Vol. 724 Thursday No. 97 20 January 2011

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT

ORDER OF BUSINESS (Continuation of Proceedings) Wednesday, 19 January 2011 (continued)

Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Committee (11th Day)(continued)

Thurday, 20 January 2011

Introductions: Lord Fink, Lord Stoneham of Droxford, Baroness Berridge Questions Gaza Disabled People: Transport St Lucia: Hurricane Tomas Health: Influenza Vaccination Business of the House Timing of Debates Coalition Government Debate Counterterrorism Statement Coalition Government Debate (Continued) Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2011 Motion to Approve 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/110120.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 2011, 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/ 487 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 488

[Continuation of Official Report from col. 486, of Wednesday, and Bristol also have great centres of excellence and 19 January 2011.] skill in financial services, but above all else that exists in the City of London and the square mile. I urge the Minister to recognise in this amendment that the City Parliamentary Voting System and is a very special place. Frankly, it will not be understood Constituencies Bill (continued) in the City or elsewhere if the City is just parcelled out among other constituencies. Committee (11th Day)(continued) Lord Martin of Springburn: I wish to speak to Wednesday, 19 January 2011 Amendment 81, on Argyll and Bute. I make no criticism of the other House when it debated this matter—far 12.23 am from it, as I served in that House for 30 years—but the Lord Myners: My Lords, I rise to speak in support different practices that exist in the other House are of the amendment proposed by my noble friend Lady such that perhaps constituencies and the problems of Hayter—Amendment 85C—and I endorse the very them in legislation like this are not always highlighted wise observations made from the opposition Benches in the way that can happen in this Chamber. Please be by the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin of Roding. assured that bringing up Argyll is not a reason to delay. I just want to explain that Argyll should have the special consideration that the Minister’s former Lord Jenkin of Roding: These are now the government constituency is to be given because of its vastness. Benches. Perhaps the noble Lord has forgotten. I asked the Library to look at the size of other constituencies along with Argyll and Bute. Penrith Lord Myners: I think that we regard you as at best and The Border was represented by David Maclean— temporary occupants of the Spiritual and Temporal Lord Maclean as he will now be, as he is about to Benches on the opposite side. come here—whom I considered a good friend regardless As I look to the opposite side, I see many people of the fact that we belong to different political traditions. who, like me, have enjoyed a career as a result of the Penrith and The Border covers 113 square miles. Anyone great focus of skill that we have in the City of London. who has been in that part of the world will acknowledge I look to those who have represented the City of that Penrith and The Border is a very big constituency, London, such as the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, who but in comparison Argyll and Bute is 2,751 square was for many years my Member of Parliament—I may miles. Westmorland is 61 square miles compared with not have agreed with his politics, but he was an extremely the 2,751 of Argyll and Bute. good constituency MP—and to the noble Baroness, My noble friend Lord Robertson—an Argyllshire Lady Wheatcroft, who was a City editor. boy, born and bred—tells me that, if you were to Without wishing to inflame the views of those measure every inch of the Argyll coastline, the distance behind me, I would say that the City is the City of would be such that it would take you from Glasgow to London. We do not use the term “the City”as shorthand New York. The islands are not small by any means. for Birmingham, Manchester or Truro, where I come There is Mull, Jura, Islay, Colonsay, Tiree, Gigha, Coll from. The City is the City of London—the square and the beautiful and ancient Iona, where Columba mile—which is a source of great excellence and a brought Christianity to Scotland. centre of economic prosperity. Of course, some firms based in the City have experienced recent difficulties, 12.30 pm but we must not forget that many sectors of activity For the local Member of Parliament to travel in conducted within the City of London, under the Argyll, from Oban he would need to travel by car 68 supervision of the Corporation and the guidance and miles to get to Campbeltown, not by motorway but by framework that the City of London provides, have old-fashioned, traditional roads. To get to some of the continued to prosper. I think here particularly of fund islands, the Member of Parliament would have to take management and of insurance. a ferry to one island and, if he wished to go to another The City is the square mile, and we cannot see this island, he would have to take another ferry. As my great centre of excellence divided as part of a rounding noble friend Lord Foulkes will know, when you get to error to make weight for adjacent constituencies with Campbeltown and the famous Mull of Kintyre, you wholly different profiles. To ensure continuing effective are to the south of Ayr and the constituency that he liaison among Guildhall, the City Corporation and represented—although you are separated by a vast Parliament, it is important that the City resides within amount of water. a single parliamentary constituency. That is why I support the amendment of my noble friend Lady Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: In between there is the Hayter. island of Arran, which, on the basis of the arguments I was fortunate to be offered a ministerial position put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Fowler, ought to in the previous Government. My formal title was be a constituency of its own. Financial Services Secretary to the Treasury, but the office was commonly referred to in the press and Lord Martin of Springburn: I will take the noble elsewhere as “the City Minister”. I endeavoured at all Lord’s word for that. times to recognise that I had a particular responsibility If the boundary commissioner was to look only at to speak for the activities that took place in the City. numbers and close proximity, there could be some Other centres such as Edinburgh, Manchester, Norwich strange notions because places such as Campbeltown 489 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 490

[LORD MARTIN OF SPRINGBURN] to say to the officials of the House of Commons when are geographically closer to Ballycastle in Northern they annoyed me on a Thursday, “Leave me alone. Ireland than to Glasgow and other parts of neighbouring The call of the north is coming upon me. I don’t want constituencies. to be bothered”; the only Thursday that I did not leave I have been neutral for 10 years. When I took the London was in preparation for the Cenotaph. My great office of Speaker of the House of Commons, I duty in that travel was to attend to my constituency in gave up my membership of a political party, as other Glasgow North East. I was conscious that, when I Speakers did. Being in a political party is an enjoyable would meet Alan at the airport—we took the same experience. It is not only about political belief, but plane—within half an hour of my arriving at Glasgow friendship and kindredship, going to conferences and airport I could be at a constituency meeting, yet he meeting friends, who are like family. I have given that had a journey of three hours to get to his constituency. up, and I know that people would argue that I was in After travelling from Westminster to Heathrow, he the Labour Party at one time—I do not deny that, and would need to fly to Glasgow and then drive for three am proud of the membership that I had—but I am hours more to get there. I could easily have been at a arguing for a constituency that, to my knowledge, has surgery or attending a parents’ night at a local school never been represented by a member of the Labour while he was still travelling. Party. In fact, one of the great offices of state—that of There is unfairness in that. With a vast area of the Secretary of State for Scotland—was performed mainland, the Mull of Kintyre, Oban and all the other by Michael Noble, who was a Conservative Member areas and then out to those beautiful islands that I of Parliament for Argyll. As a Peer, he then served this have inadequately described, a boundary commissioner House so well after he left the House of Commons—he would then have to go landward, further into Scotland, was a Chairman of Committees—as did the late John to get the numbers up. That would be extremely unfair Mackay, who had also been the MP for Argyll. on any Member who had to take in Argyll. I know A lovely lady whom we all got on with was Ray that the term “special case” has been bandied about Michie, who served the House of Commons so well for several days now, but Argyll should be made a and also came to this House and served so well here. special case. She used to regale us with the stories of how, when she had to go and see her constituents on some of these Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke: I support my noble islands, she had to get on to an old trawler ship and friend’s case about Argyll. I have had a home in Argyll share the accommodation with cattle. for almost 30 years. The issues that he raises about the complexity of travel cannot be overstated. Most of the Lord Browne of Ladyton: As an aspirant politician roads in Argyll and Bute are single-track roads with in 1992, I had the temerity to take on Ray Michie. passing places. I used to travel up on a Thursday night When I took over the candidacy, the Labour Party was with Ray Michie. As I pointed out the other night, I fourth of four parties in the constituency. When I would be home in bed before she had even managed to handed it on to my successor, we were fourth of four get her car defrosted to do a journey of up to two and parties in the constituency. half hours to get to Oban in Argyll. I endorse all that my noble friend has said, but I I travelled around the islands a lot, particularly as could not pass up the opportunity to pay tribute to Secretary of State for Scotland. There are many islands Ray Michie and, in particular, to her husband, who that it would be impossible for the Member of Parliament campaigned for her assiduously during every election to visit and come back from on the same day, so the by going round the constituency, knocking on doors MP would have to remain overnight on the islands. and encouraging people not to vote for her so that he The unfairness of the way in which Argyll and Bute would not have to make his own tea as she was absent is being treated in this legislation gives me cause for in London. He charmed constituents into voting for her. alarm. The Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, represented a constituency that was a Lord Martin of Springburn: I agree with the noble series of islands. He, more than anybody else, knows Lord. She was a lovely lady. the complexity of representing islands. It is an oversight of overwhelming proportions that Argyll and Bute Of course, there is fantastic compensation in a should not be given special status in the Bill. If a Member representing a constituency like Argyll. My boundary commissioner were even to visit the islands fondness for the music of the Highland pipes comes in and look at their complexity, the commissioner would part from the fact that there are so many tunes, probably be lost for a month. Strathspeys, reels and marches that are named after the romantic places of Argyll and the beautiful islands there. Lord Martin of Springburn: The noble Baroness is At the moment, the seat is represented by Alan perfectly correct. She reminds me about the single-track Reid. I have not spoken to him recently, but I received roads. The difficulty is not only in getting around the a note from him in which he encouraged me to highlight islands but in getting around the great sea lochs of my amendment. What is significant is that, when I met Argyll, such as Loch Goil. For getting landward from Alan, serving in the House of Commons as Speaker, I these, it would be easier to go by boat because of the was a Member of Parliament in my own right. Every single-track roads. Thursday I headed north, as did every other Scottish No noble Lord should be thinking “Well, this is a Member of Parliament. Many a time we shared the nice, rural area and it will be just rural problems that rooms at Heathrow airport waiting for a plane. I used have to be looked at”. There are pockets of poverty in 491 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 492 these areas, because people cannot travel to their proposals was published, goodness knows why, by the work. There is also a great whisky distilling industry Electoral Reform Society—other Members may have on Islay, which gives a great deal of money to the seen this; they drew a map of how the country might Exchequer. The present Member of Parliament would look if there were 50 fewer MPs—they predictably have to take representation from the whisky industry enough gave us four MPs in Shropshire. If someone and come to this House and the other place to highlight had drawn pretty randomly on a map, they probably the difficulties that that industry has. would have made a better job of it. I thank your Lordships for listening to me. My case I simply mention this to remind the Government of is not selfish but, knowing the constituency as I do, I the reported reaction of local MPs and their parties. think that some special pleading should be made. My good friend David Wright, who succeeded me as the Labour MP for Telford, said: Lord Grocott: My Lords, I speak to Amendment 85A “The speculative proposals by the Electoral Society are nonsense– in my name, which adds to the list of preserved and the danger with the Government’s approach is that local communities will not be allowed to have any input in the process”. constituencies the constituency of Telford, which I represented in the other place. The immediate reaction If your Lordships are tempted to think that he would of the House, I am sure, when anyone starts his or her say that as a Labour MP, the Conservative Member of remarks with something like that is to say, “Oh, this is Parliament for Shrewsbury and Atcham, Daniel a purely parochial point, and we can think about Kawczynski, said that it would be, breakfast or whatever takes our minds off the passing “an outrage and simply unacceptable”, speech”. That is not the case. I am doing so because it illustrates at least three serious weaknesses in the Bill. to cut the number of seats in Shropshire, and that: I do not need to repeat that I think that this is a very “The county is actually under-represented in Parliament”. bad Bill with little support in the House of Commons, despite the votes which in no way reflect what members The Conservative MP for Ludlow, Mr Philip Dunne, of all parties in the House of Commons are actually said that he supported a reduction in the number of saying about it. MPs to make Parliament a fitter, leaner place, but added: I will admit five seconds of self-indulgence. I never thought that I would have the opportunity to put my “I am firmly of the view that Shropshire deserves five MPs. former constituency on the Marshalled List. I would The county’s growing population justifies five MPs”. love to see it in Hansard, and so I will have to mention I do not ask the Government to tell me the result of it: the constituency of Telford, comprising the wards their survey, but I put it to the Liberal Democrats that of Brookside, Cuckoo Oak, Dawley Magna, Horsehay they should consult their own Members of Parliament and Lightmoor, Ironbridge Gorge, Ketley and Oakengates, as to whether they favour their constituencies being Lawley and Overdale, Madeley, Malinslee, The Nedge, made bigger and, in particular, ask them whether they Priorslee, St Georges, Woodside, Wrockwardine Wood think that in their own county or city, or wherever the and Trench. No doubt that will be interpreted as gross happen to live, there should be a smaller number of filibustering; I point out to the House that it took Members of Parliament. It would be wonderful if they about five seconds. did that and reported it to the House, but I predict On the substantive point—much encouraged as I that they will do neither. They would not like the result am by the decision of the House to add one more that they got. name to the list of preserved constituencies, which gives me a bit more confidence in making my point—the The disadvantage from our point of view, having Bill proposes boundary redistributions every five years, argued long and hard for five MPs and now being told which is a bad decision in any case. It was only at the that we are almost certainly going to get four, and the 1997 general election that at long last we got five knowledge that right around the United Kingdom Members of Parliament for Shropshire. There was a there will be people making points of this kind—“By pretty overwhelming case for that happening over a all means get rid of a few MPs, but not in our longish period of time. We had always had four, but area”—should be taken into account by the Government we were given five. That was welcomed across the if they have any sense. I have always known that there political spectrum and by representative bodies across is a big majority of Members of Parliament, particularly the country. If this Bill becomes an Act we will Conservative Members of Parliament, who are totally undoubtedly go back down to four constituencies. opposed to Part 1 of the Bill. I increasingly realise that there is a large number of Conservative Members of I issue a gentle piece of advice, if not warning, to Parliament who may be in favour of Part 2 of the Bill the government Front Bench. While they may find for everyone else, but not for their own area. large numbers of people and Members of Parliament who are in favour of, and can argue the case for, I conclude with this appeal. The three exempt reducing the number of MPs by maybe 50, I challenge constituencies so far are Orkney and Shetland, which them to find any substantial local government area, is Liberal, the Western Isles, which is SNP, and the Isle town, city or county across the United Kingdom that of Wight, which is Conservative, so perhaps in the says, “We want fewer Members of Parliament representing mood of generosity that we have noticed once or twice us in Westminster”. They never say that, and they in ministerial responses today the Government will certainly did not say it in Shropshire. It will come as take the magnanimous decision, in the interests of no surprise to the House that when a draft set of harmony right across the House, to exempt a constituency constituency boundaries under the Government’s such as Telford, which is, of course, a Labour seat. 493 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 494

Lord Davies of Stamford: My Lords, I have listened Having said that, I recognise that it is difficult to to this debate with great interest. I listened with great say anything favourable about the City at the present sympathy to the paean of praise for Telford by my time. Bankers and politicians are the two most noble friend Lord Grocott. I happen to know Telford unacceptable groups of humanity at the moment in because, when I was Defence Procurement Minister, this country and, indeed, elsewhere and we just have to among the agencies for which I was responsible were accept that for the time being. As I have said in the the Defence Support Group and the Defence Storage House, there is no doubt that in commercial banking, and Distribution Agency. I visited them in Telford on which is just one area of activity that takes place in the more than one occasion. I watched them doing superb City, serious professional mistakes were made. An work repairing vehicles that had been repatriated from awful lot of the criticism and, indeed, vituperation Afghanistan after having been extremely seriously has, I am afraid, been all too well deserved. damaged by improvised explosive devices. I was immensely Nevertheless, the City of London is much more moved—that is the only word that I can use—not only than commercial banking or investment banking, which by the skill but by the extraordinary dedication of the is my field. The City of London involves stockbroking, people who were working on that job. They knew how securities trading, fund management, international fund enormously important it was for the military and they management—an enormously important field of activity, were proud to do the job, which they did with absolute as my noble friend Lord Myners said—commodities perfection and dedication. If any group of men and trading, insurance and reinsurance, both the company women in this country deserves special electoral market and the Lloyd’s market, and shipping. The recognition, I should find it hard to deny it to the Baltic Exchange is the world’s greatest centre of trading people of Telford. in ship charters. I do not have the figures in my head, Apart from that consideration, I had no idea that but we all know that the City generates an enormous anybody was thinking of making a special concession proportion of gross domestic product. Some people to Telford. Neither was I aware of the attractions of may say that it is disproportionately great, which may the Scottish islands off the coast of Argyll. Having be true in the sense that it would be nice to have a more heard the idyllic descriptions of them from several balanced economy, but the solution to that is not to quarters of the House this evening, I shall certainly run down the great asset and generator of wealth that make it a priority to visit that part of the country. we have, it is to nurture it and ensure that we are in no way inhibiting the development of other sectors of With the leave of the House, I will revert to the City economic activity. of London and speak in support of the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, who spoke The City is an enormous national asset. It is the with the historical erudition that the House will associate envy of Europe that we should have achieved here in with him. I also support the equivalent amendment London, in this time zone, far and away the greatest tabled by my noble friend Lady Hayter, which would financial market in the world. It is a great source of have a similar, although slightly more forceful, effect. employment. The latest figure which I have, which The noble Lord, Lord Brooke, supported by the noble may be out of date but it sticks in my mind, is that half Lord, Lord Jenkin, made a case for the historic privileges a million people work in the City every day. The vast of the City and for the City of London’s right to majority of them come into the City. We have already continue to be recognised as a constituency, or as part heard from the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, that only of a constituency with that name included in it, as has about 4,000 or 5,000 people live in the City and some been the case since Parliament existed. of them do not work there, so it is an enormous generator of wealth and employment. I follow my noble friends Lady Hayter and Lord I think that the House is familiar with the importance Myners in making a more pragmatic case. I am in no of the City to the national economy and will therefore way detracting from the historical case, but I think bear with me when I say that it would be an enormous that there is an important practical reason for continuing mistake to deprive the City of a representative in to ensure that one individual—one man or woman—can Parliament who is explicitly that, who is the Member be described as the Member for the City of London. of Parliament for the Cities of London and Westminster, So that I do not get into trouble, I had better declare or whatever the name might happen to be. It clearly an interest, although it is not really a current interest. needs to be for the City and somewhere else, and Before I entered politics, I was engaged full-time in the Westminster seems to fit it very well, but it must be a City of London, latterly as a director of a merchant single Member of Parliament for the City. If the City bank. I was a colleague of the noble Earl, Lord Home, was divided between two, three or four constituencies—the with whom I shared an office at one time. I saw him in neighbouring constituencies at present—that responsibility his place a moment ago, although he has now left the would not fall on any one man or woman. We would Chamber. Even after I had been elected to Parliament not have a clearly defined interlocutor for government as a Back-Bencher, I continued my role in the City and who could say truthfully that he or she represented the subsequently, before entering the Government, I was City; we would not have one person to whom the City on the council of Lloyd’s of London, which is one of could appeal. the biggest insurance and reinsurance groups in the world. However, I have no current financial interest in Before I give way to my noble friend Lord Myners, the City of London. I am a liveryman of the Goldsmiths’ perhaps I may say that he was an enormously distinguished Company, which is one of the ancient City companies, Minister for the City. We need a Minister for the City but I do not know whether that in any way constitutes and it would be nice if we could again have such an a material interest. able and effective Minister as my noble friend, but the 495 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 496

