DOCSLIB.ORG

Project Gutenberg's Proportional Representation, by John H

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project Gutenberg's Proportional Representation, by John H Project Gutenberg's Proportional Representation, by John H. Humphreys Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook. This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do not change or edit the header without written permission. Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included is important information about your specific rights and restrictions in how the file may be used. You can also find out about how to make a donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved. **Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** **eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** *****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!***** Title: Proportional Representation A Study in Methods of Election Author: John H. Humphreys Release Date: January, 2006 [EBook #9630] [Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] [This file was first posted on October 11, 2003] Edition: 10 Language: English Character set encoding: ASCII *** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION *** Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Debra Storr and PG Distributed Proofreaders PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION A STUDY IN METHODS OF ELECTION BY JOHN H. HUMPHREYS HON. SECRETARY, PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION SOCIETY WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE RT. HON. LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH _First Published in 1911_ TO THE MEMORY OF CATHERINE HELEN SPENCE OF ADELAIDE AN UNWEARIED WORKER IN THE CAUSE OF REAL REPRESENTATION INTRODUCTION BY LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH I believe this book will generally be welcomed as opportune. Proportional Representation has made very rapid, almost startling advances in recent years. In one shape or another it has been adopted in many countries in Northern Europe, and there is a prospect of a most important extension of this adoption in the reform of the parliamentary institutions of France. Among ourselves, every political writer and speaker have got some inkling of the central principle of proportional representation, and not a few feel, sometimes with reluctance, that it has come to stay, that it will indeed be worked into our own system when the inevitable moment arrives for taking up again the reform of the House of Commons. They know and confess so much among themselves, but they want to be familiarized with the best machinery for working proportional representation, and they would not be sorry to have the arguments for and against its principles once more clearly examined so that they may be properly equipped for the reception of the coming change. This little book of Mr. Humphreys is just what they desire. The author has no doubt about his conclusions, but he goes fairly and with quite sufficient fulness through the main branches of the controversy over proportional representation, and he explains the working of an election under the system we must now regard as the one most likely to be adopted among us. His qualifications for his work are indeed rare, and his authority in a corresponding measure high. A convinced adherent of proportional representation, he stimulated the revival of the Society established to promote it. He was the chief organizer of the enlarged illustrative elections we have had at home. He has attended elections in Belgium and again in Sweden, and when the time came for electing Senators in the colonies of South Africa, and Municipal Councils in Johannesburg and Pretoria, the local governments solicited his assistance in conducting them, and put on record their obligations for his help. The reader can have no better guide in argument, no more experienced hand in the explanation of machinery, and if I add that Mr. Humphreys has done his work with complete mastery of his subject and with conspicuous clearness of exposition, I need say no more in recommendation of his book. It may be objected that the Royal Commission which issued its Report last spring, did not recommend the incorporation of proportional representation into our electoral system. This is most true. One member indeed (Lord Lochee) did not shrink from this conclusion, but his colleagues were unable to report that a case had been made out for the adoption "here and now" of proportional representation. Their hesitancy and the reasons they advanced as justifying it must lead many to a conclusion opposite to their own. They themselves are indeed emphatic in pressing the limitation "here and now" as qualifying their verdict. They wish it to be most distinctly understood that they have no irresistible objection to proportional representation. They indeed openly confess that conditions may arise among ourselves at some future time which would appear to be not necessarily distant, when the balance of expediency may turn in favour of its adoption. They suggest "that some need may become felt which can only be satisfied by proportional representation in some form or another," and I do not think I misrepresent their attitude in believing that a very small change of circumstances might suffice to precipitate a reversal of their present conclusion. All who are familiar with the conduct of political controversies must recognize the situation thus revealed. Again and again have proposals of reform been made which the wise could not recommend for acceptance "here and now." They are seen to be good for other folk; they fit into the circumstances of other societies; they may have worked well in climates different from our own; nay, among ourselves they might