Garcia is also governed by the 1976 UK/US Exchange of Notes and is in general Questions restricted to members of the forces of the United Asked by Lord Chidgey Kingdom and of the United States, the Commissioner and public officers in the service of BIOT, representatives To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their of the Governments of the United Kingdom and assessment of measures taken against Burundian United States and, subject to normal immigration civil society and journalists, including the arrest of requirements, contractor personnel. Access for any Jean Claude Kavumbagu and Faustin Ndikumana, other person is a matter for consultation between the and statements by the Minister of Interior and the UK and US authorities. Police Director General to the effect that journalists and civil society should not be working on justice Charities: VAT and security issues. [HL3606] Question The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Asked by Baroness Smith of Basildon Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): We are aware of the To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment arrest of Burundian journalists Jean Claude Kavumbagu they have made of the impact on charities of the and Faustin Ndikumana on security related charges increase in the standard rate of VAT to 20 per cent. and are following developments in these cases closely, [HL3166] together with EU partners. Asked by Lord Chidgey The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Sassoon): The charity sector currently benefits from To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their around £3 billion in tax relief, of which over £150 million assessment of measures taken against the political relates to relief from VAT. opposition in Burundi, including allegations of In the Budget we published the distributional impacts (a) torture of opposition activists by the National and the economic effects of the Budget. A full impact Intelligence Service (SNR) in June and July, (b) the assessment was also published on Budget Day. Government takeover of the FNL political party in August, (c) arrests of provincial and communal representatives of the opposition parties FNL, MSD, Commonwealth Frodebu, and UPD, and (d) recent allegations of Questions extrajudicial executions, documented by United Asked by Lord Laird Nations Integrated Office in Burundi (BINUB). [HL3607] To ask Her Majesty’s Government what qualifications are required for a state applying to Lord Howell of Guildford: There have been recent join the Commonwealth for its application to be unconfirmed reports of extrajudicial killings and incidents supported by the United Kingdom. [HL3685] of torture, allegedly by government agents, in Burundi. The Burundian Government have appointed a commission The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth to investigate. The opposition party, the Forces nationales Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The Commonwealth de liberation (FNL), has split after factional disputes Secretariat is responsible for considering applications allegedly encouraged by the Government. There were for membership. some reports of arrests of opposition political activists, The revised criteria for countries applying to join from parties calling for a boycott of the elections, over the Commonwealth were agreed by Commonwealth the May-August election period. We continue to monitor Heads of Government at their meeting in Kampala on the situation closely. 25 November 2007. These include: havinga historic constitutional association with an existing Commonwealth member; accepting Chagos Islands and complying with Commonwealth fundamental values, Question principles and priorities; demonstrating commitment to democracy, rule of law and good governance; accepting Asked by Lord Ashcroft Commonwealth norms and conventions such as use of To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether there the English language; and acknowledging Her Majesty are any restrictions on United Kingdom citizens Queen Elizabeth II as the Head of the Commonwealth. entering the Chagos Islands by sea. [HL3651] I have placed a copy of the Kampala communiqué, which sets out the criteria in full, in the Libraries of the Houses of Parliament. The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The British Indian Asked by Lord Laird Ocean Territory (Immigration) Order 2004 states that To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their no one may enter the British Indian Ocean Territory policy towards nations which seek to be part of the (BIOT) or be present there unless in possession of a Commonwealth. [HL3686] permit. The only exceptions to this are members of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces, public officers and officers Lord Howell of Guildford: The Commonwealth in the public service of the Government of the United Secretariat is responsible for considering applications Kingdom while on duty. for membership. WA 153 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 154

The revised criteria for countries applying to join Detention: Overseas Ministers the Commonwealth were agreed by Commonwealth Heads of Government at their meeting in Kampala on Question 25 November 2007. Asked by Lord Turnberg I have placed a copy of the Kampala communiqué, which sets out the criteria in full, in the Libraries of To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action the Houses of Parliament. they propose to take to prevent individuals from seeking to obtain the arrest and detention of ministers of overseas democratically elected governments when Commonwealth Development Corporation they visit the United Kingdom. [HL3547] Question The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Asked by Lord Ashcroft McNally): As I announced in a Written Ministerial Statement on 22 July (Official Report, cols. WS 96-97), To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress the Government intend to bring forward legislation to has been made on the review of the work of require the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions the Commonwealth Development Corporation, before an arrest warrant can be issued to a private announced by the Secretary of State for International prosecutor in respect of an offence of universal Development in September 2010. [HL3464] jurisdiction.

Baroness Verma: In his Written Statement to the Education Maintenance Allowance House on 12 October 2010, the Secretary of State for Question International Development set out the broad parameters Asked by Lord Watson of Invergowrie of his vision for a reconfigured CDC and announced that the Department for International Development To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment (DfID) would launch a public consultation to hear they have made of the impact of abolishing the views on CDC. The consultation was launched on education maintenance allowance on plans to raise 5 November 2010. DfID is also commissioning the participation age in education and training independent studies on CDC, the findings of which to 18. [HL3701] will be made public through DfID’s website. Details of the scope of the consultation exercise and studies, and The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for how to submit views, are available on the DfID website. Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): We are committed to making sure that every young person remains in education or training until they are 18. Where young people need Defence: UK-France extra support to realise their potential we will ensure that services are in place to support the most vulnerable. Question In reaching the decision to end education maintenance Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon allowance (EMA) we have looked closely at evaluation evidence and other research, which indicates that the To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they scheme does not effectively target those young people are negotiating with France to use French laboratory who need financial support to enable them to participate facilities to service the United Kingdom’s nuclear in learning. The evidence suggests that around 90 per warheads; and, if so, why the servicing cannot be cent of the young people who receive EMA would still carried out by United Kingdom nuclear establishments. have participated in learning if the scheme was not [HL2519] available. From 2011-12, EMA will be replaced by an enhanced The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry learner support fund that will be administered by of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): The Declaration on schools and colleges themselves, targeting those young Defence and Security Co-operation from the UK/France people who face a real financial barrier to participation. summit on 2 November 2010 states that the UK and France have decided to collaborate in the technology Education: Virtual Education associated with nuclear stockpile stewardship in support of our respective independent nuclear deterrent capabilities. Question This will be in full compliance with our international Asked by The Countess of Mar obligations through unprecedented co-operation at a To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they new joint facility at Valduc in France that will model plan to protect the funding for virtual education performance of our nuclear warheads and materials courses for young people over the age of 16 with to ensure long-term viability, security and safety. This myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome will be supported by a joint technology development which were previously funded by the Learning and centre at Aldermaston in the UK. Skills Council through the Nisai Virtual Academy, The declaration also states that the UK and France given that the Young People’s Learning Agency want to enable our forces to operate together, to refuses to recognise the Nisai Virtual Academy as a maximise our capabilities and to obtain greater value provider while local education authorities providing for money from our investment in defence. This does education for under 16s do recognise the academy. not affect the independence of the UK’s nuclear deterrent. [HL3702] WA 155 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 156