Minister for the City, by definition, is not a representative out of this Bill will not enable any future Boundary of the City; he is a member of the Government Commission simply to allow the City to disappear as a constrained by collective responsibility. There may be parliamentary responsibility. occasions when the Government want to do something that the City does not want, or the City wants to make Lord Watson of Invergowrie: I rise briefly to supplement representations to the Government to do something the remarks of my noble friends Lord Martin and else. In those situations, it is necessary that the City Lord Foulkes in relation to Amendments 80 and 81 in has a genuine representative in Parliament in the form respect of the city of Edinburgh and the area of Argyll of a man or woman who has in his or her title the and Bute. I speak on both from a personal viewpoint: phrase “Member for the City of London”. I should declare an interest, albeit a rather removed one, in respect of Argyll and Bute. My great-grandmother Lord Myners: I am grateful to my noble friend for came from there in the 1880s as an impoverished his correct anticipation of my point. It is disappointing Gaelic speaker with no English. It is quite moving to that we no longer have a City Minister. We no longer read her Poor Law application, of which I have a copy, have in government a Minister who is seen to have which she signed with just a single X—one of many specific responsibility for the City. Instead, the thousands of islanders forced from the Highlands and responsibility is divided between Mr Mark Hoban in Islands of Scotland by the appalling Highland clearances. the other place and the noble Lord, Lord Sassoon, in An example of that is that the island of Islay, from your Lordships’ House. It is clear that there is a which my great-grandmother came, once had a population dispute between the two of them as to who speaks on of 15,000; that was in the 1830s. It is now 3,500: it behalf of the City; they fight for the juicier parts of dropped dramatically throughout the latter years of the responsibility and eschew the more burdensome the 19th century, with many people going to Canada, ones. The need to have a powerful voice for the City the USA and Australia. should be reflected in the constituency structure. Also, My wife and I regularly keep in touch with I urge the Government to designate one Minister as developments in our extended family through the various the City Minister. That has gone unnoticed, unnoted websites of Islay people. I think it would be wrong to and uncommented on at a time when the City needs say that Argyll and Bute is only about Islay—of course, representation and a direct dialogue between the that is a small part and the part I know best. But the Government and the City. Gaelic tradition of Islay and other islands, as well as the Western Isles, is an important consideration when 1am it comes to parliamentary representation. Islay itself Lord Davies of Stamford: I am so glad that I gave was one of the earliest islands settled. It was the home my noble friend the opportunity to make that point, a of the Lord of the Isles; it has the Gaelic Islay Columba very important point indeed. It is an extraordinary Centre, part of the University of the Highlands and piece of neglect on the part of the Government that Islands, specialising in Gaelic. It is important that that they have decided not to give that explicit responsibility is recognised in terms of its representation. Argyll and to a single Minister. He will acknowledge—I think he Bute itself, as a constituency of about 67,000 people, did in his intervention—that quite separately from would fall short of the arbitrarily chosen figure of that, it is equally important that the City has some 75,000, give or take. As my noble friend Lord Martin individual to go to who actually sits in the House of said, with about 2,700 square miles, it is a massive area Commons and has constituency responsibilities, including to be covered, and that has to be given consideration the City. That cannot possibly be an effective role if it in terms not only of the coastline, which was referred is divided up. We all know that a responsibility divided to, but also of the very specific interests that have to be is a responsibility that gets neglected. It is impossible looked after. There are special islands allowances given for an individual, if he or she were just to represent by the Scottish Government to reflect that. one corner of the City, to go to the Government or—a My noble friend Lady Liddell of Coatdyke mentioned point very well made by my noble friend Lady Hayter—to the fact that, in terms of travelling to and from those go to the European Commission or anybody else and islands, it is rarely a simple matter. Some of them, say, “I am speaking on behalf of the City”. It is including Islay, you can fly to, but mainly you have to equally important that people in the City—it may be go there by ferry. It is very difficult to get there and the different trade associations or individual firms—are back in a day; if a parliamentary representative went able to go to someone in Parliament who understands to one island but wanted to go to more than one, they the City, who, as a matter of professional integrity, has would not be able to get back to their base on the same made sure that he or she is well briefed, even if they do day. In many cases, if you go to an island on one day not have a financial background, on the major issues by ferry, you cannot get off that island for a couple of in the City, whose door is open and can understand days until a ferry is going on somewhere else. representations on City-related subjects and can take It is important to recognise that fact, and to lump them up. That is a great strength in Parliament; that is Argyll and Bute together with some other part of the a great strength for this absolutely key economic sector mainland would be unfortunate. I have to recognise—it in our economy. That is an asset which would be would be unfair not to do so—that Helensburgh is destroyed if we do not retain the City as a specifically part of the Argyll and Bute council area. That only demarcated parliamentary responsibility. So I very came into effect some five years ago, but by and large, much support the two amendments that have been it is a collection of islands needing specific representation. moved tonight, and I hope the Government will take With an electorate of 67,000, it is more than capable these points on board and accept those amendments, of qualifying for that. I hope that that will be borne or at least give us some assurance that whatever comes in mind. 497 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 498

[LORD WATSON OF INVERGOWRIE] time. He says he has relatives who come from Islay, as Finally, I would like to say a few words about I do. I cannot claim to trace mine back to the Lord of Edinburgh. I should also declare an interest as a the Isles, but perhaps he can. constituent in Edinburgh North and Leith, admirably represented—as my noble friend Lord Foulkes said—by Lord Tyler: I shall make a brief contribution and Mr Mark Lazarowicz. The decline in the number of acknowledge that a number of very succinct and relevant Edinburgh constituencies from seven to six and now points have been made in this debate, which contrast to five has been against trends. We know that the most with the way in which the argument was taken forward recent reduction was a reflection of the establishment earlier in the week. I do not in any way disrespect the of the Scottish Parliament. That has some validity on cases that have been made on behalf of specific areas its own, but it means that the city, at a time when its of the country, because I took great pride in the population is growing, has seen a reduction in its constituency which I had the pleasure of representing constituencies. As things stand, if the 75,000 quota for a number of years. were strictly adhered to, it could well lead to Edinburgh being, in effect, farmed out to bits of Lothian—East, I want to make two general points about this whole West and Midlothian—to make up the required figure. group of amendments. Incidentally, I understand that That is why, as my noble friend Lord Foulkes said, the the amendment in the name of my noble friend Lord 10 per cent figure would be far more valuable and Teverson is now in a different group, so I will not would help Edinburgh maintain those five constituencies. address that. First, there have been a number of occasions when those who have direct experience of urban areas Although I live in the area which is part of Leith, I have suggested that somehow rural areas do not deserve will not tread, either literally or figuratively, on the the same amount of attention and that their Members territory of my noble friend Lord O’Neill, who knows of Parliament do not have as much work. Since I was these matters much better than I do. As an incomer, the representative of a very big, scattered rural constituency however, I say that the people of Leith have their own during the period of both foot-and-mouth and BSE—and pride and that must be respected. Equally, the people I know that there other Members who had this of Edinburgh as a city have their own pride. The experience—I have to say that a Member of Parliament historic significance of Edinburgh, not only as the can be on 24-hour call in a rural constituency. I do not capital city of Scotland but also as a major tourist wish to pursue that. Indeed, I know of the long attraction for all sorts of reasons at all times of the distances and the difficult topography in the particular year, has to be given some consideration and not case of Argyll and Bute, which I had the pleasure of treated by the blunt instrument approach, which could visiting when I was responsible for rural policy for my well see the number of constituencies reduced from party in the other House. It is important in this House five. I very much hope that will be taken into account that we do not create an artificial distinction between by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace of urban and rural constituencies. Tankerness, when he responds to this debate. I am trying to be brief.

Lord Selsdon: My Lords, I intervene when anybody Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: We welcome all contributors mentions the word Islay, since my family comes from to this debate. Having sat through many hours of Islay. With a name like McEacharn, one of the biggest debate, I cannot remember anyone, certainly on my whiskey producers in Islay for many years, with a side of the Committee, saying that Members representing black labrador called Islay and with a great-grandfather urban constituencies have a greater workload than who was Lord Provost of Edinburgh, I have to support those representing rural constituencies. We have said the noble Lord, Lord Watson of Invergowrie. But he is that they are different, but the workload is not necessarily making a few mistakes. We, in the McEacharn family, greater. Since I represented a large rural constituency created the Scottish Line—the only shipping line allowed for 26 years, as I said at six o’clock in the morning the to carry the Scottish flag. As things became bad, we other day, I know the workload of rural constituencies. migrated and helped the migration of people all over The noble Lord is falling into the trap of forgetting the world. My other great-grandfather was the first that many rural constituencies throughout the whole Lord Mayor of Melbourne, and one of the first Members of Britain have been represented for years, and represented of the Parliament there. well, by Labour Members of Parliament. Therefore, what the noble Lord says now strikes a chord with me. I support him fully, but he must accept Lord Tyler: I do not deny that for a moment. I think that, over time, there have been movements and migrations the noble Lord has been so busy making speeches that and changes in the economies of the various countries. he has perhaps not had an opportunity of reading If he speaks of Leith, where my family came from as Hansard because that point has been made. well—the shipowners and others—then I congratulate My second point again applies to this group of him on promoting the part of Scotland that I love. amendments.

Lord Watson of Invergowrie: I welcome those remarks, Lord Campbell-Savours: Does the noble Lord accept but at some future stage it might be possible to have a that some of us would contest the contribution of my discussion on the item to which I think the noble Lord noble friend Lord Foulkes of Cumnock? The noble was referring when he said he disagreed with me—the Lord will remember from stories told by secretaries Highland clearances and their effects. That would be a in the House of Commons during the period when I very interesting and worthwhile debate for some future was there that there were often conversations between 499 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 500

Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative secretaries being the case, does he not agree that the system we in which they discussed workload. It very often surfaced have employed for many decades to establish constituency during the conversations that Labour Members in boundaries and ultimately, therefore, as a product, the inner-city seats had a far bigger workload than other size of the House of Commons, should be retained? Members of Parliament. My noble friend obviously While general principles that permit flexibility are set contests this, but he had a secretary who I am sure was down by the legislature, the execution of those principles involved in those conversations as, indeed, was the should be in the hands of an independent body, the noble Lord’s. It was well known. Boundary Commission, subject to sensible local appeal. On that basis, we would certainly have the breadth of Lord Tyler: I apologise to the noble Lord because I principle that he calls for, and I agree with, and we do not understand what he is saying. All I am saying is would also be sensitive to the realities of parliamentary that I think we should all accept in all parts of the representation, community integrity and the relevance House that both those representing rural constituencies of local government boundaries that are in danger of and those representing urban constituencies can have being lost if this Bill is accepted without the amendments an enormous workload. The way in which they respond being put by my noble friends and which are now the to that workload is not something that I want to subject, I hope, of productive joint consideration. pursue. I want to make another general point about this Lord Tyler: I am not sure whether that was an whole group. I am not a lawyer, but I am uneasy about intervention or an extension into a new speech. The too many special exemptions in any legislation. I think noble Lord, Lord Kinnock, has agreed with the principle it is much better if you can design legislation so that I have advanced, but he has taken it into a different you incorporate sufficient flexibility so that you do not development. I accept that, in his inimitable way, he have to have, in the words of this Bill, too many has made a speech to develop the point I was making. preserved constituencies. I understand the arguments— I accept too that he has a perfect right to do so, but although it was very interesting, it was not exactly Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: Surely that is what I wanted to say. exactly the point about Boundary Commission hearings. You do not have to write it in the Bill because that will Lord Grocott: I am not intervening on the noble be allowed to come on later. I put down the amendment Lord and I do not expect him to respond, but we are in for the City of London because I would have expected the Committee stage and he has raised an issue that that consultation with the Lord Mayor of London lies absolutely at the heart of one of the fundamental and others would allow that. That seems a much weaknesses of the Bill. I could not believe it when I better way. Will the noble Lord accept that we are saw that a paragraph in this Bill is headed “Exempt making special cases only because we know that Boundary constituencies”, although the word used may be Commission public inquiries will go so we will not be “Excepted”. Without any attempt to relate them to able to make them there? any other part of the Bill, two constituencies were going to be exempted just like that. As soon as I saw Lord Tyler: The case for the City of London is not that, I must say that I and a number of noble friends what I am referring to. I am referring to those thought, “This Bill has a very big piece of hybridity in constituencies in particular parts of the country where it”. It has all the basic characteristics of a hybrid Bill it is being argued that they should be preserved because one group is being treated separately for no constituencies in their present entirety. I shall make a discernible reason. The Bill gives no explanation of general point because I think it is right to do so within why it is being made into a category. the context of a group of amendments. I accept that it That is a weakness in terms of how Bills ought to is not easy, particularly when we have such a wide be drafted. Here let me say quite clearly, especially range of different circumstances, but I think it is better knowing that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace, legislation so to craft the Bill that there is general is to wind up the debate, that I do not object in the flexibility that accommodates more special circumstances least to the Western Isles or to Orkney and Shetland within the general range of the Bill rather than a having their own constituencies because of their longer and longer list of preserved constituencies. I characteristics. I fully support that and think it is think there is general agreement across the House on absolutely right, but as soon as you trespass into that that. If we can work towards that, that is preferable kind of territory when drafting legislation, it is obvious and leads to better legislation. Therefore, I have listened that there is not a single constituency in England, with great interest to the special cases that have been Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland that could not advanced within this group, but I hope that we will make a case for their unique characteristics to be find a better way of dealing with them. treated as a constituency in its own right and being one of the excepted cases. It is bad drafting and bad 1.15 am politics because it would be so easy to put down an Lord Kinnock: First, I endorse the first of the amendment for every single constituency. arguments the noble Lord has made so eruditely and I am sure that, at his convenience, the noble and accept it as a good definition of what should be the learned Lord, Lord Wallace, could draft a clause that form and nature of Bills, particularly constitutional would allow for Orkney and Shetland quite properly Bills, and most particularly Bills that affect the way in to be a constituency in its own right. He could write it which the people of this country are represented. That in general terms, which is how you should write legislation, 501 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 502

[LORD GROCOTT] Despite having substantially fewer voters than the and it would probably include a number of other proposed new quota of 75,000—in the case of Orkney exempted constituencies, but at least there would be and Shetland I think the electorate is around 37,000 some rationale for what is being done. There is none in and in the Western Isles it is just 21,000—these this paragraph as it stands. It is yet a further example, constituencies are deemed to warrant a special status but a particularly glaring one, of why this is a bad Bill in the Bill. I completely agree with my noble friend that has been badly drafted. Lord Grocott that it is obviously sensible—but I also strongly agree with the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, that Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, that exchange where you are dealing with any public Bill, but most at the end goes to the heart of the issue in relation to especially when you are dealing with a constitutional these amendments. I should indicate which amendments Bill, there must be some principle involved. What is I understand we are considering, starting with Amendment the principle involved such that these two should be 78B, the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord preserved constituencies? Is it that they are island Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, that argues for a constituencies? That cannot be the Government’s principle, classification of constituencies that fall in the special because the Government explicitly rejected exemptions authorities category. I think the name of the noble for both Anglesey and the Isle of Wight. Is it unique Lord, Lord Jenkin, is on that, as is that of the noble geographical circumstances? It cannot be, because there Lord, Lord Newby. We are considering Amendment are more islands that are populated in Argyll and Bute 80, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes of Cumnock, than there are in either the Western Isles or Orkney which says that there shall be five constituencies in the and Shetland. Is it because of the particular historical city of Edinburgh. We are considering Amendment status of these two constituencies? It cannot be, because 81, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Martin of Springburn, the City of London has been mentioned in electoral which argues that a constituency called Argyll and legislation for more than 100 years and the Western Bute should be preserved. We are not, obviously, Isles was first mentioned in electoral legislation only considering Amendment 82, tabled by the noble Lord, 70 years ago. Lord Martin of Springburn, which is in the group, Without a principle, it is very difficult to understand because it is about the Isle of Wight. We are not why special favours have been granted. I do not know considering Amendment 85 because it is about the Isle whether noble Lords remember—many noble Lords of Wight. We are considering Amendment 85A, which were not in the House when it happened—but at the is my noble friend Lord Grocott’s amendment dealing very beginning of this process I admitted to the House with Telford. We are considering my noble friend that this is a hybrid Bill because two constituencies Lady Hayter’s Amendment 85C, which argues that were being taken out, not on the basis of principle, but there should be a constituency that includes the whole on the basis that they were being treated differently of the City of London. We have not had argued my from the rest of the country. I do not want to go over noble friend Lord Liddle’s amendment in relation to the argument of whether it is hybrid. My own view Cumbria. I will only deal with the amendments that I remains that it is hybrid and that it is absolutely clear have just referred to, going through the list. that hybridity can come not just from property interests, The Government have consistently argued that the but from interests such as a desire to live in a particular core principle underpinning their proposed new rule place, as occurred in the previous case concerning for drawing parliamentary constituencies is equality. Gatwick Airport. Put all that to one side. The consequence The Bill is designed, within a very narrow tolerance, to of the Government resisting the hybridity Motion and create equal-sized seats. As we have said repeatedly, we the consequence of there being no principle underlying on this side of the House agree with the principle of these two exceptions mean that we are now in the creating more equal-sized seats but, as we have consistently position that we are in. pointed out, the Bill sets out this objective in a clumsy and unfair fashion. As we have heard, and will continue Distinguished Members of this House, such as the to hear, it aims to equalise seats on the basis of an noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, make unequal electoral register and it aims to do so in a way persuasive arguments for special treatment for other that will override all other factors such as geography, places. The argument that he makes, that the noble community and history, which ought to be taken into Lord, Lord Foulkes, makes for the capital city of account in some way when designing patterns of Scotland or that the noble Lord, Lord Martin of representation. Yet, a curiosity about the Bill is that Springburn, makes are all incredibly persuasive. With while the principle of numerical equalisation is deemed respect to my noble friend Lord Grocott, I am not sure to be the trump card in almost all cases, there are some that the argument for Telford was quite as strong as places and some circumstances where the iron law of the others, but those ones were very persuasive and uniform statistics has been disregarded. that is because there is no principle that one can legitimately identify. There have been a lot of attempts For example, a new rule on the maximum territorial to identify a principle. I have distilled the two that have extent of a constituency has been invented, accompanied been given so far by Mr Mark Harper in the other by a “get out of jail” free clause for at least one place and by Mr Nicholas Clegg and I understand Scottish Highland seat from the requirement to adhere them to be island communities, geography and history. to the electoral quota. Alongside that, in new paragraph 6 They just do not stack up as an explanation. in Clause 11 is a further exemption from the electoral quota, which we have heard a lot about, for two I understand the foundation of the Bill to be a Scottish island seats—Orkney and Shetland and the pamphlet written by Mr Andrew Tyrie, Conservative Western Isles are to be preserved, as it were, in aspic. Member of Parliament, who is described as the brains 503 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 504 behind the boundary review policy. In his pamphlet, This sequence of amendments is obviously important Pruning the Politicians, Mr Tyrie wrote that special in relation to the individual places to which they refer, considerations, but they demonstrate absolutely the utter unthought-out “should be abolished … The principle of equal representation is nature of the Bill and demonstrate that this is not a too important to be compromised by get-outs”. valid piece of constitutional change; it is a political Not for the first time, I disagree strongly with Mr Tyrie. horse-trade which is difficult to defend on constitutional Although we should create more equal-sized seats, we terms. That does not mean that this side of the House should do so in a way that, in special cases, continues does not want more equal constituencies—we do—but to allow factors other than pure statistics to influence we want it done in a durable way and we think that the shape of constituencies. The best solution would this sequence of amendments is important and requires be for the Government to bring forward the proposal answer. that some independent body identify a very small I shall deal, finally, with the amendment of my number of exceptions to preserve the principle of noble friend Lord Foulkes of Cumnock, which says equality, rather than the situation we have at the that there should be five constituencies in Edinburgh. moment, where two political parties have come together I declare an interest—I was born and brought up in and agreed these two exceptions. Edinburgh. I can think of no place that is more I do not know the basis on which these two exceptions deserving of five constituencies, whatever the population were agreed. Were they agreed in the coalition agreement of Edinburgh, than Edinburgh, so I particularly support talks? Were they agreed separately? What was the that amendment. basis on which the agreement was reached? I think that one is a Scottish National Party seat and one a Lord Judd: Does my noble friend agree that once Liberal Democrat seat. I think that the exception in again, as we consider these amendments, we see that relation to size particularly helps two Liberal Democrat the Bill is strategically flawed? The British public, the seats in the north of Scotland, so it would appear that electorate of the whole United Kingdom, have not two of the exceptions help the Liberal Democrats. seen the case for the change, let alone the details proposed for the change. In a democracy that was really sound, there would be an opportunity for an 1.30 am expression of opinion by the electorate of the whole There is a problem with that. I am sure that the United Kingdom on what was being proposed. If we noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, are taking upon ourselves the responsibility for making in all his dealings in relation to all of this, is only the change, it is more important than ever that all the motivated by a proper constitutional settlement. However, rationale for what is being done is absolutely explicable if you have two political parties in a five-day haggle and spelled out. What I fear is that, at a time when reaching agreement on exceptions and it is impossible public confidence in the political system is at a pretty to identify any intellectual basis upon which exceptions low ebb, this will again be seen as arrogance on the are to be agreed to, naturally, in the House of Commons part of a closed political community in Westminster. and the House of Lords, people will press the Minister for an explanation and it is on the basis of the quality Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I agree with every word of that explanation that people outside will judge of that. The detailed point is that, if you were minded whether or not those exceptions are justified. If the to have exceptions, surely the starting point would Government are serious about this boundary review—and have been a public consultation in which people who by serious, I mean not just that they want to get it thought that their area was entitled to special favours through, but they want it to last as a constitutional could have put their arguments, which could then at settlement—they should be thinking about legitimacy. least have been seen by the public. However, because The idea that exceptions can be simply plucked out of this Bill has had no public consultation and no pre- the air with no principle and no justification seriously legislative scrutiny, that opportunity has not existed. undermines the durability of this settlement. I will be listening very closely to what the Minister says was the basis upon which these two exceptions Lord Wallace of Tankerness: My Lords, I come now were chosen. Also, if it is geography and history that to address the series of amendments that have been are the two criteria, what about the geography of spoken to or moved. I agree with the noble and Argyll and Bute? Let us remember that there are parts learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, about which of that constituency which could not be reached except amendments we are dealing with, except to say that by trawler. My noble friend Lady Liddell of Coatdyke the initial amendment, which was moved by my noble said yesterday that there were some parts of the friend Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, was constituency that the late Ray Michie could only visit Amendment 66C. Linked with that was the amendment one day in a year. If history is a criterion, I thought that relates to the exceptions or the preserved that the case made by the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, constituencies, to which the noble and learned Lord was a pretty strong case. It is a pretty bad idea to devoted most of his remarks. However, we are on spread the City of London over three constituencies; common ground as to which amendments we are it should be kept in one. That sounds perfectly sensible discussing. to me; it is the sort of argument that I would have On numerous occasions during the Committee stage thought would appeal to a Boundary Commission of this Bill, I have spoken about the principles behind and would not offend against the numerical quota that the Government’s approach and our belief in equal has been put into the Bill. votes—one vote, one value. As my noble friend Lord 505 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 506