be tried in some auxiliary fashion separated from the great use for which they have been recommended, but we will wait for the proper moment of their undisguised general acceptance. It is in this way that political ideas have been propagated, and it would be a mistake if we were hastily to condemn what are sure and trusty lines of progress. When the Royal Commissioners, after all their hesitations about the intrusion of proportional representation even in the thinnest of wedges into the House of Commons, go on to say that "there would be much to be said in its favour as a method for the constitution of an elected Second Chamber," and again, though admitting that this was beyond their reference, express a pretty transparent wish that it might be tried in municipal elections, the friends of the principle may well be content with the line which the tide of opinion has reached. The concluding words of this branch of the Report are scarcely necessary for their satisfaction: "We need only add, that should it be decided at any time to introduce proportional representation here for political elections the change would be facilitated if experience had been gained in municipal elections alike by electors and officials." A few words may be permitted in reference to the line of defence advanced by the Commissioners against the inroad of proportional representation. Mr. Humphreys has dealt with this with sufficient fullness in Chapters X and XI which deal with objections to proportional representation; and I refer the reader to what he has written on the general subject. My own comment on the position of the Commissioners must be short. Briefly stated, their position is that proportional representation "cannot be recommended in a political election where the question which party is to govern the country plays a predominant part," and, as elsewhere they put it, "a general election is in fact considered by a large portion of the electorate of this country as practically a referendum on the question which of two governments shall be returned to power." The first remark to be made upon this wonderful barrier is that a general election avowedly cannot be trusted as a true referendum. It produces a balance of members in favour of one party, though even this may fail to be realized at no distant future, but the balance of members may be and has been under our present system in contradiction to the balance of the electors; or in other words, a referendum would answer the vital question which party is to govern, in the opposite sense to the answer given by a general election. This is so frankly admitted in the Report that it is difficult to understand how the Commissioners can recommend adherence to a process which they have proved to be a delusion. Even on the bare question of ascertaining what government the nation desires to see installed at Westminster, the present method is found wanting, whilst the reformed plan, by giving us a reproduction in miniature of the divisions of national opinion, would in the balance of judgment of the microcosm give us the balance of judgment in the nation. If a referendum is really wanted, a general election with single-member constituencies does not give us a secure result, and an election under proportional representation would ensure it. A different question obviously disturbs many minds, to wit, the stability of a government resting on the support of a truly representative assembly. Here again it may be asked whether our present machinery really satisfies conditions of stable equilibrium. We know they are wanting, and with the development of groups among us, they will be found still more wanting. The groups which emerge under existing processes are uncertain in shape, in size, and in their combinations, and governments resting upon them are infirm even when they appear to be strong. It is only when the groups in the legislature represent in faithful proportion bodies of convinced adherents returning them as their representatives that such groups become strong enough to restore parliamentary efficiency and to combine in the maintenance of a stable administration.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parliamentary Debates House of Commons Official Report General Committees
    PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT GENERAL COMMITTEES Public Bill Committee SAVINGS ACCOUNTS AND HEALTH IN PREGNANCY GRANT BILL Fourth Sitting Thursday 4 November 2010 (Afternoon) CONTENTS Examination of witnesses. CLAUSE 1 under consideration when the Committee adjourned till Tuesday 9 November at half-past Ten o’clock. PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON – THE STATIONERY OFFICE LIMITED £5·00 PBC (Bill 073) 2010 - 2011 Members who wish to have copies of the Official Report of Proceedings in General Committees sent to them are requested to give notice to that effect at the Vote Office. No proofs can be supplied. Corrigenda slips may be published with Bound Volume editions. Corrigenda that Members suggest should be clearly marked in a copy of the report—not telephoned—and must be received in the Editor’s Room, House of Commons, not later than Monday 8 November 2010 STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT WILL GREATLY FACILITATE THE PROMPT PUBLICATION OF THE BOUND VOLUMES OF PROCEEDINGS IN GENERAL COMMITTEES © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 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/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] Public Bill Committee4 NOVEMBER 2010 Savings Accounts and Health in Pregnancy Grant Bill The Committee consisted of the following Members: Chairs:
    [Show full text]
  • THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
    THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84.