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): The Young People’s Sassoon): The Government have no plans to mandate Learning Agency (YPLA) has informed the Department the display of such information on projects in the UK for Education that following the receipt of an application undertaken by the European Union. from NISAI Virtual Academy (on 28 September 2010), the YPLA is currently considering NISAI Virtual Academy as a new provider through its process for Fluoridation considering new independent specialist providers for Question learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities. It expects to make a decision by next spring. Asked by Earl Baldwin of Bewdley In the mean time young people are able to access provision from the NISAI Virtual Academy via an To ask Her Majesty’s Government, with regard arrangement with Harrow College, which is funded by to the statement on the website of the National the YPLA. Fluoride Information Centre in the section Water, “Like ’York’ [the British Medical Research Council] concluded that areas of concern in the past no EU: Budget longer required any further investigation”, (a) which Question areas are referred to, and (b) in which sections of Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick the York report these conclusions can be found. [HL3571] To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the impact of a 2.9 per cent increase in the European Union budget on the United The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Kingdom’s budget. [HL3428] Department of Health (Earl Howe): We understand that the National Fluoride Information Centre is referring The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord to concerns about whether the fluoridation of water is Sassoon): The overall impact to the United Kingdom effective in improving oral health. A Systematic Review of implementing a 2.9 per cent increase in the EU of Water Fluoridation published by the NHS Centre budget compared to the decision by the European for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of Parliament to increase the EU budget by 5.8 per cent York concluded that “The best available evidence from would be a saving of around £350 million. studies on the initiation and discontinuation of water suggests that fluoridation does reduce caries prevalence, both as measured by the proportion of children who Export Industry are caries free and by the mean dmft/DMFT [decayed Question missing and filled teeth]”. Asked by Lord Dykes To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they Food: Pork and Bacon plan to promote the achievement of export surpluses in leading United Kingdom manufacturing sectors; Question and which sectors they will concentrate on.[HL3747] Asked by Lord Hoyle The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, To ask the Chairman of Committees , further to Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Baroness his Written Answer on 2 November 2009 (WA 385), Wilcox): Manufacturing has a vital contribution to whether the Refreshment Committee has reviewed make to the growth of the UK economy and is a key the comparative prices of British and Dutch bacon part of the Government’s strategy for rebalancing the since 13 May 2009. [HL3988] economy. We will shortly launch a manufacturing framework which will highlight key ambitions, identify growth opportunities and set out a new framework of The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of actions for Government and industry to ensure growth Tara): Catering and retail services compare the meat both domestically and globally. This future growth prices put forward by their contracted suppliers on a will come from companies across all sectors of business weekly basis. Since British bacon remains uneconomical responding to opportunities such as globalisation, for the River restaurant, the Refreshment Committee technological and demographic change. has not been asked to reconsider the issue.

Flags Gaza Question Question Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon Asked by Lord Hylton To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they consider that, where projects in the United Kingdom To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the are undertaken by the European Union and its European Union is putting into practice Baroness logo is on display, a Union Jack together with the Ashton of Upholland’s remarks at the Foreign message “Matching funds supplied by Her Majesty’s Affairs Council of 25 October about support for Government” should also be displayed when Palestinian state-building and access to Gaza for appropriate. [HL3470] both imports and exports. [HL3559] WA 157 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 158

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): We strongly support of Health (Earl Howe): As set out in our White Paper, the noble Baroness Ashton’s conclusion that the EU Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, we plan to needs to continue its influencing work with key reform the way that drug companies are paid for international stakeholders and its support for Palestinian National Health Service medicines by moving to a state-building and Gaza access and exports. The EU’s system of value-based pricing from 2014. This will support for Palestinian state-building work is through ensure licensed and effective drugs are available to the two year programme Palestine, Ending the Occupation NHS patients and clinicians at a price to the NHS that and Establishing the State, adopted in 2009 and the reflects the value they bring. The National Institute for Palestinian Reform and Development Plan for 2008-10. Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is recognised With regards to Gaza access and exports, we, together as an international leader in the evaluation of drugs with the EU and quartet, have called on Israel to ease and health technologies, and it will continue to have an restrictions on access and enable a return to economic important advisory role, including in assessing the normality. My right honourable friend the Foreign incremental therapeutic benefits of new medicines. Secretary discussed these issues with Prime Minister However, as we implement our plans for value-based Netanayhu during his recent visit. The Palestinian drug pricing from 2014, NICE’s role will inevitably economy, whether in Gaza or on the West Bank, will evolve. play an important role in contributing towards a viable Prior to the introduction of value-based pricing, we Palestinian state living alongside Israel in peace and will continue to ensure that the NHS funds drugs that security. have been positively appraised by NICE. Asked by Lord Crisp Government Departments: Salaries To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they Question have plans to issue a statement clarifying their expectation of the future relationship between GP Asked by Lord Newby consortia and the National Institute for Health and To ask Her Majesty’s Government what number Clinical Excellence. [HL3666] and percentage of Ministry of Defence staff have Earl Howe: As we have made clear in our White received, or are due to receive, increments in pay in Paper, Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, the year ended 5 April 2011; and what is the estimated general practitioner (GP) consortia will be responsible percentage and money increase in the department’s for making decisions about the range and nature of pay bill due solely to increments this year, disregarding services to commission in order best to respond to the promotions or general increases in pay scales. needs of their local population. Individual GPs will [HL2537] continue to be responsible for their referral and prescribing decisions. The National Institute for Health and Clinical The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry Excellence will continue to have an important role in of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): The department has providing advice to both commissioners and clinicians. a number of separate pay arrangements covering the Armed Forces, Senior Civil Service, mainstream civil Health: Nursing and Midwifery servants below the Senior Civil Service, specialist grades (such as fire service personnel, police, teachers, nurses Question etc) whose pay is analogued to outside comparators, Asked by Baroness Emerton locally engaged civilians overseas and those employed in trading funds and non-departmental public bodies. To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in light of the publication of the report Front line care by the Information on the elements of the pay bill solely Prime Minister’s Commission on the Future of related to progression for all these groups of staff is Nursing and Midwifery in England on 2 March, not readily available and could be provided only at when they will respond to the report; and how its disproportionate cost. recommendations will contribute to the formulation of policy on nursing and midwifery issues at a local Health: Drugs and national level. [HL3479] Questions The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Asked by Lord Crisp Department of Health (Earl Howe): Ministers and policy officials are considering the report in the light To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they of the new Government’s agenda. A response will be have to replace the single clinically led and issued in due course. scientifically based national assessment of drugs and therapies currently undertaken by the National Health: Vaccinations Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence with local arrangements. [HL3664] Question To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, and Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick to what extent, they expect general practitioners to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures follow the assessments of drugs and therapies made they will take to boost the number of children who by the National Institute for Health and Clinical receive the measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. Excellence and local arrangements. [HL3665] [HL3583] WA 159 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 160