[LORD WALLACE OF TANKERNESS] alone travel from Orkney to Shetland—you can travel Tyler indicated, that is the principle and it is important from Orkney to Shetland by plane, but you then have that the exceptions to it are limited. I shall therefore to go very much further again. deal with the exceptions first. They are the constituencies of Orkney and Shetland and what used to be referred to as the Western Isles—I am not a Gaelic speaker and Lord Reid of Cardowan: The Minister is giving us I do not want to disgrace the Gaelic language by even not a principle but a geographical description, and attempting the Gaelic name. saying that those places are geographically different. But so is Argyll; so are many of the other examples The noble Lord, Lord Grocott, echoed by the noble given. So I have to ask the Minister again: what is the and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, again raised the principle by which these places are being distinguished question of hybridity. Noble Lords who were present from the other examples being given? The distances at the outset of these debates, before Second Reading, are similar to those in Argyll; the size of Argyll is some will recall that that matter was thoroughly debated in 2,000 square miles. this House. The Clerks gave the advice that the Bill was not hybrid and the House had its say on the Lord Wallace of Tankerness: I rather suspect that matter, rejecting the argument, however eloquently the noble Lord was not listening as attentively as he and persuasively put by the noble and learned Lord, would normally do, because I said that those constituencies Lord Falconer, that the Bill was hybrid. had been excepted because they were dispersed island The noble and learned Lord asked why the Bill groups which could not readily be combined with the makes the exceptions of the two preserved constituencies. mainland. By definition, Argyll and Bute is already a For anyone who has looked at a map, the reason is set of islands which has been readily combined with probably blindingly obvious. The constituencies are at the mainland and which over many decades has been the most extreme parts of our United Kingdom. If represented by very distinguished, hard working Members anyone has any doubt, let me say that Orkney and of Parliament—I think back to Michael Noble and Shetland are at the very top and go far north; they are my late noble friend Lady Michie of Gallanach. It is not in a box somewhere in the Moray Firth—my now represented my colleague and honourable friend former constituents used to be very irritated when it Mr Alan Reid. The two preserved constituencies are looked as though the distance between Shetland and not readily combined with the mainland. If they were Aberdeen was very small. Indeed, the fact that they to be so combined, they would be part of constituencies are so far away is a factor. We are talking not just whose surface area would be larger than the largest about geography but about extreme geography, where constituency. Let us remember, when we talk about the dispersed island groups cannot readily be combined surface area, we are not talking about areas of sea as with the mainland. It takes 12 hours by ferry from well, which would not be counted into surface area. Lerwick in Shetland to Aberdeen on the Scottish The most recent judgment of the Boundary Commission mainland. By any stretch of the imagination, that was that the maximum size of a constituency should situation is extreme. be what was manageable for constituents and MPs. We could contrast that with other islands that are That is why we brought forward the other rule, rule 4, already combined with mainland constituencies. Argyll which sets a physical, geographical size limit, just by and Bute is one example; it comprises a substantial sheer reference to manageability. It perhaps cannot mainland area together with islands. The constituency stand as a legal principle, but trying to make sure that of St Ives, which is represented by my honourable you do not go beyond a certain extreme of manageability friend Mr Andrew George, includes the Scilly Isles. is surely in the interests both of the Member, of The constituency of, I think, Cunninghame North, whichever party, and the electors, who have to make which includes Arran and, I suspect, the Cumbraes, is contact with their Member of Parliament. represented by—I am sorry, I cannot remember. I think that it was being implied by the noble and learned Lord that there is some political motivation Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: It is represented by Miss behind the proposal. As I have said, it is obvious from Katy Clark. the extreme geographical position of the two constituencies why they have been exempted. Although Orkney and Lord Wallace of Tankerness: I have no reason to Shetland has been represented by a Liberal or a Liberal doubt that. These are examples of island communities Democrat for the past 61 years, I am sure that the which are linked to and can readily be combined with noble and learned Lord will acknowledge that, until the mainland. 1997, the Western Isles had a Labour Member of We took extreme geographical circumstances into Parliament—indeed, until 1970, when the late Donald account. If the preserved constituencies were linked Stewart won the Western Isles, it had been represented and combined with part of the mainland, their surface by the Labour Party from the 1930s. I am sure that his area would almost inevitably be larger than that of colleagues in the Labour Party in the Western Isles the largest current constituency. In the course of our have no intention of giving up their aspirations for debates in Committee, concerns have been expressed that seat. Our approach is in no way partisan; it is a by many noble Lords about the distances which people recognition of geography. have to travel. I recall in one debate—I cannot remember which of the many—someone talking about the possibility Lord Davies of Stamford: Is the Minister telling us of having to drive for two-and-a-half hours to get to a that, in the coalition’s discussions which gave birth to place. In Orkney and Shetland, it can require two-and- this Bill, the Liberal Democrats—leader or otherwise—did a-half hours even to get to one part of Orkney, let not insist on these two exemptions in Scotland? 507 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 508

1.45 am Lord Jenkin, the noble Lords, Lord Myners and Lord Davies of Stamford, and, very persuasively, by the Lord Wallace of Tankerness: I was not in the front noble Baroness, Lady Hayter of Kentish Town. I think line, but I have no recollection of these specific seats the important role that the City of London has in the ever being mentioned in the coalition talks during the history of this nation is well recognised across the famous five days in May. If they were mentioned, they Committee, as is the important financial contribution were not mentioned in my hearing in any of those that the City makes. negotiations. I have no reason to believe that they were mentioned. They are self-evidently at the extreme end As I have indicated, the primary concern of the Bill of geographical considerations. is to create more equal-sized constituencies, and that is best achieved by keeping exceptions to the minimum. As a result, the Government do not believe that the Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Then to whom can we City of London should appear as an exception. While give the credit for making these suggestions? Who it is not for me to say what the Boundary Commission originally came up with these suggestions for preserved for England will do, I hope it might reassure noble constituencies and when? Lords to know that the 25 wards in the City of London have fewer than 7,000 electors, which is smaller Lord Wallace of Tankerness: Obviously discussions than some individual wards elsewhere in the country. I took place in the preparation of this Bill. I honestly therefore suspect that it is unlikely that the City will be cannot think of who took the final decision, no more split between two constituencies. This is a very obvious than anyone else here. Who was involved in which part case where the rules, particularly rule 5 about where of which Bill— special local ties would be broken by changes in constituencies, would be highly relevant in addressing Lord Rennard: Would my noble friend agree that the Boundary Commission. whoever devised the 1986 legislation devised the exception The question was raised with regard to the historic for Orkney and Shetland, that it has been around for nature of the City. The position, as I understand it, is many decades and was not new in this Bill? Treating that while Magna Carta protects certain privileges of the Western Isles in the same way is purely logical. the City of London, paragraph 628 of volume 12(1) of Halsbury’s Laws of England lists customs of the City Lord Wallace of Tankerness: It was not the 1986 that have been certified by the Recorder and recognised legislation. Let me put it on the record that Orkney by the courts, but does not include anything on Parliament and Shetland is under present legislation outwith the or constituencies. However, there is considerable history purview of the Boundary Commission for Scotland. here and I would want to do better justice to this issue. Orkney and Shetland is preserved as a Westminster I hope that I shall be able to write to the noble constituency by virtue of the Scotland Act 1998, which Baroness who raised this matter, addressing the point was passed by the previous Labour Government. It that she made concerning the history of the City as a was outstandingly passed as it was a very good piece parliamentary constituency, and I shall seek to do so of work. It was whipped through by the noble Lord, before Report. As for the name of the constituency, Lord McAvoy. It gives the constituency of Orkney and again, that should be a matter for the Boundary Shetland preserved status. It was not done by this Commission. However, I have no doubt that those party but by a Labour Government. I congratulate who feel strongly about any proposal from the commission them on it. It seemed logical that the Western Isles that affects the City of London will be able to make should be treated in a similar way in this Bill. representations to it. I certainly recognise the importance of the name of the City of London, and we believe that this strikes the best balance between respecting Lord McAvoy: The Minister has forced me to break the history of the nation’s communities, including my self-denying ordinance about intervening on Ministers. the City of London, and providing equal weight to the However, he will recall that in a previous discussion votes of those who live in all our communities. about Orkney and Shetland both getting MSP seats he I turn to the question of Edinburgh— said that one day he would give us details of the deal he struck with the late Donald Dewar to get that. Who did he do this deal with to get preserved constituency Lord Davies of Stamford: My Lords— status? Lord Wallace of Tankerness: No, I think that we Lord Wallace of Tankerness: I did not do a deal have heard quite a bit on this matter. I turn now to the with anyone with regard to this. I have just paid tribute other capital city, Edinburgh, which was referred to by to the party opposite which recognised the importance the noble Lords, Lord Foulkes and Lord Watson of of Orkney and Shetland by giving them separate seats Invergowrie, and indeed, with due deference to his in the Scottish Parliament and preserving the Orkney native home, by the noble and learned Lord, Lord and Shetland Westminster seat. I hope that noble Falconer of Thoroton. I do not think that the noble Lords will think that it is not unreasonable that, given Lord, Lord Foulkes, declared his interest as a supporter the similar circumstances of the Western Isles, they of Heart of Midlothian Football Club—perhaps he should be included. just took it that it is a well known fact. If the additional There were some important contributions in this five constituencies all contained in the Edinburgh debate about the City of London. The amendment council area were to be excepted, which would be the was spoken to by my noble friends Lord Brooke and consequence of the amendment, from the 5 per cent 509 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 510

[LORD WALLACE OF TANKERNESS] great, and the fact that the islands are already incorporated above or below the rule, they would be projected to in the mainland, it would not qualify for a preserved diverge on average from the electoral quota by just constituency in the same way as the Western Isles and over 12,300 electors—that is, just over 16 per cent. Orkney and Shetland do. Again, I do not think that that ties in with the concept As to the island area of Telford being surrounded of fairness and equal votes, as we believe that by the rest of Shropshire— constituencies should be broadly of equal size. I do not believe that there are the geographical Lord Grocott: The Labour island. challenges that we find in the two constituencies that have been preserved. I know Edinburgh reasonably well and I do not think that there are geographical Lord Wallace of Tankerness: As the noble Lord, challenges there that would make it particularly difficult Lord Grocott, says, the Labour island. He referred to for MPs to see their constituents or for constituents to this because it gave him an opportunity to make some see their MPs. Nor, indeed, is this a case in which there important points, but he will readily recognise the is an issue of sparsity of population. The noble Lord, arguments for preservation. I do not think that even Lord O’Neill, mentioned that, for the Boundary he would start to claim that it has a special extreme Commission, the Edinburgh East constituency had geographical situation. I understand what he is saying, sometimes included and sometimes excluded Musselburgh, but a Boundary Commission will be able to devise and which I believe lies administratively in the county of recommend seats within the parameters of size defined East Lothian. Therefore, Edinburgh has expanded its in the Bill that give proper and fair representation and boundaries in the past for parliamentary purposes. a fair vote and fair value to the people of Shropshire, including the people of Telford. Ultimately, it will be for the independent Boundary Commission to take account of all the factors. I say In any of these matters, we should not lose sight of this only because I think that the noble and learned the fact that while, yes, primacy is given in the legislation Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, said that in every to securing fair votes and fair values as best we can, circumstance he would want Edinburgh to have five the Boundary Commission still may—I acknowledge seats. If Edinburgh, in order to thrive and flourish, as that the numbers within the margins take primacy—take we would all wish to see, merited six seats, I am not into account, to such extent as it thinks fit, special sure why in statute we should restrict the number to geographical considerations, including the particular five. There is a problem in going down that road. size, shape and accessibility of a constituency; local However, I have no doubt that the Boundary Commission government boundaries as they existed at recent ordinary will be able to secure equality of votes between council election days; and any local ties that would be constituencies within the 5 per cent margin and that broken by changes in the constituencies. These are Edinburgh’s standing as Scotland’s capital city will in important factors, which will help to address a number no way be impaired. of the concerns that have been raised not only in this debate but in other parts of the United Kingdom. I turn to the case made by the noble Lord, Lord Martin of Springburn, and supported by others, including In these circumstances, I hope that the noble Lord the noble Lord, Lord Watson, on Argyll and Bute. As will withdraw his amendment. We are certainly conscious I have already indicated, Argyll and Bute already of the concerns expressed and we recognise the strength combines islands and the mainland, which I think of feeling, but we are confident that the variation of distinguishes it from the two that are reserved and up to 10 per cent between the biggest and smallest which, as I have already indicated, we do not believe constituencies will lead to a reasonable balance between could incorporate part of the mainland very readily. equal value votes and have proper regard to locally Argyll and Bute is already very close to the range that meaningful boundaries. will be required under the Bill. Although I recognise noble Lords’ concern about large areas, I have already Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: My Lords, I am referred to the fact that there are rules in the Bill that grateful to all noble Lords and Baronesses who have would ensure that the size did not become unmanageable. spoken in this vigorous debate, especially my noble It is not just at 13,000 but at between 12,000 and friend Lord Jenkin of Roding. I admire the spirit of 13,000 square kilometres that there is a sliding scale. the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter of Kentish Town, The noble Lord, Lord Watson, mentioned even if I cannot support the precise wording of her Helensburgh, which is currently part of the Argyll and amendment because it seeks, beyond peradventure, to Bute constituency. I believe that in parliamentary terms avoid the hybridity issue. I appreciated the quotation it is a recent addition, although in local government given by my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding—as, terms it has been part of the Argyll and Bute council no doubt, did the Opposition—of the resonant 1944 area for some time. Helensburgh, of course, is historically voice of the Home Secretary, Mr Herbert Morrison, part of the ancient county of Dunbartonshire, so its who is of course the grandfather of the noble Lord, boundaries have already changed and it is now familiar Lord Mandelson, and I thank the noble Lord, Lord as part of Argyll and Bute. I was a sufficiently political Myners, for his kind words. anorak in my youth that I can remember when Argyll I have heard what my noble and learned friend the and Bute did not have Bute and that Bute was part of Minister said, and I thank him for what he said about a north Ayrshire and Bute constituency, so Bute has the Magna Carta, about which he offered to write to migrated backwards and forwards. In areas such as both me and the noble Baroness. I understand the these, there has been no fixed boundary. Therefore, Government’s overall position, as he has indicated it, given the safeguards to prevent its size becoming too but before I contemplate whether to beg leave to 511 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 512 withdraw the amendment, I hope that the Minister that needs to be negotiated between the parties. The will agree to a meeting with us to discuss this issue sooner serious negotiations start, the better. I make it before Report, based on the strength of the case clear on behalf of the Labour Party and the Opposition presented on all sides of the debate. I remind him that we are keen to engage in serious negotiations. quietly that at the time of the 1948 Act, the Governor This process of going deep into the night should be of the Bank of England, the chairman of Lloyd’s brought to an end. As I look across the Chamber, I insurance and, I think, the chairman of the Stock must say, with the greatest respect, that half the people Exchange accompanied the Lord Mayor of London on this side and half the people on the other side are to the Bar of the other place to present the strength of half asleep; probably half the people who are supposed the City’s case. If my noble and learned friend the to be negotiating are getting more and more exhausted. Minister nods his head to my request for a meeting in There should be an adjournment and cool heads should such a way that it can been seen by the Hansard writer, start to kick in. The way in which the House of Lords I shall— always pulls back from the brink is by negotiation. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, 2pm urged earlier in the day, as the noble Lord, Lord Low, Lord Wallace of Tankerness: Perhaps I should put urged during the 21-hour session and again today, and this beyond peradventure in case the Hansard writer as is the view of many on all sides of the House, we does not see my head. I am sure that I would be willing should stop what has been described as legislating to meet and I am sure that the representations made until we drop and show some leadership by starting to by my noble friend will be every bit as powerful as negotiate. For all those reasons, I urge the House to those that were made by the various dignitaries to resume. whom he referred. Lord Soley: I support that strongly. I have watched Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: In response to with growing concern the way in which this has been the generosity of my noble and learned friend in handled by the Government. It is mind-blowing that standing up to agree to a meeting, I ask leave to the Government, and the two political parties that withdraw the amendment. make up the Government, are prepared to do so much damage to the reputation of the House of Lords. Amendment 66C withdrawn. Noble Lords: Oh! Motion Lord Soley: I ask Members to think about this. Moved by Lord Falconer of Thoroton They know, I know and everyone in this House knows That the House do now resume. that this is an important constitutional Bill. They also know, as was pointed out a number of times in the debate, including in the debate on the amendment that Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I beg to I moved a couple of days ago, that it is extremely move that the House do now resume. We had, as unusual—in fact, I know of no other case of this in a everyone in the Chamber knows, 21 hours of debate modern parliamentary democracy—for two parties on this issue on Monday and Tuesday, stopping at 1 forming a Government to force a decision on the pm. We then had another few hours on Tuesday number of seats in the House of Commons where evening and, through Wednesday night into Thursday there is neither all-party agreement nor an independent morning in this sitting, we have now had between assessment of the needs of Parliament. The Government seven and eight hours on the Bill. Between now and are not just breaking the rules of normal constitutional the date by which the Government have said that the procedures; they are breaking the rules of what is Bill has to be out of Parliament, there are nine legislating normally done in modern democracies. That is why, as days in the Lords. The Bill has been listed for Monday I pointed out a few days ago, we look very carefully and Wednesday of next week for the Committee stage, when we conduct investigations on elections overseas making a total of 13 days in Committee. at how those Parliaments are constructed. If they are On the basis that the Report stage takes between a constructed by one or more political parties trying to third and half of the time taken in Committee, there dominate the others, they invariably run into trouble are to be between four and six Report days. On the and damage the reputation of the whole country. basis that Third Reading takes between one and three I say again to noble Lords that there have been days and, because this is an important constitutional plenty of opportunities for serious negotiation. A Bill, there are the usual gaps between the two stages number of people on this side of the House have made yet to come—Committee and Report, and Report and it clear that there is a willingness to accept the referendum; Third Reading—there is absolutely no prospect that some people are for the alternative vote and some this Bill will come out of the House on 16 February. people are against it. The noble Lord, Lord Wills, and We have offered for the Bill to be split to allow the I, as well as a number of others, have made the point referendum to go ahead on 5 May, which the Government that we are willing to negotiate quite happily on the have said is their desire. We have no desire to stop the number of seats, because we take the view that the referendum. That offer has been rejected by all, up to House of Commons is too large, just as the House of and including the Prime Minister of this country, and Lords is too large. But what you cannot do, should not therefore some other solution is required. It is a solution do and should not try to do is to force a position on 513 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 514