    [Show full text]
  • Members of the House of Commons December 2019 Diane ABBOTT MP
    Members of the House of Commons December 2019 A Labour Conservative Diane ABBOTT MP Adam AFRIYIE MP Hackney North and Stoke Windsor Newington Labour Conservative Debbie ABRAHAMS MP Imran AHMAD-KHAN Oldham East and MP Saddleworth Wakefield Conservative Conservative Nigel ADAMS MP Nickie AIKEN MP Selby and Ainsty Cities of London and Westminster Conservative Conservative Bim AFOLAMI MP Peter ALDOUS MP Hitchin and Harpenden Waveney A Labour Labour Rushanara ALI MP Mike AMESBURY MP Bethnal Green and Bow Weaver Vale Labour Conservative Tahir ALI MP Sir David AMESS MP Birmingham, Hall Green Southend West Conservative Labour Lucy ALLAN MP Fleur ANDERSON MP Telford Putney Labour Conservative Dr Rosena ALLIN-KHAN Lee ANDERSON MP MP Ashfield Tooting Members of the House of Commons December 2019 A Conservative Conservative Stuart ANDERSON MP Edward ARGAR MP Wolverhampton South Charnwood West Conservative Labour Stuart ANDREW MP Jonathan ASHWORTH Pudsey MP Leicester South Conservative Conservative Caroline ANSELL MP Sarah ATHERTON MP Eastbourne Wrexham Labour Conservative Tonia ANTONIAZZI MP Victoria ATKINS MP Gower Louth and Horncastle B Conservative Conservative Gareth BACON MP Siobhan BAILLIE MP Orpington Stroud Conservative Conservative Richard BACON MP Duncan BAKER MP South Norfolk North Norfolk Conservative Conservative Kemi BADENOCH MP Steve BAKER MP Saffron Walden Wycombe Conservative Conservative Shaun BAILEY MP Harriett BALDWIN MP West Bromwich West West Worcestershire Members of the House of Commons December 2019 B Conservative Conservative
    [Show full text]
  • Stephen Kinnock MP Aberav
    Member Name Constituency Bespoke Postage Total Spend £ Spend £ £ (Incl. VAT) (Incl. VAT) Stephen Kinnock MP Aberavon 318.43 1,220.00 1,538.43 Kirsty Blackman MP Aberdeen North 328.11 6,405.00 6,733.11 Neil Gray MP Airdrie and Shotts 436.97 1,670.00 2,106.97 Leo Docherty MP Aldershot 348.25 3,214.50 3,562.75 Wendy Morton MP Aldridge-Brownhills 220.33 1,535.00 1,755.33 Sir Graham Brady MP Altrincham and Sale West 173.37 225.00 398.37 Mark Tami MP Alyn and Deeside 176.28 700.00 876.28 Nigel Mills MP Amber Valley 489.19 3,050.00 3,539.19 Hywel Williams MP Arfon 18.84 0.00 18.84 Brendan O'Hara MP Argyll and Bute 834.12 5,930.00 6,764.12 Damian Green MP Ashford 32.18 525.00 557.18 Angela Rayner MP Ashton-under-Lyne 82.38 152.50 234.88 Victoria Prentis MP Banbury 67.17 805.00 872.17 David Duguid MP Banff and Buchan 279.65 915.00 1,194.65 Dame Margaret Hodge MP Barking 251.79 1,677.50 1,929.29 Dan Jarvis MP Barnsley Central 542.31 7,102.50 7,644.81 Stephanie Peacock MP Barnsley East 132.14 1,900.00 2,032.14 John Baron MP Basildon and Billericay 130.03 0.00 130.03 Maria Miller MP Basingstoke 209.83 1,187.50 1,397.33 Wera Hobhouse MP Bath 113.57 976.00 1,089.57 Tracy Brabin MP Batley and Spen 262.72 3,050.00 3,312.72 Marsha De Cordova MP Battersea 763.95 7,850.00 8,613.95 Bob Stewart MP Beckenham 157.19 562.50 719.69 Mohammad Yasin MP Bedford 43.34 0.00 43.34 Gavin Robinson MP Belfast East 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paul Maskey MP Belfast West 0.00 0.00 0.00 Neil Coyle MP Bermondsey and Old Southwark 1,114.18 7,622.50 8,736.68 John Lamont MP Berwickshire Roxburgh
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Barriers to Politics Working Group
    Public Document Pack BARRIERS TO POLITICS WORKING GROUP Date: MONDAY, 24 JULY 2017 at 7.30 pm Committee Room 1 Civic Suite Lewisham Town Hall London SE6 4RU Enquiries to: Sarah Assibey Telephone: 0208 314 8975 (direct line) MEMBERS Councillor Suzannah Clarke L Councillor Colin Elliott L Councillor Joyce Jacca L Councillor Joan Millbank L Councillor Hilary Moore L Councillor Jacq Paschoud L Councillor Maja Hilton L Members are summoned to attend this meeting Barry Quirk Chief Executive Lewisham Town Hall Catford London SE6 4RU Date: 14 July 2017 The public are welcome to attend our committee meetings, however occasionally committees may have to consider some business in private. Copies of reports can be made available in additional formats on request. ORDER OF BUSINESS – PART 1 AGENDA Item Page No No.s 1. Minutes 1 - 6 2. Declarations of Interest 7 - 10 3. Ethnicity 11 - 15 4. Disability 