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, of information from third parties (such as local authorities) Department of Health (Earl Howe): The department is were used during the intervention. It is not therefore maintaining its efforts to immunise as many children possible to give an answer to this question. as possible against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). HMRC records do, however, show a number of As a consequence, MMR vaccine uptake rates continue cases where detail of housing benefit paid was the to rise. Provisional data for April-June 2010 published main piece of third-party information used during an by the Health Protection Agency show 88.3 per cent of intervention. For 2008-09 (the year when it is most children in England had received the first MMR dose likely that 2007-08 information was used), HMRC by their second birthday, an increase of about five settled 202 income tax interventions which totalled percentage points over the preceding two years. £972,869 in additional tax, although not all the additional Primary care trusts (PCTs), strategic health authorities tax in these interventions was attributable to housing (SHAs) and the department monitor MMR vaccine benefit payments. uptake. The department is providing centrally purchased vaccine and online information to enable PCTs and Asked by Lord Greaves SHAs to improve the effectiveness of childhood To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion vaccination programmes. of households in receipt of (a) housing benefit, and The objective of the MMR immunisation programme (b) local housing allowance, have at least one member is to provide two doses of MMR vaccine at appropriate in work (1) in England, and (2) in Greater London. intervals for all eligible individuals. These doses are [HL3543] routinely offered at ages of around 13 months and between three years four months and five years old. Children who are unvaccinated or partially vaccinated The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, remain eligible to receive two doses of MMR vaccine Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): The atalaterage. table below details the number and proportion of claimants of housing benefit and local housing allowance who are passported/non passported and whether they House of Lords: Stationery are in employment, in Great Britain, England and Question London Government Office Region—July 2010

Asked by Lord Monson Great London Britain England GOR To ask the Chairman of Committees what is the cost, when bought in bulk, of a sheet of embossed All All 4,777,430 4,070,960 805,920 Housing House of Lords writing paper in A4 and A5 sizes. Benefit [HL3838] claimants All Caseload 3,253,580 2,743,510 527,630 The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of Passported Tara): The cost of an A4 sheet of embossed House of Proportion 68.1% 67.4% 65.5% Lords writing paper when bought in a ream is 3.4 pence. Non Caseload 679,730 612,290 157,440 passported in The equivalent cost for an AS sheet is 2 pence. employment Proportion 14.2% 15.0% 19.5% Housing Non Caseload 840,510 712,120 120,370 passported in Questions employment Asked by Lord Laird Proportion 17.6% 17.5% 14.9% Local All 1,091,410 971,840 185,530 To ask Her Majesty’s Government , further to Housing the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 1 November Allowance (WA 355), how many of the 301,809 local authority claimants All Caseload 641,780 566,620 99,730 landlord returns made in 2007–08 resulted in underpaid Passported tax being discovered; how much such tax was involved; Proportion 58.8% 58.3% 53.8% and whether the 45,257 voluntary returns made in Non Caseload 290,780 265,530 63,400 2008–09 were investigated by HM Revenue and passported in Customs. [HL3531] employment Proportion 26.6% 27.3% 34.2% The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Non Caseload 156,580 137,780 22,100 Sassoon): In respect of the financial year 2007-08, HM passported in employment Revenue and Customs (HMRC) received 244 returns Proportion 14.3% 14.2% 11.9% from local authorities containing a total of 301,809 records of payments of housing benefit paid directly Notes: to landlords. Details of these payments, along with 1. The data refer to benefit units, which may be a single person or 45,257 returns made in 2008-09, were made available a couple. to HMRC compliance staff for the purposes of risk 2. Caseload figures have been rounded to the nearest 10. assessment and, where appropriate, some form of Percentages to the nearest decimal place compliance intervention. HMRC maintains a record 3. SHBE is a monthly electronic scan of claimant level data of formal compliance interventions but the record direct from local authority computer systems. does not, in every case, contain details of which pieces It replaces quarterly aggregate clerical returns. WA 161 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 162