[LORD SOLEY] everybody. In the past 48 hours, the amendments have the constitution with far too little thought and no not been loaded up on the Marshalled List. No one agreement between the political parties and organisations has gone away and shovelled a barrow-load of that are part of it. amendments on. That could easily have happened, but it did not. There is a great deal of material that could Lord Teverson: My Lords, I have found that the last be amended, particularly, I think, in Schedules 8 to 10 few amendments that we have discussed in this House on the voting system, which we have not dealt with have been dealt with remarkably constructively.However, yet; we have dealt only with Schedule 1. That has not while on the whole I am a great admirer of the noble been done. I am saying that there ought to be a better Lord, Lord Soley, I think that his intervention at this way of doing this than the one that we are being point is starting to pull things apart again. I ask noble driven towards. My noble and learned friend has made Lords to think again before they intervene at this a very good suggestion and it would be wise for point. everybody to accept it.

Lord Soley: I thank the noble Lord for his intervention. 2.13 am I am quite happy to accept what he is advising me to do. I simply say, as I said a few moments ago, that the Division on Lord Falconer of Thoroton’s Motion. House is doing itself no favours and the Government are doing themselves no favours by not negotiating. Contents 63; Not-Contents 103. Motion disagreed. Lord Rooker: It seems, on the basis of the intervention of the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, that the style of Division No. 4 what has been happening contradicts what I heard the Prime Minister say some hours ago. I thought that I CONTENTS heard him say that the beauty of the coalition was that Bach, L. Kennedy of Southwark, L. it was not ideological and that it could do things Bassam of Brighton, L. Kinnock, L. differently. That was said not in the context of this [Teller] Knight of Weymouth, L. Bill, by the way; it was in the context of another part Bilston, L. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. of government policy. However, the impression that I Boyd of Duncansby, L. Lipsey, L. get—the noble Lord’s intervention has justified this—is Brooke of Alverthorpe, L. McAvoy, L. Brookman, L. McDonagh, B. that the coalition has locked in the two parties. I am Browne of Ladyton, L. not party to any discussions, but it seems that even in McKenzie of Luton, L. Campbell-Savours, L. Myners, L. the face of the evidence neither of them can move, Crawley, B. Nye, B. Davies of Stamford, L. because they are locked in to what they decided. O’Neill of Clackmannan, L. Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde, B. Palmer, L. Noble Lords: Oh! Desai, L. Prescott, L. Dubs, L. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Elder, L. Reid of Cardowan, L. Lord Rooker: Noble Lords can deny it all they like. I Elystan-Morgan, L. Rooker, L. am just giving my view. I am entitled to my view. I am Falconer of Thoroton, L. Rosser, L. just saying that that is the way it appears. We do not Farrington of Ribbleton, B. Rowlands, L. have the flexibility because of the way in which the Faulkner of Worcester, L. Royall of Blaisdon, B. coalition was put together. I am not complaining Foster of Bishop Auckland, L. Scotland of Asthal, B. about that. In five days, the parties had very little Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Slim, V. Golding, B. Smith of Basildon, B. choice and the numbers did not make any other coalition Grenfell, L. Smith of Finsbury, L. viable. I have said that before; I do not argue about it. Grocott, L. Snape, L. But the reality now is that the position is more locked Haworth, L. Soley, L. than it would have been if we had had single-party Hayter of Kentish Town, B. Stone of Blackheath, L. government. That is the impression that I get. We have Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Thornton, B. Henig, B. Touhig, L. to be able to free the situation up. What my noble and Howarth of Newport, L. Triesman, L. learned friend said is the reality. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Tunnicliffe, L. [Teller] As for the last few amendments, I have sat through Jones, L. Watson of Invergowrie, L. the lot. I have made only two brief interventions—they Judd, L. Winston, L. have not been speeches—but I am wondering why. If we had discussed that last group of amendments in NOT CONTENTS Monday’s style, we would have decoupled them all. I Addington, L. Browning, B. kept saying to myself, “Why are we not decoupling Allan of Hallam, L. Burnett, L. these? Why are we doing it all sweet and light?”. But it Anelay of St Johns, B. [Teller] Caithness, E. Astor of Hever, L. Carlile of Berriew, L. made sense to do that. That is what has happened in Attlee, E. Cope of Berkeley, L. the last few hours. Barker, B. De Mauley, L. My noble and learned friend has made the point Bates, L. Dixon-Smith, L. that it is time to take a break; it is time to take a Benjamin, B. Eccles, V. Bradshaw, L. Eccles of Moulton, B. breather. After that, let us continue in the way that we Bridgeman, V. Eden of Winton, L. have been in the last few hours, rather than going back Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, Empey, L. to the way we did it on Monday. The choice is there for L. Falkner of Margravine, B. 515 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 516

Flight, L. Moynihan, L. However, under the Crown there are more dependent Freud, L. Neville-Jones, B. territories than the four countries of the United Kingdom. Garden of Frognal, B. Nicholson of Winterbourne, I am talking not about independent countries but Gardiner of Kimble, L. B. Garel-Jones, L. Northbrook, L. about Crown dependencies—home and overseas Geddes, L. Northover, B. dependencies, and overseas and home territories. I am German, L. Norton of Louth, L. suggesting that each constituency should be wholly in Goodlad, L. O’Cathain, B. one of Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland, so that Greaves, L. Popat, L. they should each comprise a whole number of Green of Hurstpierpoint, L. Rawlings, B. Hamwee, B. Rennard, L. constituencies, while the fourth area that would comprise Harris of Richmond, B. Ribeiro, L. a whole number of constituencies would be, Henley, L. Sassoon, L. “England together with the home and overseas dependent territories”. Higgins, L. Scott of Needham Market, B. Hill of Oareford, L. Seccombe, B. This is a radical change from the current position, as Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, Selborne, E. noble Lords will immediately recognise, with three L. Selsdon, L. particular motivations or inspirations behind it. Home, E. Shaw of Northstead, L. Howard of Rising, L. Sheikh, L. The first inspiration is the former Member for Howe, E. Shipley, L. Thurrock in the other place, Andrew Mackinlay. Noble Howell of Guildford, L. Shrewsbury, E. Lords who knew Andrew, who served in the other Hunt of Wirral, L. Shutt of Greetland, L. [Teller] place or who heard him speak will have heard him Inglewood, L. Stedman-Scott, B. Jenkin of Roding, L. Stewartby, L. argue again and again that the home and overseas Jolly, B. Stowell of Beeston, B. dependent territories should be considered and should Jopling, L. Strathclyde, L. be involved in the Parliament of the United Kingdom. King of Bridgwater, L. Taylor of Holbeach, L. He argued that very strongly and very forcefully. He Kramer, B. Teverson, L. raised it with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Lawson of Blaby, L. Thomas of Gresford, L. Lee of Trafford, L. Tope, L. Association on a number of occasions. He went a little Liverpool, E. True, L. further and said that the whole of Ireland should be Lucas, L. Tyler, L. reincorporated into the United Kingdom, which was a Luke, L. Ullswater, V. step too far in many ways. However, he is the first Mancroft, L. Verma, B. inspiration. Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Wallace of Saltaire, L. L. Wallace of Tankerness, L. The second inspiration behind it is the example of Marland, L. Walmsley, B. Gibraltar. Gibraltar is already included with part of Marlesford, L. Warsi, B. the United Kingdom in a constituency for the European Mayhew of Twysden, L. Wei, L. Parliament, so that the south-west of England and Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Wheatcroft, B. B. Wilcox, B. Gibraltar together form a constituency. Gibraltarians Morris of Bolton, B. Younger of Leckie, V. vote along with people of Devon and Cornwall and other parts of the south-west in one constituency to 2.22 am choose a Member for the European Parliament. The third inspiration behind it is from France, a country that I am getting to know quite well. As the Amendments 67 to 67B not moved. noble Lord, Lord Taylor of Holbeach, will know—I see him regularly either on his way over there or on his way back—and as others will know, in particular the Amendment 67C noble Lord, Lord Howell, who is a Minister for the Moved by Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Foreign and Commonwealth Office, France has two types of overseas territories—TOMs and DOMs: 67C: Clause 11, page 9, leave out lines 29 and 30 and insert— territoires d’outre-mer en France and départements “( ) Each constituency shall be wholly in one of Scotland, d’outre-mer. The territoires d’outre-mer are like our Wales, Northern Ireland or England together with the home and dependent territories, but départements d’outre-mer overseas dependent territories.” are integral parts of Metropolitan France. They vote in the parliamentary elections, they have representatives in the assembly in Paris and they have representatives Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: It is a great privilege to in the senate in Paris as well. speak to such a full House at such a time and to move this amendment—which would leave out lines 29 and We should look at the example of départements 30 on page 9. It is in order to make the purpose of the d’outre-mer and consider the possibility of incorporating, amendment clear, and important to look at the lines first of all, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, that are deleted. Those lines say: giving them the opportunity to vote in our elections and incorporating them into some of the constituencies “Each constituency shall be wholly in one of the four parts of here. Let them come to Westminster, argue their case the United Kingdom”; and put their arguments before Parliament. Against and they then describe the four parts: that proposal, the Minister and others might argue “England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland”. that these territories have had what they would describe Under the present provisions, each constituency would as independence for many years. However, their have to be in one of the four countries that currently constitutional situation is very similar now to the comprise the United Kingdom of Great Britain and situation in Scotland, in particular, but also in Northern Northern Ireland. Ireland and, to a lesser extent, in Wales, in that they 517 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 518

[LORD FOULKES OF CUMNOCK] Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I think that my noble have control over their own domestic affairs. However, friend is missing out on the commas. Each constituency in foreign affairs, defence and international treaties, has to be in Scotland wholly, Wales wholly, Northern the United Kingdom still has responsibility for the Ireland wholly and either in England wholly or in Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. England together with one or more of the home and The other territories that I am suggesting could be overseas dependent territories. Those territories would incorporated are the Cayman Islands, the Falkland be allied only to English constituencies, not to Scottish, Islands, the British Virgin Islands, the Turks and Caicos Welsh or Northern Irish constituencies. I checked all Islands, Anguilla, Montserrat and the others—I may the punctuation with the office to try to make it clear have missed out one or two. The noble Lord, Lord that that is how the amendment would be interpreted. Howell, will know only too well the problems that My noble friend Lady Ramsay, who has long experience have currently arisen, for example, in the Turks and in the Foreign Office one way or another, has said Caicos Islands, where we now have direct control from a sedentary position, although she might like to through the Governor of the Turks and Caicos Islands say it from a standing position— because of difficulties that have occurred there. There is a strong argument that if they were involved in Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: It is very clear what decisions and discussions here in Westminster, their the amendment is trying to do. It is trying to incorporate home arrangements would be less likely to get into the idea, which the French have employed for a long difficulties. They could get help from our legal system time, that their overseas and dependent territories can and financial structures and a number of other areas be in some cases considered part of mainland France. by incorporating them like, as I say, the DOMs are My noble friend is trying to extend that principle to incorporated in the French state. our similar dependent territories, but it should be As I say, this is a radical proposal. I am not expecting extended only into England and not into the others. It the Minister to agree to it straight away; it needs is quite clear. discussion over a period of time. Lord Dubs: I am grateful to both my noble friends. I think that I understand it now. I am sorry that I did Lord Dubs: I have been trying to follow my noble not do so before, but it is the time of the night. friend’s argument and I think that I understand what he is saying, but perhaps he could explain something Lord O’Neill of Clackmannan: Before my noble to me. My geography may be fading at this time of friend leaves this point, is it not the case that it would night, but how could a constituency in Northern Ireland not be impossible—unless this amendment was passed— go outside the boundaries of Northern Ireland? My for Argyll and Bute to be linked to a constituency in geography is not up to answering that question. Northern Ireland? After all, until fairly recently there was a short ferry service between Argyll and the Mull of Kintyre and the north of Ireland. Therefore, this is 2.30 am not beyond the bounds of possibility. The draconian Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I do not think that the powers with which the Boundary Commission will be question arises. I am not suggesting that a constituency endowed would enable it to play ducks and drakes in Northern Ireland should go outwith Northern Ireland. with all parts of these islands. While it might be I am suggesting that the Isle of Man could be incorporated mutually beneficial for Scotland and Northern Ireland in a constituency either on its own or together with and a number of areas to get closer, it is not necessary part of the mainland of England, and it would then for them to enjoy the same parliamentary constituencies. have a representative in the United Kingdom Parliament. Without this amendment, we might well have that. There is an argument for the Isle of Man to be a Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I am grateful to my constituency on its own, as we have just discussed for noble friend. I know a lot about the Ballycastle to the Isle of Wight, or for the Channel Islands to be a Campbeltown ferry, which my former honourable friend constituency on its own, or Orkney and Shetland. I Brian Wilson tried to reinstate. When the noble Baroness, am suggesting that they should be considered by the Lady Liddell of Coatdyke, was Secretary of State and English Boundary Commission so that Scottish I was Minister of State at the Scotland Office, we also constituencies are dealt with by the Scottish Boundary tried to reinstate it, with some difficulty. Commission, and the Welsh and Northern Irish by their Boundary Commissions. The English Boundary Lord Knight of Weymouth: The noble Lord will be Commission should look at the overseas and home aware that, within the European constituencies, Gibraltar dependent territories. is within the south-west of England. So there is, in a strange way, some sort of precedent for the radical, reforming idea that he wants the beginnings of a Lord Dubs: I understand what my noble friend is debate on. I remain sceptical, however. Has he spoken saying but I am reading his amendment and trying to to the Gibraltarians, for example, about whether they understand what the argument is. The amendment want representation in this Parliament? says: “Each constituency shall be wholly in one of”— Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I have spoken extensively and includes Northern Ireland. I do not see how a with people from the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man constituency could be other than within Northern and most of the dependent territories about a number Ireland. of issues, including this one, over a long period. I must 519 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 520 say that I am not the most popular person in some of example? Does my noble friend seriously think that our dependent territories. I would not claim that I was, they would be inclined to do that? We might want but I wanted this matter to be raised because it is some reciprocity. important. There are precedents. However, I do not want to go on too long. I have argued the case— Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: My noble friend is absolutely right. There would be reciprocity. They would come Lord Howarth of Newport: I know that my noble under part of our tax regime. That is part of the friend always takes a very responsible view of the purpose of it. implications of any legislative proposals for the public purse, and he will be aware that, very virtuously, it is Lord Knight of Weymouth: No representation without part of the Government’s intention to reduce the cost taxation. of politics. Has he conferred with the IPSA about the implications of his proposals, and can he give the House an estimate of what might happen to its budget? Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Yes, as my noble friend Lord Knight says, no representation without taxation—to turn something on its head. Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Anything that causes problems for the IPSA seems like a good idea to me; Noble Lords have rightly pinpointed some of the my former honourable and right honourable friends practical difficulties. There is an argument in principle down the Corridor are plagued by it at the moment. for it. Some people, particularly those in the Overseas However, there are a lot of possibilities for revenue to Territories, find the present arrangements somewhat come in, particularly from islands such as the Cayman patronising. We send out middle-rank diplomats to be Islands if we were to do this, which would far outweigh Governors and lord it over the elected representatives the IPSA costs. of the islands. Those Foreign Office officials are often insensitive to the concerns of the elected representatives. A number of them have said that they would perhaps Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke: I do not often disagree prefer independence, or incorporation into the United with my noble friend, but I am always sceptical when Kingdom. The proposal has been suggested by some he advises me about football, and I am similarly people in the many discussions that I have had, although sceptical about these matters. The point that my noble others are not as enthusiastic about it. friend Lord Dubs makes about the possibility of part of Northern Ireland being included in a Scottish constituency would be quite apposite for Rathlin Island, Lord Howarth of Newport: My noble friend has which is physically closer to Scotland than it is to shown generous sensitivity to the concerns of the Northern Ireland. Is my noble friend aware that the residents of those islands and recognises that they may Italian Senate has provision for expatriates? Indeed, indeed resent the fact that in some ways we lord it over there is an Italian Senator who actually comes from them, but if his proposal were to find favour with both Melbourne and has to commute to Rome to sit in the Houses of this Parliament, does he not foresee a Italian Senate. We might consider that when we look possibility that they might actually lord it over us? If at the form of the House of Lords. we were to have a hung Parliament, I think the quite numerous representatives of those territories could in fact be in the position of being able to determine who Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: That is a very interesting should form the Government of this country. They argument. Of course, in the European Union it is would then probably negotiate a coalition agreement perfectly open for us to stand for constituencies in any far more rigorously and effectively than the Liberal country. In fact, the noble Lord, Lord Steel, stood for Democrats have. an Italian constituency. He did not do very well. I think the fact that he could not speak a word of Italian did not help. Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: They would certainly do it more effectively. However, that situation exists at the moment. The SNP, for example, is committed to A noble Lord: How do you know? the total separation of Scotland from the rest of the United Kingdom. It has said that if it held the balance Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Well, I have parlayed of power in a hung Parliament, it would push hard on with him about it. the interests of Scotland in particular. We are already I wanted to raise this matter, but it has taken a lot facing that kind of situation, but of course it would be longer to move the amendment because of the exacerbated. interventions. I am deeply worried about the health of I have been trying to draw my remarks to a close for some Liberal Members, who get so agitated when I some time. and others go on for too long. I do not want to be responsible for the death or even the grave illness of Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I am most grateful to any of the Liberal Members, who clearly— my noble friend for giving way. He has put a very interesting proposal to the House, but it is regrettable Lord McKenzie of Luton: I am not quite sure that I that we are discussing it at almost a quarter to three in fully understand the proposition. Should representatives the morning. If we had a Green Paper and White from the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man sit in Paper that were properly subject to scrutiny, we would the UK Parliament and vote on UK tax matters, for be able to explore it in a much more sensible way. 521 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 522