16 - 53 5. Future Meetings 54 The public are welcome to attend our committee meetings, however occasionally committees may have to consider some business in private. Copies of reports can be made available in additional formats on request. Agenda Item 1 MINUTES OF THE BARRIERS TO POLITICS WORKING GROUP 27 June 2017 PRESENT: Councillors Suzannah Clarke (Chair), Jacq Paschoud, John Paschoud, Joan Millbank, Joyce Jacca, Hilary Moore Also Present: Lauren Lucas (LGiU, Commission for Women in Local Government), Salena Mulhere (Officer), David Humphreys (Officer), Sarah Assibey (Clerk), Ching Yu (Representative of Parent and Carers Forum) Apologies: Councillor Colin Elliot 1. Minutes Cllr Hilary Moore advised she sent apologies for the last meeting but they were not reflected in the minutes of the last meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • 1/18 ページ House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 21
    House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 21 May 2013 (pt 0004) 1/18 ページ You can find out more about cookies below, otherwise by continuing to use the site you agree to the use of the cookies as they are currently set. I agree I want to find out more • Accessibility • Cookies • Email alerts • RSS feeds • Contact us Site search Site search 1. Search Search Primary navigation • Home • Parliamentary business • MPs, Lords & offices • About Parliament • Get involved • Visiting • Education • House of Commons • House of Lords • What's on • Bills & legislation • Committees • Publications & records • Parliament TV • News • Topics You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Daily Hansard - Written Answers Previous Section Index Home Page Syria Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the UK has provided any (a) internal security training, (b) public order training and (c) sniper training or training in the use of heavy military equipment to Syria since President Bashar al-Assad came to office. [156010] Mr Robathan: The UK has not provided any specific internal security training, public order training, sniper training or training in the use of heavy military equipment to Syria since President Bashar al-Assad came to office in July 2000. 21 May 2013 : Column 728W The small number of Syrian personnel who attended initial officer training and staff courses between 2000 and 2008 will have been exposed to UK doctrine on these topics. Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what consideration the Defence Exports Support Group has given to lifting restrictions on exports of (a) lethal and (b) non-lethal military equipment to Syrian opposition groups.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Ministers' Interests
    LIST OF MINISTERS’ INTERESTS CABINET OFFICE DECEMBER 2017 CONTENTS Introduction 3 Prime Minister 5 Attorney General’s Office 6 Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy 7 Cabinet Office 11 Department for Communities and Local Government 10 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 11 Ministry of Defence 13 Department for Education 14 Department of Exiting the European Union 16 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 17 Foreign and Commonwealth Office 19 Department of Health 21 Home Office 22 Department for International Development 23 Department for International Trade 24 Ministry of Justice 25 Northern Ireland Office 26 Office of the Advocate General for Scotland 27 Office of the Leader of the House of Commons 28 Office of the Leader of the House of Lords 29 Scotland Office 30 Department for Transport 31 HM Treasury 33 Wales Office 34 Department for Work and Pensions 35 Government Whips – Commons 36 Government Whips – Lords 40 2 INTRODUCTION Ministerial Code Under the terms of the Ministerial Code, Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their Ministerial position and their private interests, financial or otherwise. On appointment to each new office, Ministers must provide their Permanent Secretary with a list, in writing, of all relevant interests known to them, which might be thought to give rise to a conflict. Individual declarations, and a note of any action taken in respect of individual interests, are then passed to the Cabinet Office Propriety and Ethics team and