The data are available monthly from November 2008 and July Lord Freud: The department is working closely with 2010 is the latest. the Department for Communities and Local Government 4. People claiming housing benefit not in receipt of a passported (CLG) and the devolved Administrations to assist benefit are recorded as being in employment if their local families through the transition. For example, we have authority has recorded employment income from either the main trebled the discretionary housing payment funding to claimant, or partner of claimant (if applicable), in calculating the housing benefit award. local authorities. CLG has provided an additional £10 million homelessness prevention funding. This 5. Passported status does not include recipients with unknown passported status. has been paid to London local authorities this month. We are working with local authorities and providing 6. People claiming housing benefit who are classed as “passported” are in receipt of an income-related benefit: them with a communications tool kit which will help income-based JobSeeker’s allowance; income-based employment them raise awareness so households can take early and support allowance; income support; pension credit action. If practical help and good information is made (guaranteed credit) available to both tenants and landlords, problems can be minimised. Housing Benefit Asked by Lord Hylton Questions To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they Asked by Lord Bassam of Brighton will phase in changes in housing benefit in ways similar to those proposed for the single welfare To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment benefit. [HL3796] they have made of the impact of their plans to put a cap on housing benefit claims on community Lord Freud: Reform of housing benefit is long cohesion. [HL3436] overdue and expenditure must be curbed as a matter of priority. We must press ahead with the changes The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, we have announced. We have provided a substantial Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): increase in the discretionary housing payments budget Nationally, we estimate that 2 per cent of the private which will allow local authorities to give additional rented sector housing benefit caseload will be affected support and help people through the transition. We by the caps on local housing allowance rates. This have referred the proposed legislation to the Social should not have a significant impact in most communities Security Advisory Committee and will respond to its but some private rented sector tenancies in central report in due course. London will no longer be affordable to people who rely on housing benefit. We simply cannot continue to meet excessive rents in areas where, currently, only the very rich or people on benefit can afford to live. Housing: Squatters More generally, even with the introduction of the Question caps and reductions in local housing allowance rates to the 30th percentile, between 30 and 40 per cent of Asked by Lord Patel of Blackburn private rented sector tenancies should be affordable to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps housing benefit tenants. they are taking to protect private homeowners from The department published a document on Impacts squatters. [HL3742] of Housing Benefit proposals: Changes to the Local Housing Allowance to be introduced in 2011-12 on the 23 July and an equality impact assessment. Copies of The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord the documents have been placed in the Library. A further McNally): We are considering whether the law in economic impact assessment will be published alongside relation to squatting, or the way it is enforced, should the regulations. be strengthened, but we have not yet reached any firm Asked by Lord German conclusions. To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the proposed caps on housing benefits claims will be Inflation uprated with inflation; and, if so, which measure of inflation will be used. [HL3754] Question Asked by Lord Myners Lord Freud: We will uprate all local housing allowance rates in line with the consumer prices index from April To ask Her Majesty’s Government what methods 2013. Uprating of the overall caps will be considered are used by HM Treasury to monitor expectations in the context of that work, and we have no plans to for inflation. [HL3739] uprate caps before then. Asked by Lord Hylton The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps Sassoon): Publicly available independent surveys measure they are taking to protect families with young children expectations for inflation. Assessments of these can be from the immediate impact of reductions in housing found in the Monetary Policy Committee’s meeting benefit. [HL3795] minutes and Bank of England inflation reports. WA 163 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 164

Israel and Palestine Missing Persons: Deaths Question Question Asked by Lord Hylton Asked by Lord Boswell of Aynho To ask Her Majesty’s Government what To ask Her Majesty’s Government what recent representations they will make to the Government progress they have made, in consultation with interested of Israel regarding the 15 Palestinians injured by parties, to prepare legislation introducing a new gunshots and others harmed by tear gas in Silwan regime for handling the presumption of death of on 15 October. [HL3315] missing persons. [HL3465]

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): We are concerned McNally): My department has carefully considered by the attacks which have taken place in Silwan. We the draft proposals from the charity, Missing People, deplore all civilian casualties which have resulted from to reform the law of England and Wales relating to the this conflict. We recognise Israel’s right to defend itself presumed death of missing persons. However, in light from acts of violence but call on the Israeli Government of the need to concentrate our resources on the delivery to act with restraint and in accordance with international of our key priorities, we have decided not to take this law. We also call on the Palestinian Authority to work forward. We are grateful to Missing People for prevent acts of violence from originating in the Occupied its work on the draft proposals. Territories. National Employment Savings Trust Lisbon Treaty Question Question Asked by Lord German Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the National Employment Savings Trust will be obliged To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their to make contributions to the Pensions Regulator assessment of the part of the Lisbon treaty which along the same lines as a commercial pensions refers to ever closer union. [HL3467] provider; and, if not, what difference there will be. [HL3752] The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): References to “ever The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, closer union”have been included in the Rome, Maastricht Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): The and Amsterdam treaties. They were not altered by the occupational pension and personal pension general treaty of Lisbon. levy is intended to meet the running costs of the In referring to “creating an ever closer union among Pensions Regulator. It is a long-standing principle the peoples of Europe” the same clauses of the treaty underlying the payment of the general levy that the on European Union also state “in which decisions are cost of regulating such schemes should be borne by taken as closely as possible to the citizen in accordance the schemes themselves. The general levy is therefore with the principle of subsidiarity”and “in which decisions payable by all occupational pensions and personal are taken as openly as possible and as closely as pensions and this will include the National Employment possible to the citizen”. Savings Trust which will be an occupational pension scheme. While the bulk of the general levy funds the Pensions Regulator, it also goes towards meeting the Maternity Leave cost of services provided by the Pensions Advisory Question Service, and the Pensions Ombudsman. Asked by Lord Stoddart of Swindon Overseas Aid To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Wilcox on Question 1 November (WA 359) on the cost of maternity Asked by Baroness Tonge leave, whether they will inform the European Union To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they that, in the light of the serious financial situation will recommend, at the United Nations Human facing the United Kingdom, they will not implement Rights Council on 5 November, that the United the measure to increase maternity leave to 20 weeks States remove abortion restrictions placed on all on full pay. [HL3773] foreign aid. [HL3600] The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Baroness Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The United Kingdom Wilcox): The European Parliament’s vote is just the speaks at every universal periodic review of the UN first stage in this negotiation. The UK will be working Human Rights Council. We are candid with the United hard in council to oppose the imposition of a requirement States (US) about our concerns as well as encouraging for fully paid maternity leave. We know other member progress. For the review of the US we raised many states share our view that the European Parliament’s points in our advance questions, including on the issue proposals are entirely unacceptable. raised by the noble Baroness. WA 165 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 166