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I agree completely with Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or England from my noble friend. He has just reminded me that not all the home or overseas dependent territories, that that long ago, within my lifetime anyway, we appointed constituency is wholly in one of Scotland, Wales, the Governor-General of Mauritius. He was a Northern Ireland or England. It leaves open the question distinguished Governor-General who had previously of how you identify the people from the dependent been General Secretary of the Labour Party. If my territories, whether by connection with a constituency noble friend had moved on in the Labour Party, he in the UK or by reference to their dependent territory. might have had that opportunity rather than coming The current position is that if you are from a home here. The Governor did a very good job, but I am or overseas dependent territory and you are resident in trying desperately to remember his name. My noble the UK, and you have either leave to remain or do not friend has reminded me that it was Len Williams. He require leave to remain, you can vote in a UK general proved to be an excellent Governor. election. What my noble friend is in effect suggesting is that we should by this Bill, without consultation and Lord Snape: Is it not a fact that we have present in almost certainly against the wishes of the majority of the Chamber tonight two former high commissioners most of the members of the home and overseas dependent to Australia? I refer to my noble friend Lady Liddell in territories, absorb them into the United Kingdom. front of me and the noble Lord, Lord Goodlad, The current position is that while many of them have opposite. They represent another fine example of the allegiance to the Crown, they are not governed by our Prime Minister of the day doing the right thing and Executive or our Parliament. From my experience—I appointing the right people. was the Minister responsible for the home dependent territories for a considerable period—they would be Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: My noble friend Lady outraged by the suggestion of such a change being Liddell never thought it, but some people thought she made in this way. I know that my noble friend wished had been appointed Governor-General of Australia. I only to raise a debate on this matter but from their know that she would have made a very good Governor- point of view—they will read Hansard—it is absolutely General, and indeed she and the noble Lord, Lord critical that we make it clear what the effect of the Goodlad, were excellent high commissioners in their amendment is, and I make it completely clear that we time. on this side of the House oppose it. I had better bring my remarks to a close. I am deeply worried about the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Lord Rooker: May I give my noble and learned Gresford. He is someone for whom we have the greatest friend an example from one of my former ministerial of concern and care for his future, his health and roles that comes to mind? I have never been to the Isle everything else. Earlier we saw him nearly have a of Man, which is not a member of the EU. I did not paroxysm or a heart attack because I and others went realise that, during the 10-year ban on UK beef, beef on for too long, so I am anxious that he and the other grown in the Isle of Man was exported through England Liberal Democrats are allowed— to Europe because it was not subject to the beef ban. It was not a member of the EU so it was not subject to the ban. It would not have wanted to be subject to it Lord Desai: Let me remind my noble friend that the either. There must be other complications in other Labour Party should not get romantic about the Empire, areas of policy that would have the same disastrous of all things. Good as Governors-General are, it is consequences. I agree with my noble and learned when they are gone that a country feels better. friend that the amendment would lead to incorporation into the UK, and consequently membership of the Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: That is a wonderful note EU. The Isle of Man might not want that, given all its for me to finish on. I agree with my noble friend Lord ramifications. I give that practical example as that Desai. 10-year ban would have destroyed its beef trade, as it destroyed that of UK farmers. 2.45 am Lord Falconer of Thoroton: It is pretty clear what Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My noble friend Lord my noble friend Lord Foulkes of Cumnock is trying to Rooker gives just one example. From my experience of do. It is pretty far reaching and I do not think, frankly, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, the idea that that it is sensible. they could suddenly find themselves in the European Union, with ramifications not just for the sale of beef but, for example, in relation to imposts in the form of Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Thank you. tax and VAT, would be for them a major issue and, I anticipate, something to which they would object. Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I say that with the greatest respect. As I understand it, Amendment 67C Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: My Lords, would proposes that every constituency shall be in either my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer care to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or England. The ponder whether the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, who is words, on record in Lancashire as being totally opposed to “together with the home and overseas dependent territories”, people interfering with the boundary between Lancashire mean either that a constituency also has to be completely and Yorkshire, has been consulted on whether the Isle within the home or overseas dependent territories, or of Man could suddenly be added to the county of that when you add the people to a constituency in Lancashire? 523 Parliamentary Voting System[] Parliamentary Voting System 524

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I have not had the Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I am grateful to the opportunity of discussing this matter with the noble noble and learned Lords, Lord Falconer of Thoroton Lord, Lord Greaves, but I imagine he would oppose it. and Lord Wallace of Tankerness, for their replies. I was expecting the reply from the noble and learned My position is clear on Amendment 67C. As to Lord Falconer of Thoroton because I remember discussing Amendment 77A, the proposed new paragraph 5(2) this with him briefly and so I knew he was sceptical on page 10 of the Bill states that under the new about it. In spite of the fact that both of us are avid arrangements the Boundary Commission for England, supporters of Edinburgh’s greatest football team, the “may take into account, if and to such extent as they think fit, Heart of Midlothian, I could not find any way of boundaries of the electoral regions specified in Schedule 1 to the bribing, cajoling or encouraging him to go along with European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002”. the amendments. It then states, in brackets, that when having regard to However, given all the strange and daft things that that you should ignore Gibraltar. Obviously the reason Mr Nicholas Clegg, as my noble and learned friend you should ignore Gibraltar is because it has no part Lord Falconer described him, has adopted over the to play in elections to our national Parliament. past few months, I thought there might have been The second amendment proposed by the noble some encouragement from Members on the other side Lord, Lord Foulkes, suggests that we should have to pick this up and run with it; they might have seen it regard to Gibraltar and European parliamentary as a good idea. boundaries when considering what the national It is certainly a probing amendment. Although constituency boundaries should be. For example, the there have been one or two light-hearted interventions, Boundary Commission might consider that a European there are some serious issues to it. The Channel Islands Parliament boundary here would be a good place for a and the Isle of Man are looked after by us and my constituency boundary. I do not object to regard being noble and learned friend Lord Falconer was not absolutely paid to the European boundaries but, because I oppose correct when he said that this Parliament did not have the first part, I think they should be kept separate—this responsibility for them because we do. When we sign applies to Gibraltar as much as to everywhere else—and treaties such as those on human rights, we do so on we should not have regard to Gibraltar in paragraph 5(2). behalf of the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. Therefore, on behalf of the Opposition, I also oppose This Parliament has some responsibilities. Ultimately, Amendment 77A, which I am sure was only a probing although it is not a power we would wish to exercise, amendment. the United Kingdom Parliament technically has the back-stop legislative responsibility for those territories. Lord Wallace of Tankerness: MyLords,itisan My noble friend Lord McKenzie will know that, although interesting probing at this time of the morning. I am there is a lot of independence in terms of their financial sure that it will come as no surprise to the noble Lord, regimes, we have made it absolutely clear—and the Lord Foulkes, that the Government do not support his territories have accepted this—they have to get their amendment because there are both principled and acts tidied up in relation to offshore finance. They practical objections to it. The principled objection is have not done it as much as I would like, but we have that these territories are separate from the United certainly had some influence on them. Kingdom—their people are represented by legislatures There are also anomalies whereby, for example, all in their own territory—and I certainly join the noble over the south of Spain there are people from the and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, in United Kingdom who have been there for 10 years or saying that I suspect there would be considerable more and are still able to vote in UK elections. They opposition for such an incorporation without any live in Malaga or other parts of the south of Spain. I consultation. remember when Mrs Thatcher was Prime Minister, The practical difficulty is that residents of the overseas her husband, Denis Thatcher, went out there to recruit territories may not be on the United Kingdom more and more people to the Tory party and encourage parliamentary register on the basis of an address in them to register to vote in the United Kingdom. It these territories. The noble and learned Lord indicated seems strange that these people now have no connection the basis on which people can be registered to vote in with the United Kingdom, but can vote in elections the United Kingdom. It is formed of British, Republic here. Yet the good people of Gibraltar are unable to of Ireland and qualifying Commonwealth citizens do so, although a lot of the decisions made by the UK aged over 18 who are not subject to any legal incapacity. Parliament affect them. Some of my noble friends will Anyone resident in the territories who is entitled to remember the effect on Gibraltar’s port when we register in a parliamentary register would do so from a pulled out our Navy. UK address, not from an address in the territory itself. There are some serious arguments on this and there As Gibraltar is not part of the United Kingdom, I are many more examples I could give if I had the time. also do not understand why the Boundary Commission However, I keep worrying about the health and strength should have any regard to it. I therefore share the of noble Lords opposite. I listened very carefully to opposition to that amendment. the Minister and he said that I might wish to return to The noble Lord has raised an interesting issue, and this matter on an appropriate occasion. I was wondering he may wish to return to it on a more appropriate whether that might be Report stage. I shall consult the occasion, but I am afraid that I can give him no Minister. In fact, I shall have a meeting with him. I comfort if he seeks to pursue the amendment. I ask know that he is keen on having meetings. He has him to withdraw it. already offered a number of meetings. Perhaps before 525 Parliamentary Voting System[LORDS] Parliamentary Voting System 526

[LORD FOULKES OF CUMNOCK] and all the cameras were taking pictures. So it was that I bring back the amendment, I should visit these I solved the problems of the Caribbean by getting this islands and talk at greater length to the people of warm welcome. Cayman, Anguilla and Montserrat. I visited Montserrat just after the volcano erupted. Some noble Lords will Baroness Falkner of Margravine: My Lords, I really remember that when my then Secretary of State, Clare wonder at this hour of the night whether the taxpayers Short—who did not have the sagacity, wisdom and of this country, who are paying for these facilities to intelligence of my other Secretary of State who is with be kept open, would wish to be entertained by the us today, my noble friend Lady Liddell of Coatdyke—first anecdotes of the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes. Does the met the Chief Minister of Montserrat, who was asking House not believe that we need to get to the business for help with the reconstruction after the eruption, she of the House instead of being entertained in this said in a fit of pique, “They’ll be asking for golden manner because the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, has elephants next”. been carousing in the bars of this Palace? Lord McKenzie of Luton: Do my noble friend’s ambitions extend to Belize? It seems to me that he Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: We do welcome the could get advice closer to home without so much noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, to the House, although travelling? she is a recent arrival.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I shall come to that in a Baroness Falkner of Margravine: May I suggest to moment. I was sent out, not by the Secretary of State the noble Lord that I have been here rather longer but by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to Montserrat than him? to calm things down. The airport had of course closed and I arrived by helicopter—I am not an inconsiderable Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: Anything else you would figure, as noble Lords will observe—clad in a very like to say while you are at it? large, bright orange outfit. I disembarked from the helicopter and saw all the cameras. Lord O’Neill of Clackmannan: That is why she is so bad tempered. Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My Lords, I think the noble Lord has the opportunity of moving his amendment and seeking to test the opinion of the House or of Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: There is a very simple withdrawing his amendment. I think it would help the way that the noble Baroness could have stopped me House if he gave an indication of what he would like telling these anecdotes. She could have a word with the to do so we can carry on with business. noble Lord, Lord Shutt of Greetland. I think I have finished. 3am A noble Lord: About time. Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: I am grateful to my noble friend. I call him that because I got a bit ratty with him the other day, and he is a good friend. He Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: It is about time and I and I meet together—I cannot remember if he bought was not going to go on any longer, but I keep getting me a glass of wine or if I bought him one. I was just interrupted. I have decided to withdraw my amendment. coming to the punchline and then I was going to sit down. David Brandt was standing there and I could Amendment 67C withdrawn. see as I jumped out that he was furious about what was happening. I remembered what they are like in the House resumed. Caribbean and how they are friendly, so I went straight up and gave him a big bear hug. He had to do the same House adjourned at 3.03 am. 527 Introductions[20 JANUARY 2011] Gaza 528

Lord Fowler: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for House of Lords that reply. Is not the real problem the restrictions on the import of building materials, which are necessary Thursday, 20 January 2011. to build and rebuild houses, schools and medical facilities in Gaza? We all utterly deplore the acts of terrorism 10.45 am directed at Israel but do not restrictions of that kind, affecting thousands of ordinary people in Gaza, gather Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Wakefield. in support for extremism rather than cutting it off?

Introduction: Lord Fink Lord Howell of Guildford: Yes, my noble friend is completely right. The problem is obviously the lifting 10.51 am and easing of the blockade. We have had some small success: the Israeli authorities have agreed to shift Stanley Fink, Esquire, having been created Baron Fink, from a total block on progress to a list of very limited of Northwood in the County of Middlesex, was introduced permitted goods and are moving to a blacklist of and took the oath, supported by Lord Harris of Peckham goods that cannot go in. They have announced that and Lord Howard of Lympne, and signed an undertaking they now are happy to allow in things such as steel-ready to abide by the Code of Conduct. concrete, asphalt and cement for Palestinian Authority- approved civilian projects that are under the supervision of the UN. Introduction: Lord Stoneham of Droxford There is, of course, a long list of ifs and buts. Frankly, we have not found that any of this so-called 10.57 am easement has yet made much difference on the ground but it is a slight move forward. Of course, consumer Benjamin Russell Mackintosh Stoneham, Esquire, having goods are allowed in. We will continue to press extremely been created Baron Stoneham of Droxford, of Meon hard to get a much more expansive and open regime to Valley in the County of Hampshire, was introduced and allow in the reconstruction items and materials to took the oath, supported by Lord Rennard and Lord which my noble friend refers. Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, and signed an undertaking to abide by the Code of Conduct. Lord Clinton-Davis: Opposed as I am to Netanyahu, is it not right to recognise that in recent days there has Introduction: Baroness Berridge been a considerable relaxation over the movement of construction goods from Israel to Gaza? Is it not also 11.03 am right to recognise that there is currently recognition by the United Nations that Hamas is not exactly performing Elizabeth Rose Berridge, having been created Baroness well? Does it not altogether oppose the United Nations Berridge, of The Vale of Catmose in the County of regime? Rutland, was introduced and took the oath, supported by Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Morris of Lord Howell of Guildford: I say to the noble Lord Bolton, and signed an undertaking to abide by the Code that no one on any side is really performing fully in the of Conduct. way that we want. The relaxation has been announced and we are watching to see whether it has an impact Gaza on the ground, although, as I said earlier to my noble friend, our analysis suggests that that impact is not Question very great so far. However, it is at least a step in the right direction, although we have to go further, as 11.07 am there are so many qualifications and safeguards. I also Asked By Lord Fowler say to the noble Lord—and it is a perfectly fair point with which I know he will agree—that rockets are To ask Her Majesty’s Government what raining down all the time on Israeli territory from representations they have made to the Government Gaza. Therefore, the Israeli authorities have to have of Israel on import restrictions affecting Gaza. some safeguards with regard to equipment going into Gaza, which might be used merely to develop aggressive The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth military weaponry for use against them. There is a Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): My Lords, we are balance to be struck, and I think that sensible people clear that the status quo in Gaza is both a tragedy and all round have to recognise both the difficulties and unsustainable. We continue to call on Israel to ease the possibilities on all sides. restrictions on access to Gaza. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary raised the issue with Lord Dykes: Is my noble friend hopeful of a resumption Prime Minister Netanyahu when he visited Israel in in negotiations between the immediate parties as soon November. My ministerial colleague, Alistair Burt, is as possible, despite the enormous difficulties that that currently in the region and discussed Gaza at length would involve? Such a resumption would help to end with the Israeli Co-ordinator for Government Activity the prolonged collective oppression of the long-suffering in the Territories, General Dangot. Gazan population. 529 Gaza[LORDS] Disabled People: Transport 530

Lord Howell of Guildford: I live in hope, otherwise I Baroness Tonge: My Lords, is the Minister aware would not be doing what I am doing. Of course we that the head of the Shin Bet security service said this want to see talks between sensible and responsible week that al-Qaeda-affiliated groups are behind a lot people, and of course the quartet wants to carry these of the Gaza violence? Is he also aware that the same things forward. We are working very closely with the Shin Bet security service is saying that Hamas wants quartet, as well as through the UN and the EU. to achieve its aims through charity organisations, while However, particularly if Hamas is to be involved, the other, more radical groups want the same goal through requirements are that it recognises Israel and that violence? Will the Minister agree that, this being the there is some sign of that going forward—we may hear case, we should be talking to Hamas and including it about that in a moment. It must also renounce violence in all our negotiations with Israel to protect Israel and and abide by previous agreements. That is what the prevent the situation deteriorating further? quartet requires to get things going again, but so far we are not quite there. Lord Howell of Guildford: I understand that from my noble friend, who has been absolutely tireless in The Lord Bishop of Exeter: My Lords, two years pursuing these matters in great detail, and I congratulate ago the UK Government were co-sponsors of the text her. Of course, accusations fly around and, as she of UN Resolution 1860, which, among other things, knows better than I do, there is more than one aspect emphasised the need to ensure a sustained and regular or wing and more than one associated policy within flow of goods and people through the Gaza crossing. the Hamas group. There are people in Hamas for Is it not now time for the Security Council to review whom it would be invaluable to find common ground the full implementation by all parties of those high- and to meet the conditions that the quartet requires, as meaning and well-intentioned words? I described earlier. However, I am afraid that there are also people in Hamas who are not interested in that but who are interested in violence and, indeed, presumably Lord Howell of Guildford: The right reverend Prelate organise the rocketry into Israel every day. Therefore, is of course right that this is what we want to see and we somehow have to find a way through this maze, what we want to press forward. In a sense, these and I think that my noble friend understands that matters are under review all the time. We are working very well. very closely with the UN and the quartet, through DfID, our own aid department, and through constant dialogue with the Israeli authorities about getting the Disabled People: Transport blockades lifted and getting some enterprise going. The Israelis have also announced—this may be a tiny Question glimmer that we should hang on to—that they will allow some exports from Gaza. Of course, that is 11.18 am essential if the economy is to begin to move forward. If we are to get people out of massive and miserable Asked By Lord Low of Dalston poverty there, the Israelis must allow business to flourish. To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they Therefore, yes, there must be a review but a review is will support the recent compromise agreement reached going on all the time and we must continue to be through the conciliation procedure on the proposed vigorous in our efforts. European regulation on bus and coach passenger rights, and what further steps they are taking to Lord Turnberg: My Lords, despite the terrible antipathy meet the United Kingdom’s obligations under Article between Hamas and Israel, does the noble Lord agree 9 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights that we should build on the many positive grassroots of Persons with Disabilities. interactions which exist between Gazans and Israelis? In the medical field, for example, there are many Earl Attlee: My Lords, the UK Government intend Gazan patients in Israeli hospitals, as well as doctors to support the compromise agreement reached by the in training there, so should we not be building on Conciliation Committee in respect of the EU regulation those positive grassroots efforts? on bus and coach passenger rights when it is put to the Council for formal approval. The UK Government are currently preparing a report on what the UK is Lord Howell of Guildford: Yes, that is perfectly true, doing to implement the UN Convention on the Rights and very high-quality treatment has been, and is, of Persons with Disabilities. available in Israel to meet certain urgent needs from Gazan citizens. One could go further and say that it would be good if the tens of thousands, if not a Lord Low of Dalston: My Lords, I am grateful to hundred thousand, Gazans who used to cross the the Minister for that reply. As regards the provision border every day to work in Israel were allowed greater introducing mandatory disability awareness training movement on that front as well. I agree that there are for personnel dealing directly with the travelling public, things on which to build but overall we have to get will the Government take Transport for London’s some sense of agreement and understanding between current approach of training all staff in disability Israel and the Palestine authority as a whole to get awareness as the benchmark for all bus operators? things going forward. We are just not there at the Cannot the five-year exemption for drivers be viewed moment. as unnecessary? 531 Disabled People: Transport[20 JANUARY 2011] St Lucia: Hurricane Tomas 532