the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests to confirm they are content with the action taken or to provide further advice as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Monday Volume 618 5 December 2016 No. 75 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday 5 December 2016 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2016 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY THE RT HON. THERESA MAY, MP, JULY 2016) PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. Amber Rudd, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon. Boris Johnson, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt Hon. Sir Michael Fallon, MP LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—The Rt Hon. Justine Greening, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION—The Rt Hon. David Davis, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Liam Fox, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY—The Rt Hon. Greg Clark, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH—The Rt Hon. Jeremy Hunt, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Damian Green, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT—The Rt Hon. Chris Grayling, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT—The Rt Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Levelling up and Community Renewal Fund Pdf 233 Kb
    Report to: Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre Economic Prosperity Board Report Author: Nick Gerrard, Growth and Prosperity Programme Director (Blackpool Council) Date of Meeting: 25 March 2021 LEVELLING UP AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL FUND 1.0 Purpose of the report: 1.1 To summarise the main provisions of the Levelling Up Fund and Community Renewal Fund announced in the March 2021 Budget. 2.0 Recommendation: 2.1 To note the report and to discuss the approaches to be taken by the Fylde Coast Local Authorities in relation to these funding opportunities. 3.0 Background 3.1 As part of the Budget the Chancellor announced a broad package of complementary UK-wide interventions including: The UK Levelling Up Fund, which will invest in local infrastructure that has a visible impact on people and their communities and will support economic recovery. The Fund will be jointly managed by HM Treasury, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and the Department for Transport. This is a new approach to investing in local growth – ending siloes in Whitehall that make it difficult to take a holistic approach to the needs of local areas https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/levelling-up-fund-prospectus (see summary in Appendix 6a) The UK Community Renewal Fund, which will provide local areas across the UK with access to £220 million of additional funding as they prepare for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund due to launch in 2022. It is targeted to help to level up and create opportunity across the UK in places most in need in a manner distinct but complementary to the Levelling Up Fund, through investment in skills, enterprise and employment.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Thursday Volume 619 12 January 2017 No. 89 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday 12 January 2017 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2017 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 437 12 JANUARY 2017 438 Paul Maynard: Devolution does not just occur within House of Commons Governments and within Whitehall, and between Whitehall and Scotland. A significant amount of operational devolution is occurring within Network Rail as we Thursday 12 January 2017 speak. A Scottish route within Network Rail that will have much more independence and freedom of action is being set up. I urge the Scottish Government and Scottish The House met at half-past Nine o’clock Members to engage in that devolution process, not least because the Scottish Government are co-operating with PRAYERS the Office of Rail and Road on the periodic review that will determine the output for control period 6 within Scotland. [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey) (SNP): A report commissioned by Transport Scotland showed that Network Rail’soriginal cost estimates Oral Answers to Questions for Scottish