We are constrained in what we can cover in our formula and that for additional learning support. Details review statement by being restricted to two minutes of the 16-18 funding formula for schools and colleges speaking time. However, we have continuous dialogue can be found on the website of the Young People’s with the US on human rights and we will continue to Learning Agency at http://readingroom.ypla.gov.uk/ raise issues where our policies differ. ypla/funding rates and formula v2.2.pdf and that for apprenticeships on the Skills Funding Agency website Primary Care Trusts at http://readingroom.skillsfundingaqency.bis.gov.uk/ Question sfa/Apprenticeship-funding-requirements-2010_11- v1.pdf. Asked by Baroness Gould of Potternewton To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to ensure that primary care trusts Schools: Water Supply honour the Government’s commitment to protect Questions front line services. [HL3621] Asked by Baroness Tonge The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): On 21 June 2010 To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps the department published a revision to the Operating they are taking to ensure that those schools which Framework for the National Health Service in England are receiving capital funding grants for new premises 2010-11 that set out that primary care trusts (PCTs) under the building schools for the future programme would be held to account for the delivery of operational will have toilet facilities which are in line with the plans submitted in March 2010 with the exception of recommendations set out in the new guidelines the removal of three process targets and a change in based on the 1999 School Premises Regulations. the threshold of another. The 2010 spending review [HL3539] settlement protected the health budget with a 0.1 per To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures cent real terms increase in PCT allocations for 2011-12. they are taking to ensure that schools have toilet The NHS Operating Framework for 2011-12 will set facilities compliant with the 1999 School Premises out each PCT’s allocation and the department’s Regulations in those schools that will not be receiving expectation on what PCTs need to do in terms securing additional capital funding following the cancellation the delivery of services. of the building schools for the future programme. Prisoners: Mental Health [HL3540] Question To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures they are taking to ensure that toilet and drinking Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick water facilities in schools are at the same standards To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they for pupils and for members of school staff.[HL3541] plan to reduce the number of mentally ill criminals To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans who are sent to prison. [HL3830] they have to introduce a binding code of practice The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord for toilet and drinking water facilities for pupils in McNally): The Government are committed to diverting schools which would be equivalent to the standards mentally ill offenders from custody where appropriate. for school staff under the Workplace (Health, Safety Delivery of this commitment will be strengthened by and Welfare) Regulations 1992. [HL3542] interdepartmental plans to provide mental health liaison and diversion services in England, in police stations The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for and courts, by 2014. Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): Reviewing the requirements for toilets and drinking water provision, Schools: Pupil Premium which are and will be the same for both new and Question existing schools, forms part of the exercise to streamline Asked by Lord Greaves and consolidate existing legislation, regulations and guidance affecting school buildings. This review is To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the part the work that we have commissioned from pupil premium will be payable in respect of students Partnerships for Schools for the capital review. at (a) sixth form colleges, (b) further education Currently, requirements for toilets and drinking colleges which are responsible for all or most sixth water for pupils and visitors in schools are contained form provision in an area under a “tertiary system”, in the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999. and (c) other further education colleges providing Those for teachers and other school staff are set out in sixth form courses. [HL3341] the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools 1992. We are reviewing both sets of requirements, (Lord Hill of Oareford): The 16-18 funding formula together with earlier recommendations to update the already has an element that ensures disadvantaged school premises regulations, so that we will establish learners attending schools and colleges, or who are one set of standards for all school buildings. funded as an apprentice, receive a funding premium. At present the responsibility for ensuring that schools Theformulahastwocomponentswhichprovidedisadvantaged conform to the school premises regulations generally learners with a funding supplement. These are the rests with local authorities, while responsibility for funding linked to the disadvantage uplift within the ensuring compliance with the workplace regulations WA 167 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 168 sits with the Health and Safety Executive. The means We will publish a document on the impacts of the for ensuring compliance in the future, when there is proposed changes to the shared room rate in due one set of standards, are under consideration as part course, which will include information at the local of the capital review. authority level. A more detailed equality impact The capital review, a comprehensive review of capital assessment will be published in the normal way, once investment in schools, was announced by the Secretary the detail of the policy has been finalised and before of State on 5 July. We expect to receive its main amending regulations are laid. recommendations at the end of the year and this Asked by Lord Bassam of Brighton should include proposals for revised requirements for To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many toilets and drinking water in schools. residents in Brighton and Hove receive local housing allowance for properties which exceed the proposed four-bedroom cap; and what will be (a) the total, Spending Review 2010 and (b) the average per household, benefit payments Questions lost as a result of the proposed cap for each year in the period covered by Spending Review 2010. Asked by Lord Barnett [HL3647] To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the Lord Freud: The department published a document Office for Budget Responsibility published its scrutiny on Impacts of Housing Benefit proposals: Changes to of Spending Review 2010. [HL3219] the Local Housing Allowance to be introduced in 2011-12 on the 23 July, which includes analysis at the local authority level. A copy of the document has been The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord placed in the Library. Sassoon): The information requested falls within the Tables 22 and 23 of this document present the responsibility of the Office for Budget Responsibility impact of the housing benefit caps and the four-bedroom (OBR). I have asked the OBR to reply. cap; for Brighton and Hove it is estimated that Letter from Robert Chote, Chairman, Office for Budget 20 households would be affected, losing on average Responsibility, to Lord Barnett, dated 4 November 2010. £38 per week each. As Chair of the Budget Responsibility Committee Information on the number of households affected of the Office for Budget Responsibility I have been for future years is available only at the national level. asked to reply to your recent question: Asked by Lord Bassam of Brighton To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the Office for Budget Responsibility published its scrutiny of To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many Spending Review 2010. [HL3219] residents in Brighton and Hove will be affected by The OBR scrutinised costings produced by the changes to the housing allowance shared room rate Government using the methodology set out in the on grounds of age; and how much on average Spending review 2010 policy costings document. affected individuals will lose for each year in the period covered by Spending Review 2010. [HL3648] Chapter 3 of the document outlines the approach that we used to scrutinise and challenge these costings. Lord Freud: We will publish a document on the The document was published alongside the Spending impacts of the proposed changes to the shared room Review documents on the HM Treasury website on rate in due course. This will include information at the 20 October 2010. It is also available via a link on our local authority level. website at: http://budgetresponsibility.independent.gov. Asked by Baroness Smith of Basildon uk/publications.html. To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to Copies were also issued to Parliament and placed in the Written Answer by Baroness Hanham on the Library of the House. 28 October (WA329), what information they provided Asked by Lord Touhig to fire and rescue authorities in October regarding their future budgets as a result of Spending Review To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment 2010. [HL3668] they have made of how the reductions in housing benefit announced in Spending Review 2010 will The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, affect the living conditions of disabled people. Department for Communities and Local Government [HL3526] (Baroness Hanham): I refer the noble Baroness to the letter of 20 October 2010 by the Minister for the Fire and Rescue Service to the fire and rescue service The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, authorities, a copy of which I am placing in the Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): The Library. current exemptions to the shared room rate will continue to apply once that rate is extended to cover housing Asked by Lord Watson of Invergowrie benefit recipients who are single and aged under 35 years. To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they These include disabled people who qualify for the plan to achieve savings from back office costs and severe disability premium, that is customers who receive raise all provision to the level of the most efficient, the middle or higher rate care component of disability as stated on the Department for Education website living allowance and no carer’s allowance is in payment page What does the Spending Review mean for me? for them. 16–19 education. [HL3698] WA 169 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 170