Earl Attlee: My Lords, I am not aware of precisely Lord Greaves: My Lords, is it not a sad fact that what Transport for London is doing, but clearly training there is not much point talking about passenger rights for drivers and all staff involved in the transport in areas where the bus services are being withdrawn? system is nothing other than good practice. If the operators are not doing that now, they should be. On Earl Attlee: My Lords, I have noted my noble the point about seeking an exemption, we will be friend’s point. consulting on the implementation of any exemptions but will grant them only if necessary. Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, further to the Minister’s earlier Answer, will he explain—I am afraid Lord Borrie: My Lords, is it the Minister’s that it is the same old question—why we cannot decide understanding that the Government wish to persist in this sort of thing for ourselves? Why is it imposed on the abolition of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory us by Brussels? Is it not getting beyond a joke? Committee, which is listed for abolition under the Public Bodies Bill? If so, can he explain why the Government want to persist with its abolition? The Earl Attlee: My Lords, this is a shared competence, problems of disability and accessibility to transport and the EU is bound by the principle of subsidiarity. crop up so frequently that it is very difficult to understand EU actions should not be taken unless they are likely the Government’s position and reasoning. to be more effective than actions at national, regional or local level. We believe that member states are best placed to deal with local bus services. Earl Attlee: My Lords, the Department for Transport will continue to ensure that transport policies promote equality, and these important issues will continue to be mainstreamed in departmental policy and delivery. St Lucia: Hurricane Tomas The department will consult on the successor arrangements later this year. Question

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, when I 11.23 am asked a Question on this subject last week, we had Asked by Baroness Benjamin very good answers, but other points were raised by Members of the House. In particular, the noble Baroness, To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assistance Lady Grey-Thompson, made the point that when she they are providing to the Government of St Lucia and her husband travel together, one on a disability following Hurricane Tomas. scooter and one in a wheelchair, they are told that they cannot travel on the same bus. Therefore, there is a Baroness Verma: My Lords, HMS “Manchester” point in training bus drivers to be aware of the situation provided power, clean water and food to the towns of and to make all possible efforts, just as they do with Soufriere and Morne Fond St Jacques immediately enormous prams and buggies—they take two of them after Hurricane Tomas. Crew also fixed the roof in at a time. Obviously, if the places are already taken, no Soufriere hospital. The Department for International one would expect them to be offered. However, if Development has agreed to pay £212,845 to re-establish there is space, would it not be logical to have two water, sanitation and health services in St Lucia and spaces for wheelchairs? St Vincent. The Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility, which DfID supports, also made a payment Earl Attlee: My Lords, my noble friend said there of $3,214,000 to St Lucia after the hurricane. was some point in having training for drivers. Training for drivers is vital, as I am sure she would agree. The Baroness Benjamin: I thank my noble friend for that last time that we discussed the issue, I pointed out that comprehensive answer. The devastation caused by there are costs associated with leaving unused spaces Hurricane Tomas last October, which had practically on buses for wheelchairs and mobility scooters. We no media coverage in this country, is still having an must be careful not to take out too many seats from effect on the people—and on their financial well-being—of buses while ensuring that we make proper provision St Lucia and the neighbouring islands, St Vincent and for disabled travellers. the Grenadines. Lives have been lost and it is estimated that £500 million-worth of damage has been done to Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the Minister is roads, agriculture, buildings and infrastructure. Thankfully, making the right noises, but in government actions the United Nations made a plea for international speak louder than words. Why did the Government financial assistance. What financial assistance will the not carry out a full impact assessment on the regulations British Government give to these wounded Caribbean in order that progress could be made as rapidly as islands, and will the Government of St Lucia be possible? expected to pay back any funds provided to them—and, if so, when? Earl Attlee: My Lords, when officials negotiate in Brussels, they do the best job that they can for the Baroness Verma: My Lords, the Government of United Kingdom. They ensure that we do not accept St Lucia are leading the assessment of the damage unnecessary burdens on the UK transport industry caused by Hurricane Tomas and setting reconstruction while protecting the vital rights of disabled travellers. priorities. A full report is expected later this month. 533 St Lucia: Hurricane Tomas[LORDS] Health: Influenza Vaccination 534

[BARONESS VERMA] Health: Influenza Vaccination Early damage estimates following hurricanes are often radically revised, so we cannot speculate on the extent Question of the damage until we analyse the report. 11.28 am Lord Palmer: My Lords, given that more than 60 per Asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark cent of the GDP of the island is generated by tourism, To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans would it not be extremely helpful to abolish the APD they have to review the advice on the availability of to St Lucia and the neighbouring islands? I declare an the flu vaccination. interest as a residual beneficiary of an estate on the island. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): My Lords, the Baroness Verma: My Lords, the Government cannot Government’s policy on flu vaccination is informed by change the rules for Caribbean countries without objective the expert advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination justification. The APD on a return economy ticket and Immunisation. The JCVI last met on 30 December typically represents a small percentage of the price. to review the latest evidence. The committee decided However, we are exploring changes to the aviation tax that there were no grounds to change the risk groups system, including a per-plane tax. Of course, any that are offered vaccination and recommended that major changes will be subject to consultation. efforts be focused on maximising vaccine uptake among all those in the risk groups. As with all vaccination Lord Chidgey: Is my noble friend aware that, as a programmes, the JCVI will keep this matter under result of World Trade Organisation restrictions on EU review. trade preferences, St Lucia and Windward Island farmers Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I thank the noble Earl can no longer compete with the industrial-scale banana for his response. The latest figures show that approximately production of Latin America? What measures are the 780 people are in critical care, and there is still a long Government taking to assist the Windward Isles to winter ahead of us. What steps are the Government diversify and revitalise their fragile and struggling taking in case the numbers continue to rise? Secondly, economies? what steps have been taken to address the reported shortages of flu vaccines in some areas, with GPs and Baroness Verma: My Lords, as my noble friend is pharmacies running out of stocks? aware, we do not give bilateral aid to St Lucia. All aid and help is provided through multilateral organisations. Earl Howe: My Lords, the noble Lord’s figures are I will take back the point that he raised and hope to slightly historic. Figures due to be published today provide him with a Written Answer. will give a better picture. I spoke yesterday to the Chief Medical Officer, who told me that the rates to be published at 2 pm today will show a decrease from the Lord Boswell of Aynho: My Lords, I declare an figure that he mentioned. There has also been a further interest because my daughter is resident for much of decrease since the new figure and it appears that the the time in the Caribbean. Does not this episode worst is over as regards the incidence of flu. On underline the importance of a continuing, frequent the second question, there have been reports of vaccine and regular Royal Navy presence in the area, in order shortages. We have taken steps to address that by to give immediate assistance on such occasions? releasing stocks of the monovalent H1N1 vaccine from our national stock. That system is working well. Baroness Verma: My Lords, my noble friend raises There is an online ordering system, which GPs are an important point. However, our DfID programmes using. They are also ordering stock directly from the are concentrated mostly on a regional presence and manufacturers and we understand that that system is are there to assist in climate change, disaster and risk working well, too. The reports of shortages are, I management, and to tackle crime and insecurity. I will hope, a matter of history. take back my noble friend’s question. However, we are Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, is my noble friend doing quite a lot of constructive work through multilateral aware—I am sure that he is not—that over Christmas agencies. I presented myself at my GP’s for a flu vaccination? There was no vaccine in the surgery. He gave me a Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, does the prescription, but there was no vaccine in the pharmacy, Minister agree that we should acknowledge the importance where I was informed that the general flu vaccine in of ¤200 million in humanitarian aid that the European this country had run out because the suppliers had run Union is contributing, the considerable funding that out of stock. I am delighted that the swine flu vaccine goes towards disaster preparedness in the Caribbean, is still available, but surely that does not help any and the disaster management programmes there? attempt to be vaccinated against general flu. Earl Howe: My Lords, we are very clear that the Baroness Verma: I absolutely agree with the noble amount of vaccine produced for this season’s flu to Baroness. She has summarised concisely what we are address the probable need for vaccination was more doing. than adequate. It is up to GPs to order the quantity of 535 Health: Influenza Vaccination[20 JANUARY 2011] Health: Influenza Vaccination 536 vaccine that they see as appropriate for their patients. Earl Howe: My Lords, the main lesson is one to That is what has happened over the past couple of which I referred a minute ago. We are considering years. Supplies are also ordered independently by private bringing back into central procurement the purchasing pharmacies. As regards my noble friend’s point on the of the seasonal flu vaccine, which is an exception to H1N1 monovalent vaccine, I am afraid that 90 per the normal rule. We purchase most vaccines centrally, cent of deaths have been from what is called swine flu, apart from that one. There is a lot to be said for so that is a very appropriate vaccine to use in these changing the ordering system so that we can keep circumstances. better track of supplies and, perhaps, have more cost- effective procurement at the same time. Lord Hughes of Woodside: Will the Minister comment on reports in today’s press that the Department of Health is intending to take back in house the ordering Baroness Hussein-Ece: My Lords, I read a report in of flu vaccines because GPs have not done it properly? the media last week saying that, in light of the high incidence of children under five contracting flu, the Earl Howe: My Lords, almost all vaccines, except Government are preparing to examine new evidence the seasonal flu vaccines, are procured centrally because from the advisory group that could allow for all under-fives central procurement provides a cost-effective arrangement to be vaccinated. Have the Government reached a that can take account of the variation in supply and view on this? demand. It also gives us the ability to track where the batches of vaccine have gone. We are therefore looking at taking into the department the procurement of the Earl Howe: We have not reached a view on this seasonal flu vaccine. because the JCVI’s advice remains unchanged. In fact, current evidence shows that children under five are Lord Patel: Last time we discussed this subject, I not the age group with the highest risk of death. The asked the Minister why the advice given by the Centers age group with the highest risk of death from the flu for Disease Control and Prevention in the United that is circulating currently is middle-aged adults. States was so different from the advice from our Nevertheless, those with risk factors have the highest committee on vaccination. My question this time is: is risk of severe disease and death from flu compared the Minister sure that the advice that he gets from our with healthy age groups. However, I can tell my noble committee takes into account evidence that other countries friend that nothing is set in stone. We do not wish to gather and on which they base their advice? The constrain the JCVI in any way and we will listen to its CDC’s advice in the United States is to vaccinate advice, as we always do. everybody over the age of six months.

Earl Howe: Yes, I am satisfied. The expert advice Baroness Thornton: My Lords, during the H1N1 provided by the JCVI takes into consideration first pandemic, two organisations stood out as being essential and foremost the epidemiology of the disease in the to delivering a pandemic strategy: the Health Protection UK, which may well differ from that in other countries. Agency, for its science, strategic planning and advice; The noble Lord may be interested to know that, while and the PCTs, for their support and co-ordination on the UK is experiencing H1N1 as the most prevalent the ground. Both are due to be abolished in the next flu strain, the prevalent flu strains in the United States two years. Can the Minister inform the House about are H3N2 and influenza B, so a very different situation the Government’s pandemic plans, including, for example, applies in that country. the ordering of sufficient vaccine, both after the abolition and during the transition? Lord Newton of Braintree: My Lords, I declare an interest as a member of an at-risk group who got vaccinated fairly early at the request of his doctor, Earl Howe: The noble Baroness asks an important which I acknowledge was based on expert advice. To question. The Government’s plans are to create what follow on from the previous question, the plain fact is we are calling Public Health England, which will be that that expert advice proved, in effect, to be politically the new public health service based centrally, linked unsustainable in one way or another. I think that that closely to public health efforts in local authorities with needs to be taken into account when we look at what local directors of public health. A pandemic vaccination we do next year. campaign would be mobilised through those channels. I am clear that we have proper plans for the transition, which the noble Baroness rightly mentions as being a Earl Howe: I can reassure my noble friend that the time when we need to have a specific focus on public advice that the JCVI gives is subject to regular review. health protection. The present plan, as she knows, is Clearly, before the next flu season, it will be looking to bring the Health Protection Agency functions within again at the experience of the current flu season. the Department of Health so that there is a clear line of accountability from the Secretary of State downwards. Lord Campbell-Savours: What lessons have Ministers I am clear that that is right. We will still have the learnt from the management of the vaccine programme expert advice that we do now from the people who are over the past six months? Is there anything that they currently employed in the Health Protection Agency. may be prepared to do differently next year? That is an additional safeguard. 537 Business of the House[LORDS] Coalition Government 538

Business of the House were endorsed by the country—with landslide majorities. But this coalition is born out of an indecisive election. Timing of Debates Labour lost. The Liberal Democrats did not do very well and lost a few seats, and the Conservatives did 11.38 am best, but not well enough to win. On that basis, the Moved By Lord Strathclyde Government have embarked on major constitutional change. That the debate on the motion in the name of Of course, constitutional reform was a major feature Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean set down for of the Labour Government, of which I was proud to today shall be limited to 5 hours. serve as a Minister. But there are significant differences from the constitutional reforms under Labour and Motion agreed. those being pursued by the coalition. The first rests on the lack of a clear-cut mandate for the reform programme that is fundamental to the coalition. The Coalition Government Labour Government signalled the vast majority of Debate their reforms well in advance—although not all. We were rightly challenged in this House. Indeed, proceedings came to a complete halt as I recall over the reform of 11.38 am the Office of the Lord Chancellor. But virtually all our Moved By Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean other reforms were heralded in our manifesto. On the whole, we did what we said we were going to do. To call attention to the constitutional and That is not so with the current coalition. Both parliamentary effect of coalition government; and parties have manifestos and campaigned on them. The to move for papers. Liberal Democrats even went beyond their manifesto undertakings in making specific and individual pledges Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, over the issue of tuition fees. Liberal Democrat MPs when I tabled this debate, I, of course, had no idea that signed a pledge not to increase fees, clearly implying it would take place against such a tumultuous that a signed pledge was somehow more secure; a parliamentary and constitutional background as we better promise than a mere manifesto. So, for example, have seen in the House this week. I thank all noble the 7 per cent more 18 to 24 year-olds who voted in the Lords who are here today, particularly those who put 2010 election, and voted Liberal Democrat, gave their their names down to speak. As it happens, the timing support on the basis of that promise, which in the end of today’s debate could hardly be more apposite: if turned out to be a false prospectus. anyone wishes to see the parliamentary and constitutional In the event, the formation of the coalition saw effect of a coalition Government, they need look no both parties in the coalition having to ditch their further than what we have experienced in your Lordships’ manifestos, first, in favour of an outline agreement House this week. between the two parties published on 12 May and then This is the first peacetime coalition in this country in a fuller document called The Coalition: Our Programme for more than 70 years. Of course, coalitions are more for Government, published on 20 May. familiar elsewhere. They are familiar in Scotland and Wales now and in many local councils. Coalition Lord Steel of Aikwood: From her considerable Governments are both commonplace and widespread experience in the Foreign Office, does the noble Baroness beyond these shores and the experience of such coalitions agree that no other country, including Scotland with has helped coalition government specialists to characterise its more limited agenda, would dream of putting a coalition Governments as of particular kinds. There coalition together in as little as five days? are coalitions of conviction formed on specific issues such as the Conservative/Liberal Unionist coalition in 1895, which was formed to resist Irish home rule. Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I There are coalitions of necessity, brought about by was not going to dwell on the five days because, as the specific external circumstances, such as the wartime noble Lord will know, many thought that it was rather Lloyd George coalition of 1916 and the Churchill a rushed job. coalition of 1940, and there are coalitions of convenience, The document was published by the Cabinet Office determined by the politics of the parties involved. rather than by the parties concerned. Of course, it was We on these Benches would argue that the current a legitimate and sensible course of action to take for coalition in Britain is of the third kind. On the other the coalition, but it has never been endorsed by the hand, the Government seek to argue that it is a coalition electorate in this country. I make that point as clearly of an entirely new kind: one of co-operation, whereby as I can, because many people believe that we are two parties with different political views agree to likely to have more coalitions in the future, partly co-operate for limited purposes and for a limited time because of the breakdown of traditional voting patterns in order to ensure effective Government. What is clear in this country and because there will be many more is that this coalition is different from previous ones in coalitions if a system of AVor proportional representation this country in a number of important respects. The is introduced, as the Liberal Democrats want. However, first and most important is that this coalition has not it means that there are serious questions about how far been voted for as a coalition by the British people. In any coalition government can rest on the old conventions the past, the peacetime coalitions of 1918 and 1931 of parliamentary practice. 539 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 540