projects were unreliable. Does the Minister agree that, especially when projects overrun by hundreds of millions of pounds, those who commission the work should have the power to hold Network Rail to account? TRANSPORT Paul Maynard: I reiterate the point that with the new devolution settlement within Network Rail and the The Secretary of State was asked— growing independence of the Scottish route within Network Rail, there are ample levers available to Members here Network Rail and indeed the Scottish Government to influence how the Scottish route director delivers those infrastructure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Votes and Proceedings
    No. 152 Wednesday 13 June 2018 Votes and Proceedings Corrected 31 July 2018 The House met at 11.30 am. Prayers 1 Questions to (1) the Secretary of State for Wales (2) the Prime Minister 2 Disorderly conduct Ian Blackford, Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber, wilfully disregarded the authority of the Chair. The Speaker ordered him to withdraw immediately from the House during the remainder of this day’s sitting (Standing Order No. 43). Accordingly the Member withdrew from the House. 3 Questions to the Prime Minister (resumed) 4 Employment Guarantee Bill: Presentation (Standing Order No. 57) Frank Field, supported by Sir Nicholas Soames, Jack Brereton, Margaret Beckett, Stephen Timms, Jeremy Lefroy, Sir Roger Gale, Kate Hoey, Ruth Smeeth, Sammy Wilson, Jim Shannon and Diana Johnson, presented a Bill to require the Secretary of State to guarantee paid employment for six months for claimants of Jobseeker’s Allowance, or the jobseeker’s component of Universal Credit, who have been unemployed for six months or longer; and for connected purposes. Bill read the first time; to be read a second time on Friday 6 July, and to be printed (Bill 224). 5 Animal Welfare (Service Animals) Bill: Presentation (Standing Order No. 57) Sir Oliver Heald, supported by Sir Roger Gale, Sir Paul Beresford, David Hanson, John Spellar, Mr Ben Bradshaw, Neil Parish, Gareth Thomas, Maggie Throup, Mr Nigel Evans, Jim Fitzpatrick and Sir Mike Penning, presented a Bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 in relation to service animals. Bill read the first time; to be read a second time on Friday 15 June and to be printed (Bill 225).
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Scully MP Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Labour Markets Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET
    Paul Scully MP Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Labour Markets Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET 2 February 2021 Dear Minister, Re: Support for the weddings industry. We are writing to you as a cross-party group of MPs concerned at the situation facing the weddings industry. A few weeks ago, the UK Weddings Taskforce presented a stark picture to us, with many of their businesses on the brink of collapse. This is despite pent-up demand and record bookings for the year ahead, worth £25 billion. There are 60,000 businesses and 400,000 workers relying on this sector and it is worth an average of £14.7 billion to the UK economy each year. Yet it requires urgent attention and bridging support to stay solvent, fulfil upcoming bookings, maintain jobs, and boost the economy when restrictions are lifted. The industry has been able to postpone the majority of its 2020 revenue, but without confidence about when weddings can restart, at a reasonable capacity, cancellations are increasing and the ability of wedding businesses to survive is diminishing by the day. First, the sector needs more information about the year ahead, including whether, after Easter, venues will be allowed more than 50 guests. Confidence is the most important factor in calculating spend, preventing cancellations and securing new bookings. Government engagement would not cost the Treasury and would help both consumers and the sector. Second, the sector needs an urgent cash injection to keep it going until reopening. The Weddings Taskforce has identified that cash grants of up to £10,000 would support up to 38,000 wedding businesses to survive until 1st April, and grants of between £10,000 and £40,000 would support a further 22,000 businesses.
    [Show full text]