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): To live within the Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): We are very concerned spending review settlement we will need to secure a by the slow progress on preparations for the referendum reduction in unit costs and we recognise therefore that on self-determination for Southern Sudan to take schools, colleges and other training providers will have place in January 2011. Urgent action must be taken by to make challenging but, I believe, achievable efficiency the Sudanese parties and the Southern Sudan Referendum savings. We will provide advice to support schools and Commission to address delays, ahead of the scheduled colleges to help them identify how efficiencies can be start of voter registration on 15 November. The Sudanese made. There is much good practice on better procurement, parties must also reach agreement on the critical post- better use of administrative resources and more efficient referendum arrangements, including border delineation, use of teaching resources. However, we do not want to wealth sharing and citizenship rights. be prescriptive and it will be for schools and colleges to identify for themselves how to deliver the necessary The British Government are providing significant efficiency measures. Furthermore, we have already support to ensure a peaceful and credible referendum. taken steps to reduce the inefficiency in the way that My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for 16-19 institutions are funded by introducing a simplified International Development visited Sudan between funding system and ensuring that funding follows the 7-10 November to urge accelerated progress. The learner. Department for International Development is providing £10 million of assistance which will help to finance the We are currently working through the specifics of voting process, assist the Referendum Commission, the spending review and aim to announce the details and support civic and voter education and domestic of the 16-19 settlement, and any changes to funding and international observer groups. policy that will help deliver the efficiencies we need, before Christmas. Asked by Lord Luce

SPIRE System To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have a Special Representative to help Sudan hold a Question referendum on 9 January 2011 on the future of the Asked by Lord Harris of Haringey South; and, if so, who is undertaking that role. [HL3612] To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the average length of time taken for export licences applied for through the SPIRE system to be granted, in respect of applications submitted by (a) technology Lord Howell of Guildford: The UK Special companies, and (b) small and medium-sized enterprises. Representative for Sudan is Michael Ryder, who is [HL3789] leading our effort at senior official level.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Asked by Lord Luce Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Baroness Wilcox): The Government produce median statistics To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their to measure the time taken to process export licences assessment of any outstanding problems which need through the SPIRE system. In 2009 the median processing to be resolved before a referendum can be held in time for standard individual export licences and standard Sudan on the future of the South. [HL3613] individual trade control licences was 12 days. During the same period the median processing time for open individual export licences and open individual trade control licences was 27. These statistics, along with the Lord Howell of Guildford: We are very concerned median statistics for the first two quarters of this year by the slow progress on preparations for the referendum and median statistics by destination, are included in on self-determination for Southern Sudan to take the published annual and quarterly reports that place in January 2011. Urgent action must be taken by are available to view on the Strategic Export the Sudanese parties and the Southern Sudan Referendum Controls; Reports and Statistics website at https:// Commission to address delays, ahead of the scheduled www.exportcontroldb.berr.gov.uk/eng/fox. start of voter registration on 15 November. The Sudanese parties must also reach agreement on the critical post- Export licensing statistics do not enable us to produce referendum arrangements, including border delineation, processing statistics aggregated by business type or wealth sharing and citizenship rights. size. The British Government are providing significant Sudan support to ensure a peaceful and credible referendum. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Questions International Development visited Sudan between Asked by Lord Luce 7-10 November to urge accelerated progress. The Department for International Development is providing To ask Her Majesty’s Government what role £10 million of assistance which will help to finance the they are playing in helping Sudan hold a referendum voting process, assist the Referendum Commission, on 9 January 2011 on the future of the South. and support civic and voter education and domestic [HL3611] and international observer groups. WA 171 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 172