The coalition has recognised that. The nature of its The House of Lords Reform Bill was in both constitutional programme seeks to alter our institutions. manifestos. We will judge on their merits the proposals So does its practice in government. For example, the for reform when we finally see them, but we on this Cabinet has been significantly altered by the coalition side of the Chamber are determined to give the proposals removing, in effect, the powers of the Prime Minister the scrutiny that the issues merit, just as we have given on the appointment and dismissal of Ministers and proper scrutiny to the coalition’s proposals to change placing those in the hands of others on a party political the voting system and the number of constituencies. basis, and by the explicit abandoning of the constitutional We believe that the entire issue of further House of doctrine of Cabinet and ministerial collective responsibility Lords reform should be put in a referendum to the in a range of policy areas, such as the crucial decision people of the country. If a voting system which benefits on the renewal of our nuclear defence system. the Liberal Democrats is worthy of a referendum, The proposal for a referendum on AVdirectly addresses surely one of the key checks and balances in our the Westminster electoral system, while the rearranging constitution, this House, is equally worthy of a of constituencies proposed in the Bill that we have referendum. debated this week will fundamentally alter Parliament The coalition has produced a number of other in a way not done since the 1832 Act. I am not seeking significant constitutional innovations. There is the to argue the merits of the Bill but merely to argue that, Cabinet manual, at which I am sure many of your if enacted, these proposals will permanently alter the Lordships will have looked, but none of us has yet way in which Britain is governed. Given the fundamental debated it. It was written by a small group of senior point that no one voted for this programme, the officials in consultation with some clever academics, constitutional ambitions of the coalition are bound to but neither House has debated the full document. raise some very difficult questions. What is the status of the document? Can the Leader of The nature of the coalition Government has particular the House tell us whether it is the first step towards a implications for this House because of the Salisbury written constitution, as accepted by the Cabinet Secretary, convention, the best and most recent definition of or is it, as stated by the noble Lord in reply to a which—best because it was agreed by all parties in Question in this House from my noble friend Lady both Houses—is contained in the report on the Royall, of a rather different nature? If it is of the conventions of the UK Parliament from the Joint importance and enduring significance implied by Sir Committee on Conventions chaired by noble friend Gus O’Donnell, surely we should debate it fully and Lord Cunningham of Felling and on which I have the soon. privilege to serve. The Joint Committee laid out that Of course, some reforms are welcome and very the convention means that, in this House: helpful; for example, revealing the date of the Budget. “A manifesto Bill is accorded a Second Reading … A manifesto Once, that was a sacking offence, but it is a sensible Bill is not subject to ’wrecking amendments’ …; and … A and right move. Similarly, setting out the dates of manifesto Bill is passed and sent (or returned) to the House of Recesses is laudable and, frankly, I wish that my party Commons, so that they have the opportunity, in reasonable time, had done it years ago. But sadly, such a sensible to consider the Bill or any amendments the Lords may wish to approach is not applied elsewhere. Since 10 January, propose”. coalition Peers have joined us so fast that, including The standing of the Salisbury convention is clear. today’s Introductions, the coalition majority is 71. It Where a proposal from the coalition Government was has risen from 54 to 71 in just seven working days. We contained in the 2010 general election manifestos of have to ensure that this House remains a revising both the political parties in the coalition, that proposal Chamber, not an approving Chamber. In effect, we would rightly be subject to the Salisbury convention. have returned to the pre-1997 position. The Conservative- But it is those proposals alone that are subject to the led Government have an unassailable majority in both convention and not the proposals in the coalition Houses, not because of a landslide victory in a general document, except where they appeared in both manifestos. election, but because of a coalition agreement. If, for example, the Conservatives had won a landslide victory Of course, I recognise that there is a strong counterpoint at the 2010 election, they would have a majority in to be put here, although I do not believe that it is an another place, but certainly not in here. By performing overriding one. That is, in being asked by Her Majesty worse in the election than predicted, they have gained to form a Government, the coalition enjoys the confidence a stranglehold on both Houses. of the House of Commons, meaning that what the Government do in the Commons and in this House That has serious implications because an important must have commensurate authority. However, that part of the role of this House is the role of the does not detract from the legitimacy gap at the heart Cross-Bench Peers. As independents, they listen to, of the coalition, particularly in relation to constitutional assess and make judgments on the arguments they reform. hear, and they vote accordingly. They are a huge asset to us and a huge constitutional asset to the country. Neither manifesto proposed a referendum on AV But that important constitutional role in this House as and neither proposed the reduction in the number of the provider of checks and balances is under threat MPs proposed in the Bill discussed this week. Therefore, with so many coalition Peers coming in. the Bill is not a manifesto Bill and not subject to the convention. The Fixed-term Parliaments Bill, which The conventions on how we operate are indeed we shall debate shortly, was in the Liberal Democrat important. The Companion tells us that there is a firm manifesto but not in that of the Conservatives, so, convention that from Monday to Wednesday, the House again, the Salisbury convention will not apply. will rise at 10 pm. The Companion describes a closure 541 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 542

[BARONESS SYMONS OF VERNHAM DEAN] On the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Motion as “a most exceptional procedure”—very strong Bill, it said that: words—but it has been deployed twice this week. That “Pre-legislative scrutiny and public consultation would have has been done because the Government really believe enabled a better assessment of whether the new rules as to that it is fair to use it on an issue which is not the equalisation are overly rigid”. subject of the Salisbury convention, which has had no It had similar criticisms to make of the Fixed-term pre-legislative scrutiny and no public consultation. We Parliaments Bill and the Public Bodies Bill. Those disagree. What is clear is that the application of closure criticisms were pungent and forthright. I just make the Motions in this way is tantamount to a guillotine. Of point that six members of that committee are coalition course it is not a guillotine on the whole Bill, but it is Peers. Two are Cross-Benchers, and only four come clearly a guillotine on individual amendments. It is a from the opposition Benches. guillotine that I do not believe is appropriate in this Coalition is different. This coalition is different House, and I hope that it will never be appropriate. from all previous coalitions. It is different in origin. It What is clear is that this kind of parliamentary was different in its formation. It is different in its innovation is of a piece with similar innovations in the purpose. And it is different in its effect. We believe that coalition. I refer to the use, for example, of framework many of the steps the coalition is taking in terms of legislation, which is similarly problematic. The Public the constitution and in terms of Parliament are wrong. Bodies Bill has been extensively criticised on constitutional Wrong in policy terms, yes, of course; but that is not grounds. As has been well put in this House, in the Bill the point that I am arguing. I mean wrong in terms of the Government are seeking to use Henry VIII powers Parliament and wrong in terms of the constitution. on an industrial scale. That is just plain wrong. It is not a correct use of such powers, and those powers We believe that we are acting properly in defence of were rightly criticised by many constitutional experts the constitution, as this House is meant to do. Do not as being something inapplicable in a modern democracy. just take my word for it. Think about what Mr Jacob Moreover, coalition Ministers have questioned the Rees-Mogg, Member for North East Somerset, and decision in this House to seek to vote down secondary indeed the son of a distinguished Member of your legislation, specifically on tuition fees. There are clear Lordships’ House, said in another place this week in provisions in the terms of the Cunningham committee— the final stages of the Fixed-term Parliaments Bill. He said of our all night session that, “it is notable that their lordships sat throughout last night, Lord Lawson of Blaby: I have been listening to the fulfilling their proper constitutional role of ensuring that a serious noble Baroness with great attention because she always constitutional change is properly debated and reviewed”. speaks in a very reasonable way, so will she give a He said that the Peers were, reasonable answer to this question? She has talked “battling for the great British constitution, which has served us about a number of things she considers appropriate extraordinarily well for hundreds of years”.—[Official Report, and a number of things that she considers inappropriate. Commons, 18/1/11; col. 708.] Does she consider a filibuster to be appropriate or Let me quote from another very strong Conservative inappropriate? supporter, Mr Simon Heffer of the Daily Telegraph, whose piece on the coalition’s constitutional reforms Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I in December contained, yes, very many sharp criticisms consider holding the Government to account, which is of my own party, but he went on to say that, what I have witnessed this week, to be entirely appropriate. “the Coalition has chosen to ignore or contradict parts of the parties’ respective manifestos, which raises the question of who actually voted for what we are being offered now; it has chosen to Noble Lords: Oh! try to gerrymander parliamentary boundaries, without any sort of mandate to do so; it has chosen to try to change the voting system, without any sort of mandate to do so; it has chosen to try Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, to have fixed-term parliaments, without any sort of mandate to there will be different views. I have endeavoured in my do so; and for good measure there will be no Queen’s Speech next remarks so far to put my points as reasonably as the year, because it would be an inconvenience for the executive”. noble Lord has expressed, but I should not have Not my words, but the words of the Conservative thought that jeering was quite the way we would want commentator. He also said: to conduct a serious debate of this nature. However, “It seems to regard its creation as some sort of miracle, and a the noble Lord may think differently. miracle requiring all the rules to be bent, twisted and otherwise The Cunningham committee report stipulates precisely mangled to keep it intact”. how attempting to vote down secondary legislation Discussions on coalitions in British politics cannot can be legitimately done. We stayed wholly and completely avoid including reference to Disraeli’s famous comment. within the terms of those provisions, and we did so As the first speaker in the debate, I claim the right because they had been explicitly agreed in both Houses. today to deploy the comment first. In a speech in the On Bills of constitutional importance, the Constitution Commons on 16 December 1852, Disraeli said: Committee of your Lordships’ House has taken a very “But coalitions, although successful, have always found this, firm line. It says that, that their triumph has been brief. This too I know, that England does not love coalitions”.—[Official Report, Commons, 16/12/1852; “it is a matter of principle that proposals for major constitutional col.1666.] reform should be subject to prior consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny, unless there are good reasons for departing from this In the fullness of time, we will see how prescient principle”. Disraeli was about this coalition in overall terms. But 543 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 544 in terms of parliamentary and constitutional impact experience, in many cases the Opposition want the of the coalition, we on this side of the Chamber would timetable Motion because it is a very practical way for contest that Disraeli’s prediction is already true. them to show complete opposition to a Bill. They would much sooner have a guillotine to demonstrate that point and then have some orderly planning of the 11.58 am rest of the debate than what has been going on in Lord Wakeham: My Lords, the first thing I would the past few days—I said that I would not talk about like to do is to congratulate the noble Baroness on the past few days, so I will not. proposing the Motion in, as we would have expected, a vigorous and forceful way. She may have been a bit luckier than she anticipated in exactly when her Motion Lord Higgins: Will my noble friend make it clear in came to be debated, but nevertheless it was a forceful his remarks about timetable Motions that he is speaking speech. This is the first opportunity that I have of about the House of Commons, as a timetable Motion saying publicly to her, since she was very helpful to me in this House would be totally new and extremely on the committee we had dealing with expenses, how dangerous? much I enjoyed working with her on that occasion. Once or twice I was not quite sure whether she was on Lord Wakeham: I certainly have no desire for a my side but nevertheless she always made a constructive timetable Motion in this House. I will try to explain contribution to it and very much helped in producing why I think that it would be extremely undesirable. the final result. That is not to say that it might not be necessary, but I I want particularly just to talk about the parliamentary very much hope that it will not. The whole of my aspects of a coalition. Much has been written about political career in, if you like, business management, these things, and the noble Baroness has added a has been to avoid such things, except, as I said, on number of things to it. As for her quotations from the certain occasions where both sides reckoned that it Joint Committee on Conventions that she did with her was the best way forward. I never reached the point noble friend who was around a few minutes ago, I that the dear man, Michael Foot, did when he moved think that she perhaps chose that part which suited her four timetable Motions in one day in the House of arguments best. Indeed, in its report the committee Commons and, when pressed, said that the reason says it believes that the Salisbury convention has changed why he was doing it was that the Government had significantly and does not believe that it should be such a small majority that that was the only way to get called the Salisbury convention any more. At paragraph the legislation through. Some of us agreed that that 102, it also indicated that, was probably right. “evidence points to the emergence in recent years of a practice The basis on which I have felt that parliamentary that the House of Lords will usually give a Second Reading to any business should be conducted is as follows. First, a government Bill, whether based on the manifesto or not”. Government who have a majority in the Commons are So we are in a new situation here. I do not want to entitled to get their business through. It is not, in dwell on the events of the past few days—except to principle, the job of Oppositions to seek to frustrate say, if I may, that the exchange between my noble the will of the Government of the country. Secondly, friend the Leader of the House and the noble Baroness Oppositions should never lose sight of the fact that the Leader of the Opposition, exactly a week ago they will be the Government one day. That has always today at Questions, was extremely helpful and was one been the position, and therefore Oppositions should which many of us appreciated. never do anything that they would disapprove of if It is more than 30 years since I started to be they were in government. That is a proper constraint involved in the management of parliamentary business. on Oppositions at all times. Thirdly, Oppositions have I cannot see that the management of parliamentary their rights in political debate, and it is the responsibility business or the rules that govern it have altered of the government Front Bench and government business substantially since then. Of course, there have been managers to deliver to the Opposition the rights that changes. The noble Baroness talked about the number they reasonably should have. That always has been, of new Peers who have come into the House. At the and it always will be. beginning of this Parliament, I think that I am correct Fourthly, in this House it is not always sensible to to say that more than 50 per cent of the House had press matters to a Division when there is absolutely no been created under the Labour Government, so a possibility of the House of Commons agreeing with number of new Peers have been brought into this them. This House is a revising House and is at its best House by both Governments. The main problem now when it seeks to ask the House of Commons to look is to find a seat to sit on, but we all share in that again, particularly where the House of Commons is responsibility—and of deciding how we will go on in singing—if I may say so—an unclear note on an issue. this place. That is where this House is right. I can remember, In the 30 years during which I have looked at when I first got here, first Lord Callaghan and then parliamentary procedures, things have substantially Lord Whitelaw each saying, “Of course I respect the deteriorated. To be fair, the rot set in in the House of right of your Lordships to press this amendment, but Commons. I believe that the automatic timetabling the question is: is it wise? Is it a sensible use of time to of business was a great mistake. I very much regret seek to pass amendments that have no prospect whatever that the present Government have not felt able to of ever being taken up by the House of Commons?”. remove that from the House of Commons. Timetable That is something that we should bear in mind when Motions are, of course, sometimes necessary; in my we are doing it. 545 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 546

[LORD WAKEHAM] just as people had begun to demand more choices as All of what I have been saying to you is, in fact, “the consumers, so they wanted to exercise more choice in usual channels”. That is how things should be negotiated. their politics. The situation that we now face—so well From time to time in our history it is impossible to described earlier—is that the parties and Parliament negotiate a satisfactory arrangement. There is then no are having to catch up with where the people have alternative but for the Government to do something—the already led. By 2010, the total vote for Labour and Government have to get their business. So I am 100 Conservatives had declined to less than two thirds—fully per cent in favour of negotiations and I want to see one third went to parties other than the big two. them going on all the time. If it does not happen, then So what does this mean? It means that, in the it is the Government’s responsibility to propose a context of this debate, the public as a collective are solution for which they will have to get a majority. I quite clear that they want more than two answers to finish by saying that the sentence that I like best in this any given political question. Voters are no longer subject was said in a speech by the late Lord Biffen, wrapped up in red cloth, blue cloth or even a golden who many of us were great admirers of, in which he sash. Party and class alignment are all but dead as said that the agenda for political debate needs to be voters float among the parties between elections and fixed, so that the discussions can be fierce and competitive. even during election campaigns—what psephologists refer to as “churn”. 12.08 pm The verdict of the most recent general election was Lord Tyler: My Lords, I broadly agree with everything clearly that no one had really won. In the most propitious that my noble friend has just said, but that is not circumstances, the Conservatives could not defeat Labour, surprising because he speaks with almost unique and despite astonishing scaremongering in the media experience of both Houses of Parliament. I, too, about the dire effects of a hung Parliament, more congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Symons of people voted for the Liberal Democrats—and indeed Vernham Dean, on a very timely debate, because we for other, smaller parties—than at any time since the are after all in a different situation so it is good that we party’s inception in 1989. It hardly betrays any secrets take this time. However, I have to say to her that, when to say that the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition a Labour supporter quotes Mr Simon Heffer, I tend to was thought to be an impossible outcome. To their discount some of the rest of the argument. credit, however, the Conservatives were more prepared to embrace the facts of modern politics—that coalitions Ever since the 1920s, when the Liberal Party descended may be necessary to make government work—than into the doldrums, an almost total political duopoly were their Labour counterparts. has grown up in this country, at parliamentary level at least, between the Labour and Conservative parties. In The coalition was a popular change: 59 per cent 1951, we should recall, when Labour and the Conservatives supported the coalition after the election and many— won 96.7 per cent of the vote, the Liberals won only contrary to the hopes and assumptions of noble Lords six seats. The electorate was largely settled in its political opposite—still do. People like the idea of politicians allegiance, often along social and economic, and even working together and putting aside the pantomime hereditary, lines. I recall in my first successful election partisanship that they see so childishly displayed in in 1964—I was very, very young—banging on doors Prime Minister’s Questions. Despite the popularity of and often getting the response, “Oh, my husband is a the concept, of course, there has been disquiet about union member, so we are Labour”, or, “We are in the consequences, to which the noble Lady has referred. business, so we are Conservative”. Occasionally, people The consequence is simply and inexorably compromise. said, “We have always been Methodists, so my family Just as in every boardroom around the country, and in are Liberals”. Allegiance was automatic, but that is no committees of all the organisations that we are all longer the case. involved in, accommodations and common decisions are reached from different perspectives, so that now Dramatic changes have taken place over that period, happens around the Cabinet table. Indeed, there is but Britain nevertheless got used to a stable two-party more open discussion of issues, as we understand it, pendulum. Up till 1979, the pendulum moved fairly than under the Blair and Brown regimes. regularly and fairly modestly; then came the minority Governments of Thatcher, Major and Blair. Curiously, Again, the public seem to be relatively relaxed as the pendulum swung less often—but often with about that. Only the media—the square mile of the more force—the mandate for Governments with large Westminster village—hanker for times when things Commons majorities declined. Thatcher had a 43-seat were simpler, when one party would win perhaps 35 majority in 1979 on only 43 per cent of the popular per cent of the vote, gain a big majority of seats and vote. She then got a majority of 144 seats on a lesser do what it liked. That was all very straightforward, but vote of 42.4 per cent in 1983 and a 102-seat majority it no longer works for the public. on a very similar share in 1987. Then, in 1992, John Manifesto commitments have been jettisoned in the Major won more votes than any Prime Minister before past by majority Governments—for example, on electoral or since, yet he was returned with a smaller Commons reform, tuition fees and privatisation proposals under majority of just 21. In 1997, Blair won only 43 per cent the previous Government—whereas, with the coalition, of the vote—far fewer votes than Major—but Labour the process is actually more transparent. The coalition won a majority of 179 seats. agreement contains strands of policy that are clearly All these capricious, irrational results can be explained from one manifesto or the other. Indeed, those who by the gradual pluralisation of political choice, constrained were close to the negotiations—I was not there—can by an intrinsically binary political system. However, tell us that they usually chose the best policy of the 547 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 548 two parties rather than attempt simply to water down 12.18 pm either one or the other. Any dispassionate person can now look through that coalition agreement and see the Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield: My Lords, I add my Liberal Democrat parts, the Conservative parts and thanks to the noble Baroness for giving us an opportunity the parts that represent a blend. to debate these matters. The other place has been despatching to us near-JCB quantities of earthmoving It has been argued, and it was hinted at earlier, that constitutional legislation, which naturally has been a coalition Government is one that nobody has voted absorbing a great deal of the time, attention and for. Technically, I suppose that that is true. However, nervous energy of your Lordships’ House. Relatively what is also true is that the electorate has a much more unnoticed among the rumble of these great Bills, likely prospect of seeing a broad preference than a however, the Cabinet Office sent us shortly before wholesale endorsement of any one party’s manifesto. Christmas 148 pages of an entirely new constitutional Indeed, one thing that deters people from joining document: the draft Cabinet manual, as minted by parties is that they think that all party members must officials, defined by the Cabinet’s Home Affairs Committee share the same detailed commitments. That is obviously and approved at full Cabinet level by the commission. not true, but it puts people off. Sensible people think it It is, in my judgment, an artefact of considerable weird, frankly, that anyone should say that they must constitutional significance, although it is not, nor is it wholeheartedly sign up to the policy platform of one intended to be, the core of a written constitution. party without a scintilla of qualification. With coalitions, Essentially, it is the Executive’s operating manual, there is a natural tendency to get what people want. describing those moving parts of the constitution and That certainly happened to a very large extent to the associated procedures that the Executive, both Ministers voters of 2010. and officials, believe impinge currently on their work. To their credit, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime We all face a difficulty in adjusting to this situation, Minister and the Cabinet Secretary wish to have our but I think that the public have adjusted better than views on the Cabinet manual before it hardens into either the media or many in politics. Sensible people a first edition. As it does not, in my view, embrace respond well to this spirit of compromise and to the certain constitutional questions central to the work of sense that, where there is no winner, no one should your Lordships’ House, it deserves serious attention, take all. We had better get used to it. As Professor and I know that shortly the Constitution Committee John Curtice has pointed out—I have not the time to of your Lordships’ House will give it just that. go through all his reasons—the hung Parliament that Before examining some of the detail, I must declare occurred after 6 May was no one-off aberration. He an interest. I, with other outsiders, helped the Cabinet has outlined three specific reasons why—even under Office a little with chapter 2 of the Cabinet manual, on first past the post, if that continues—we will have elections and government formation, particularly its more hung Parliaments, so it is important that we in section on the hung Parliament contingency. I warmly politics should adjust to that and respond to what the welcome its publication, not merely because of the public clearly wish to achieve. clarity that it adds to the delicate matter of the Sovereign’s remaining personal prerogative of appointing a Prime It is extremely important that the factors to which Minister, but generally as a substantial step towards Professor Curtice refers, which make hung Parliaments greater transparency in the engine room of central a regular reality, impose some new disciplines on all of government. us involved in Parliament and in politics. Frankly, it is On the appointment of a Prime Minister in hung a good thing that we move towards where the public circumstances, the draft manual refines the earlier have already led. I do not accept that negotiation and version of chapter 2, which was given to the Justice agreement between adults should be painted as somehow Select Committee in the other place at the end of grubby or as horse trading. At least the negotiation is February 2010 and on which that committee reported a great deal more open than what happened in the before the election. With the experience in mind of the elective dictatorship of recent so-called majority five days in May that led to the coalition’s eventual Governments. formation, paragraph 50 of the draft Cabinet manual now makes explicit what was only implicit in the All of us who are involved in the profession of February 2010 version: politics—it is a profession—have a very important “The incumbent Prime Minister is not expected to resign until opportunity to respond to what the public are asking it is clear that there is someone else who should be asked to form a us to do. The Westminster establishment may not be government because they are better placed to command the used to these questions or such realities, but to my confidence of the House of Commons and that information has been communicated to the Sovereign”. mind they now broadly reflect the enlightened view of the British public. Politicians should talk to each other The overriding requirement here is that the Monarch more often. There should be no one monopoly on is not drawn into the appearance, let alone the reality, rectitude. It is one of the great features of this House of political partisanship, an impulse I profoundly that we never assume that we are the only ones in the share. right and that all those over there are inevitably wrong, The original unrevised draft was of critical use for which tends to happen at the other end of the building. those of us who sat in television and radio studios, That is the best hope for good government. The best for nigh on the whole five days in May, attempting to hope is plural government, and that may often mean impersonate the British constitution and being asked coalition government. constantly what should or should not be happening in 549 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 550