Taxation: Corporation Tax We have specifically urged the Ugandan authorities to ensure that any legislation in this area strikes an Question appropriate and legitimate balance between maintaining Asked by Lord Burnett public order and protecting the rights to free expression and assembly. To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the Asked by Lord Chidgey corporation tax yield in (a) 1978–79, and (b) 1996–97; and what was the retail prices index for each of To ask Her Majesty’s Government what those years. [HL3597] representations they have made to the Government of Uganda regarding the arrest and detention of the Muslim human rights activist Al Amin Kimathi, The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord who is currently charged with terrorism and murder. Sassoon): Corporation tax receipts for 1978-79 were [HL3605] £3,940 million and for 1996-97 they were £27,788 million. The average retail prices index for 1978-79 was Lord Howell of Guildford: Mr Kimathi was charged 201.6 and for 1996-97 606.4. with terrorism and murder on 20 September as a result of the Ugandan police investigation into the terrorist attacks that took place in Kampala on 11 July. We are Taxation: Income Tax aware of the concerns expressed by human rights Question organisations, and have inquired about the arrest of Mr Kimathi with the Ugandan authorities. In our Asked by Lord Ouseley contacts with both the Ugandan and Kenyan Governments To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many we stress the importance of due process and the maintenance people have left the country to work elsewhere, or of the rule of law in counterterrorism activity. are predicted to do so, as a result of the 50 per cent top rate of income tax. [HL3590] UK-US Military Accord Question The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick Sassoon): The Government do not estimate or forecast To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their this figure. assessment of the impact of the new United Kingdom- France military accord on relations between the Uganda United Kingdom and the United States. [HL3585] Questions The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): The strategic defence Asked by Lord Chidgey and security review made clear that the UK’s defence To ask Her Majesty’s Government what and security relationship with the US remains pre-eminent. representations they have made to the Government The UK-France Defence and Security Co-operation of Uganda on the Code of Conduct Bill. [HL3460] treaty will increase the capability of both our Armed Forces, making us more capable members of North The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Atlantic Treaty Organisation and allies of the US. The Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): We have raised the treaty is therefore complementary to a strong UK-US code of conduct with the Government of Uganda to defence and security relationship. urge its enactment. It is currently unclear whether parliamentary time will be found to enact the code UN Women before elections in February 2011. Question My honourable friend Henry Bellingham has also Asked by Baroness Tonge made the point to members of both the government To ask Her Majesty’s Government what support and opposition parties in Uganda (including President they will offer to UN Women, the United Nations Museveni and the leader of the opposition in Parliament) Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment that all political parties need to engage peacefully and of Women. [HL3679] responsibly in the electoral process. Constructive dialogue between the governing and opposition parties, at both Baroness Verma: I refer the noble Lady to my national and local level, will be essential to this. Answer of Thursday 4 November 2010 (Official Report, Asked by Lord Chidgey col. WA 450). To ask Her Majesty’s Government what Unemployment representations they have made to the Government of Uganda on the Public Order Management Bill. Question [HL3461] Asked by Lord Ouseley To ask Her Majesty’s Government what measures Lord Howell of Guildford: We have raised the Public they will introduce to reduce the levels of Order Management Bill with the Ugandan Minister of unemployment and under-employment of people Internal Affairs, the Minister of State for Internal with disabilities who are actively seeking employment. Affairs and the Inspector-General of Police. [HL3591] WA 173 Written Answers[15 NOVEMBER 2010] Written Answers WA 174

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): The Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The Government department is committed to increasing the employment are promoting the accountability of governments in opportunities available to disabled people and others their implementation of UN Security Council Resolution who experience complex barriers to employment and 1325 by: in the process reducing the levels of unemployment lobbying conflict-affected states to tackle impunity and under-employment which they experience. for perpetrators of sexual and gender-based violence; We are introducing the work programme which will providing financial and technical support for states replace a number of previous employment programmes, to develop action plans; and including the underperforming Pathways to Work supporting international mechanisms to improve programme, and will be an integrated package of accountability, including the development of UN support providing personalised help to a broad range indicators to measure progress and the International of individuals, including those who may previously Criminal Court to tackle impunity. have been receiving incapacity benefits for many years. Fuller details of the Government’s work will be set We will offer providers differentiated levels of payment out in our National Action Plan on Women, Peace for supporting harder customers into work that reflect and Security, which will be released later this month. levels of support to ensure it is worth while for providers We intend to lay a copy of this plan before the Parliament. to different customer groups appropriate support. We aim to have the work programme in place nationally by the summer of 2011. As of October 25 2010 we launched Work Choice, a Women: Peace and Security new pan-disability supported employment programme Questions for disabled people, which provides tailored support and targets those customers who face the most complex Asked by Lord Judd barriers in reaching or retaining employment, including self-employment. Under a new funding model in which To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action prime providers work closely with their subcontractors, they are taking to promote the development of individuals get early, quality support that helps them implementation indicators as practical applied measures progress at work and, where it is appropriate for the to secure the objectives of United Nations Security individual, helps them move into sustainable long-term Council Resolution 1325 as they relate to the role employment. and security of women in conflict and peacebuilding in Afghanistan, Nepal and Uganda. [HL3622]

Union of the Comoros The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The Government Question strongly support the development of UN indicators to Asked by Lord Laird enhance implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325. And we are supporting efforts by To ask Her Majesty’s Government what islands states better to measure their progress. they recognise to be part of the Union of the we support human rights institutions that assist the Comoros. [HL3628] Government of Afghanistan to fulfil their obligations under 1325; we provide financial and technical support to the The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Nepalese Government to develop their own National Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): The Union of the Action Plan on UN Security Council Resolution Comoros comprises of three islands: Ngazidja (Grande 1325; and Comore), Nzwani (Anjouan) and Mwali (Moheli). The island of Mayotte is a departmental collectivity of in Uganda, the Department for International France. In March 2009, 95 per cent of the people on Development is supporting UN Development Fund Mayotte voted in favour of it becoming an integral for Women’s programme to engage women in building French Department in 2011. peace and security. Part of this programme aims to improve the use of indicators to strengthen accountability. Our new National Action Plan on Women, Peace United Nations Security Council and Security, due for release later this month, will also Resolution 1325 measure progress made in our own activity. We intend to lay a copy of our plan before Parliament. Question Asked by Lord Judd Asked by Lord Judd To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to secure the rights and wellbeing of they are taking to promote the accountability of women in the context of United Kingdom support governments in the context of United Nations Security for the reconciliation process in Afghanistan. Council Resolution 1325. [HL3623] [HL3624] WA 175 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 176

Lord Howell of Guildford: We continue to work “Security Sector Accountability and Police closely with the Afghan Government to improve the Reform” project in the Democratic Republic of the status of women in Afghanistan, so they can play as Congo; full a part as possible in a future, peaceful Afghanistan. supporting integration of UN Security Council The UK will work with individuals and groups who Resolution 1820 into UN operations and missions; accept the conditions laid down by President Karzai’s and Government: insurgents must renounce al-Qaeda, give providing training on UN Security Council up armed struggle and work within the constitutional Resolution 1325 for UK military and civilian framework. We consider on its merits any request for personnel involved in conflict resolution. the UK to play a role in support of this Afghan-led Fuller details of the Government’s work will be set process. out in our national action plan. We intend to lay a Asked by Lord Judd copy of this plan before Parliament. To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to promote the protection of women Youth Parliament in areas of conflict and to monitor the effective Question implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1820. [HL3625] Asked by Lord Fearn To ask the Chairman of Committees how many Lord Howell of Guildford: The Government are times the Youth Parliament is invited to the House fully committed to improving the protection of women of Lords Chamber each year. [HL3943] in conflict and are taking a range of actions to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1820. We will set out The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of our activity in a National Action Plan on Women Tara): The Information Committee allows one Chamber Peace and Security, due for release later this month. event for young people each year. The UK Youth Our activities include: Parliament organised such an event in 2008. This action on the ground, such as Department for year’s event on 10 December is a debate for schools International Development’s £60 million five-year with assistance from the social enterprise Debate Mate. Monday 15 November 2010

ALPHABETICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN STATEMENTS

Col. No. Col. No. EU: Justice and Home Affairs Council...... 27 Sport...... 31

Pensions...... 30 Terrorism: Finance ...... 31

Monday 15 November 2010

ALPHABETICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN ANSWERS

Col. No. Col. No. 1999 School Premises Regulations...... 149 Housing Benefit...... 161

Autism ...... 149 Housing: Squatters ...... 162

BBC: World Service ...... 150 Inflation...... 162

Benefits...... 150 Israel and Palestine ...... 163

Bolivia ...... 150 Lisbon Treaty...... 163

Burundi ...... 151 Maternity Leave...... 163

Chagos Islands...... 151 Missing Persons: Deaths ...... 164

Charities: VAT ...... 152 National Employment Savings Trust...... 164

Commonwealth ...... 152 Overseas Aid...... 164

Commonwealth Development Corporation...... 153 Primary Care Trusts...... 165

Defence: UK-France...... 153 Prisoners: Mental Health...... 165

Detention: Overseas Ministers ...... 154 Schools: Pupil Premium...... 165

Education Maintenance Allowance ...... 154 Schools: Water Supply ...... 166

Education: Virtual Education ...... 154 Spending Review 2010 ...... 167

EU: Budget...... 155 SPIRE System ...... 169

Export Industry ...... 155 Sudan...... 169

Flags ...... 155 Taxation: Corporation Tax ...... 171

Fluoridation ...... 156 Taxation: Income Tax ...... 171

Food: Pork and Bacon ...... 156 Uganda...... 171

Gaza ...... 156 UK-US Military Accord...... 172

Government Departments: Salaries ...... 157 UN Women...... 172

Health: Drugs ...... 157 Unemployment ...... 172

Health: Nursing and Midwifery...... 158 Union of the Comoros...... 173

Health: Vaccinations...... 158 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325...... 173

House of Lords: Stationery ...... 159 Women: Peace and Security ...... 174

Housing ...... 159 Youth Parliament...... 176 NUMERICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN ANSWERS

Col. No. Col. No. [HL2519] ...... 153 [HL3606] ...... 151

[HL2537] ...... 157 [HL3607] ...... 151

[HL3166] ...... 152 [HL3611] ...... 169

[HL3219] ...... 167 [HL3612] ...... 170

[HL3315] ...... 163 [HL3613] ...... 170

[HL3341] ...... 165 [HL3621] ...... 165

[HL3428] ...... 155 [HL3622] ...... 174

[HL3436] ...... 161 [HL3623] ...... 173

[HL3460] ...... 171 [HL3624] ...... 174

[HL3461] ...... 171 [HL3625] ...... 175

[HL3464] ...... 153 [HL3628] ...... 173

[HL3465] ...... 164 [HL3647] ...... 168

[HL3467] ...... 163 [HL3648] ...... 168

[HL3470] ...... 155 [HL3651] ...... 151

[HL3479] ...... 158 [HL3664] ...... 157

[HL3526] ...... 167 [HL3665] ...... 157

[HL3531] ...... 159 [HL3666] ...... 158

[HL3532] ...... 150 [HL3668] ...... 168

[HL3537] ...... 149 [HL3679] ...... 172

[HL3538] ...... 149 [HL3681] ...... 149

[HL3539] ...... 166 [HL3685] ...... 152

[HL3540] ...... 166 [HL3686] ...... 152

[HL3541] ...... 166 [HL3698] ...... 168

[HL3542] ...... 166 [HL3701] ...... 154

[HL3543] ...... 160 [HL3702] ...... 154

[HL3547] ...... 154 [HL3739] ...... 162

[HL3558] ...... 150 [HL3742] ...... 162

[HL3559] ...... 156 [HL3747] ...... 155

[HL3571] ...... 156 [HL3752] ...... 164

[HL3583] ...... 158 [HL3754] ...... 161

[HL3585] ...... 172 [HL3757] ...... 150

[HL3590] ...... 171 [HL3773] ...... 163

[HL3591] ...... 172 [HL3789] ...... 169

[HL3597] ...... 171 [HL3795] ...... 161

[HL3600] ...... 164 [HL3796] ...... 162

[HL3605] ...... 172 [HL3830] ...... 165 Col. No. Col. No. [HL3838] ...... 159 [HL3988] ...... 156 [HL3943] ...... 176 Volume 722 Monday No. 66 15 November 2010

CONTENTS

Monday 15 November 2010 Introduction: Baroness Hollins...... 509 Questions Justice: Magistrates’ and County Courts ...... 509 Educational Psychology ...... 511 Healthcare: Costs...... 513 Health: Private Medical Insurance...... 516 Communications Committee Membership Motion ...... 521 European Union Committee Membership Motion ...... 521 Statutory Instruments Committee Membership Motion ...... 521 Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill [HL] Order of Consideration Motion ...... 521 Freedom of Information (Time for Compliance with Request) Regulations 2010 Motion to Approve ...... 522 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Motion to Refer to Examiners ...... 522 G20 Statement...... 545 Legal Aid and Civil Costs Reform Statement...... 555 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Second Reading (1st Day)...... 567 Written Statements...... WS 27 Written Answers...... WA 149