[LORD HENNESSY OF NYMPSFIELD] everyone. Absent that trust, people will deem such sacrifices as constitutional terms. Chapter 2 of the manual generally unfair, even punitive, and, thus, will not support the programs will be of central use to all concerned if future that require them.” general elections produce an inconclusive parliamentary The election process of 2010 left voters in no doubt arithmetic. that, because of the financial crisis that faced this I turn briefly to what is not captured in the 148 pages country, sacrifices would have to be made by the of the draft manual. There are two important omissions population. They expected whatever party or parties on the national security side: the placing of all the were elected to have to do difficult things. The outcome secret agencies on a statutory footing with the Intelligence of the election indicated that the electorate was unsure Services Act 1994, and the associated parliamentary which Government would be best able to offer the best oversight arrangements, which are not covered. Also return on the sacrifice of jobs, homes, financial security not covered are the conventions about how and when and much else that might have to be made. Parliament has a say in decisions of war and peace. It is in the nature of coalition government, as the However, the most striking gaps, on the work of excellent Library Note prepared for this debate indicates, your Lordships’ House in particular, are the lack that manifestos upon which parties seek election, have of any interpretation of what constitutes a money Bill to some extent to be set aside. As the noble Baroness in the minds of the Executive and of any description has already pointed out, on previous occasions when of the current reach and vitality of the Salisbury/Addison coalitions have been formed, elections have followed convention of 1945. As a still recent arrival in your in order to achieve a mandate from the people. This Lordships’ House, I respectfully suggest that, from has not happened with the current coalition, and while what I have observed here so far, both those questions such a process is not essential, what becomes important are of real and immediate concern to many of your is that, constitutionally, the Executive do not take Lordships. powers to themselves that do not represent the will of I do not think that we have had an executive view of the people. the condition of Salisbury/Addison since Mr Jack At the same time, it is in the nature of all Governments, Straw, as Leader of the Commons, gave evidence to coalitions or otherwise, that they be seen to govern. the Joint Committee on Conventions, chaired by the This means that a hierarchy of priorities has to be noble Lord, Lord Cunningham of Felling, which reported established, given the limits of elected time, fixed or in 2006. Both Houses debated that report and it was otherwise. This Government, as the people expected, noted with approval in each case, but the Cunningham have had to make difficult decisions in respect of report’s recommendation that Salisbury/Addison should national debt. Inevitably, this has impacted upon the be the subject of a resolution in your Lordships’ lives of many ordinary people, who, up until the point House, subsequently communicated to the other place of receiving their redundancy notice, believed that the and renamed the “government Bill convention”, was work they were doing was valued and worth while. not acted on. Given that, until last May, Salisbury/Addison Many people see the present circumstances exacerbated was never faced by the political ecology of coalition by the failure of the market. Harvey Cox, a professor and the question of what trumps which manifestos or at Harvard, has observed that the market has been coalition agreements, the time is right for a serious treated as omnipotent, possessing all power; omniscient, re-examination of Salisbury/Addison and its replacement having all knowledge; and omnipresent, existing with a Strathclyde/Royall/McNally convention. everywhere. When the market was in crisis, the Nobel The draft Cabinet manual lacks poetry. Not one of Laureate, Paul Krugman, described it as, “a crisis of its phrases is likely to cling to the Velcro of memory. It faith” and the financial journalists, Larry Elliott and is a very British document: a bundle of laws, conventions Dan Atkinson, in their book The Gods That Failed, and procedures, just like the constitution itself. It is spoke of the market as promising, also, in parts, what these days we would call “aspiration”, “paradise if only we would obey and pamper their hero-servants especially its chapter on the indispensability of proper and allow their strange titans and monsters to flourish. We did as collective Cabinet government. The Civil Service, being they asked, and have placidly swallowed the prescriptions of the lavishly rewarded bankers … hedge fund managers and private almost entirely herbivorous, to a man and woman, in equity tycoons, while turning a blind eye to the rampaging of the its approach to government, must have purred with exotic derivatives, the offshore trusts and the toxic financial pleasure when Ministers endorsed this section. Whitehall’s instruments … These gods have failed. It is time to live without herbivores never enjoy command premierships, where them”. collective corners are cut. Cabinet government has Whether or not such analyses are accurate, they enjoyed a revival since last May, possibly because reveal the dilemma for Government. To tackle such coalitions require higher levels of collegiate spirit and godlike powers holds many risks. The temptation therefore practice. As a fully paid up herbivore myself, I can becomes the greater to return to those areas where only welcome this recognition by the coalition of the some evidence of government can be seen; areas such importance of being collective. as education, social welfare and healthcare. Legislation made in these areas does not exceed manifesto commitments made by either of the participating parties 12.24 pm in the coalition. It cannot simply be a choice of the The Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells: My Lords, I, best parts—after all, who decides? too, thank the noble Baroness for this debate. The I have recently been in conversation with many of American political theorist Mark Hetherington observed: the heads of schools in my diocese. They and other “When government programs require people to make sacrifices, teaching professionals speak of themselves as being they need to trust that the result will be a better future for exhausted by the relentless stream of legislation, 551 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 552 jeopardising their fundamental vocation as teachers of It is a self-evident truth that the scrutiny of legislation the young. On health, I had a meeting this week with is fundamental to the work of Parliament and subjecting local GPs and, while seeing some merit in the proposals legislation to rigorous scrutiny is an essential responsibility for consortia, they were, nevertheless, concerned about of both Houses of Parliament if bad law is to be the top-down nature of it and the lack of public avoided and the technical quality of legislation tested. consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny. One observed It is also important that those affected by, or with to me that, if it is to be managed well, many who now knowledge of, or having an interest in, proposed legislation serve the PCTs will walk out of one door and in should have an opportunity to make their voice heard through another, but probably only after the trauma while legislation is being considered, rather than after of job loss, with its attendant anxieties and financial it has taken effect. Parliament’s influence is usually insecurity. Why not a process of evolution rather than greater before a Bill has been introduced because revolution, they ask? Ministers will be more likely to accept change when a I make these points in relation to the NHS first, Bill is not in a settled state and the Minister is not at because prior to the election, the Prime Minister observed: the Dispatch Box defending his position. That is why “There will be no more pointless reorganisations that aim for pre-legislative scrutiny is so important and why so change, but instead bring chaos. Too often ministers have rearranged many who gave evidence before the committee, including the NHS like they’re shuffling a pack of cards … It reveals an many members of today’s coalition, some of whom attitude to the NHS that sees it just as a bureaucratic machine to are speaking in the debate today, were keen to emphasise be taken apart and put together again”. its importance. Secondly, its not being a manifesto commitment means that the Executive have again decided upon a The committee was aware that not all measures of policy without the consent of the people, thereby high political contention have been published in draft undermining one of the fundamental principles of in the past and subject to pre-legislative scrutiny, but it democratic government. The Prime Minister has asked did not necessarily regard this as a category for exclusion. the public to place their trust in the future in terms of As Dr Meg Russell of the Constitution Unit put it, what he has called the big society. It is a bold concept, such Bills, but one still largely undefined, and at risk of seeming “are arguably the bills that most need proper scrutiny”. hollow in the light of the loss of jobs and security and The committee stated, in paragraph 30: the sword of Damocles of much top-down change. “However committed a Government may be to a measure—and It was the late Lord Devlin who observed: however opposed other political parties may be—that does not “Society means a community of ideas; without shared ideas necessarily mean that the technical elements of its provisions on politics, morals and ethics, no society can exist ... If men and cannot be improved through early debate and objective scrutiny”. women try to create a society in which there is no fundamental agreement about good and evil, they will fail; if, having based it These points are of even greater importance in the on common agreement, the agreement goes, the society will case of Bills which seek to change the constitution. In disintegrate.” my view, such Bills should always be the subject of full Society is based upon relationships, not on contract. consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny; subsequent There is no justified government without the consent committee reports have continually emphasised this, of the governed. In society, we do together what we no matter which party is in power. For example, in the cannot do alone. There must be joined-up thinking 17th report of the Session 08-09 on the Parliamentary that ties the aims of a big society together with the Standards Bill, the committee said, realities of a mandate from the people in respect of “The way policy-making has been rushed, the lack of public changes as radical as those currently being proposed. consultation and the limited opportunities given to Parliament to Government are required to seek common good under scrutinise the bill all, in our view, fail to meet the minimum a mandate from the people and common good is the requirements of constitutional acceptability”. facilitating of society doing justice to the whole as well In the 11th report of 2009-10 on the Constitutional as to the parts. Reform and Governance Bill the committee said, 12.32 pm “The House may take the view that the consequence of the Government tabling so many late amendments to the Bill is that Lord Hart of Chilton: My Lords, let me join others the parliamentary consideration given in both Houses to the in congratulating the noble Baroness, Lady Symons of important aspects of constitutional reform which this Bill is likely Vernham Dean, on introducing this timely debate. I to effect has been substantially curtailed. ... This is no way to declare my membership of the Select Committee on undertake the task of constitutional reform”. the Constitution, but today, of course, I speak in my When it came to a consideration of the Constitutional personal capacity and not on behalf of the committee, Reform Bill—which I remember very well because I although I shall draw attention to several of the was standing next to the bomb when it exploded—and committee’s reports in recent years when it has discussed the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, there the constitution. The first is the 14th Report of the were many, now to be found on the coalition Benches, 2003-04 Session entitled Parliament and the Legislative who protested that insufficient scrutiny had been given Process. That report noted a concern that a growth in to the Bill’s contents and that in the case of the the volume of legislation was not being matched by Constitutional Reform Bill, it should be directed to a Parliament’s capacity to scrutinise it effectively. It Select Committee. A delay of three months, they said, therefore put forward a number of recommendations was nothing if it meant that the Bill was got right. The aimed at improving matters, including a move to publish present Leader of the House, the noble Lord, Lord more Bills in draft, far greater pre-legislative scrutiny Strathclyde, thought the Bill could be a candidate for and an emphasis on evidence-taking and consultation. carry over, with the delay that that entailed. So it is in 553 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 554

[LORD HART OF CHILTON] Report and Third Reading are almost always taken on this context that I come to consider the coalition the same day. In the Lords, Report and Third Reading Government’s series of piecemeal Bills for constitutional are nearly always taken on separate days, and amendments reform. may be tabled and considered at Third Reading. Any This is not the place for a detailed consideration of suggestion that the procedures of this House should the issues that each raises but it should be noted that be adapted to model the other place would point a they are the product of a coalition agreement produced dagger at proper scrutiny, and yesterday’s debate at speed over a number of days. They clearly represent highlighted the very real and present danger. both the cement to hold the coalition together and the I conclude by saying that it should be axiomatic desire to show a determination to get a legislative that every constitutional Bill be published in draft, programme under way with speed and vigour—to hit consulted upon and subjected to pre-legislative scrutiny, the ground running, as the Prime Minister so often with evidence being called and tested. Only the most puts it. Each has been criticised, however, not only by exceptional circumstances should dictate otherwise, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution and there is none to justify the two Bills now before but by the House of Commons Political and this House. In my view, gluing the coalition together Constitutional Reform Committee. The Commons for short-term political convenience and an early start committee regretted that the AV Bill was, on legislative programmes are not exceptional reasons. “being pushed through Parliament in a manner that limits both For the reasons I have given, many of the problems of legislative and external scrutiny of its impact, and may consequently the past few days could have been avoided if this undermine the Government’s intention to restore the public’s process had been followed, and the issues hammered faith in Parliament”. out by testing and looking at evidence to prove the The committee said that for primarily political reasons propositions being put forward. the Bill links two sets of provisions which could have By definition, it is unlikely that coalitions will produce been considered separately and, joint policies which will have been the subject of “does not include proposals on reforming the House of Lords identical but separate manifesto commitments. Those which would have allowed the composition of Parliament to be policies will not have received public endorsement. On developed in the round.”. the contrary, they will be a mix and match to bind the The House of Lords Select Committee regarded it, parties together in their desire to push forward with a “as a matter of principle that proposals for major constitutional legislative programme to seek to justify the creation of reform should be subject to prior public consultation and pre-legislative the coalition. That is perfectly understandable, but it is scrutiny. We recognise that there may exceptionally be good not an excuse and does not justify the promotion of reasons for departing from this principle, but the perils of doing constitutional Bills and claiming for them a special so are well illustrated in the present Bill. The case for proceeding status that exempts them from proper consultation rapidly with one Part of this Bill is far stronger than for the other”. and scrutiny. To do otherwise would lead to all coalitions wanting to adopt a similar course, thereby doing enormous Both committees also censure the Fixed-Term damage to Parliament and its task of full and proper Parliaments Bill in a similar way in respect of the scrutiny. speed, the lack of consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny. The report in the House of Commons said: 12.43 pm “It is acutely disappointing to us that we have needed to Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, I join in criticise the Government for the process it has chosen to adopt in thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, for the passage of its first two constitutional Bills, the other being the introducing this extremely timely debate and enabling Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill. While we understand the political impetus for making swift progress in this this House again to reflect in particular on the possible area, bills of such legal and constitutional sensitivity should be impact of coalition government on its deliberations. published in draft for full pre-legislative scrutiny, rather than However, I take some issue with two assertions that proceeded with in haste. We intend to inquire very soon, in she made, the first being that the coalition Government co-operation with the Procedure Committee if possible, into how have a stranglehold on this House. It is very apparent proper pre-legislative scrutiny of such Bills can best be ensured in from the proceedings on the Public Bodies Bill that the future, whether through the House’s Standing Orders or otherwise”. coalition has been able to dictate neither the content The reasons for pre-legislative scrutiny are of course nor the timing of that deliberation. Indeed, there have obvious. Taking evidence and soundings allow arguments been significant amendments passed by this House, to be tested and developed. Issues which seem to be against the wishes of the coalition, for the improvement based on arbitrary opinions can be explored and and revision of the Bill. explained. Consensus can be reached and alternatives The second issue that the noble Baroness raised, discovered. In short, argument can be reduced to a which is also questionable, is that legislation of smaller number of points and time can be saved. Government is legitimate—and I think that she was In this context, the procedures of each House are speaking here about constitutional legislation—only complementary, one to another. In the other place, as in so far as it is reflected in advance by the manifestos everyone knows, Programme Motions and guillotines of the parties putting it forward. She admitted the mean that scrutiny is curtailed. In this House, the exception to that rule, which occurred in the lifetime Government have no formal control over parliamentary of her own Government—the Constitution Act, which time, and all amendments tabled must be called and dispensed with the role of the Lord Chancellor historically, debated. That is precisely what has been applauded by separated the Judicial Committee from this House many Members of the other House. In the other place, and set up the new Supreme Court. That cannot be an 555 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 556 absolute rule, and it is not a desirable rule. Manifestos constitutional arrangements—the overmighty power by their nature express broad goals and certainly not of the Executive. The Better Government Initiative, detailed methods of implementation of those goals. created by a number of former civil servants, focused Furthermore, there are occasions when Parliament clearly on all that. To my mind, there is some opportunity must move with a degree of rapidity to respond to here again to address those problems more easily in a situations. I think, for example, of the embarrassment coalition than in the autocratic single-party leadership of this House when certain of its Members were that we have faced over quite a long period of the last considered to have behaved in a manner totally generation. What will reinforce the public’s trust is the inappropriate to their positions of responsibility. The sense of the Government being more deliberative and noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, seeking properly to consult. That does mean having gave his advice on the responsibilities and capabilities prelegislative scrutiny in constitutional Bills and putting of this House, but it was by no means an open-and-shut out Green Papers to give the public a proper opportunity case, and it required a response to the circumstances. to debate and contribute their informed evidence on Some of the matters being considered for constitutional the issues under discussion. There have been good reform at this time would have been strengthened by examples of this from the coalition, noticeably in the prelegislative scrutiny. In that respect, I agree with the Green Paper that has come out about electricity, brought noble Lord, Lord Hart. It is not impossible for this out by Mr Chris Huhne, which sets out what the issues House to express its views on these measures as they are and how the Government’s mind is moving and are presented to us. gives a proper timetable to enable reactions to come The second point that I would wish to make about in. Similarly, the Minister of Justice, Mr Kenneth the history of the coalition Government is that it is Clarke, brought out a first-class paper on penal matters. very easy to overlook, when one is concerned with That allows the transparency that we require to know what is admittedly a new situation in modern terms, what the Government’s thinking is about these issues the extent to which Cabinet Governments have not and the opportunity to participate in the decision-making. been monolithic, although they may have been single-party The foreword to the coalition manifesto spoke of Governments. I go back as far as I can recall, to the the time having come, Attlee Government. The Bevanites and Gaitskillites “to disperse power more widely in Britain today”. were in constant tension with each other. They were I am very much in agreement with that overriding not reflecting on the manifesto; they were reflecting rubric, but I hope that the agreement includes recognition different ideologies and practical approaches to the of the power of Parliament in respect of the coalition, achievement of their respective goals. There was always and that Parliament’s dialogue with the Government a tension. Similarly, there was a tension—and the will become more than advisory and will, indeed, be Government of the day did not speak with one voice— informative and creative. when Barbara Castle published her document, In Place of Strife. A minority of the Cabinet, including the Prime Minister and Roy Jenkins, supported her. 12.54 pm Within single-party Governments there are shifting Lord Wills: My Lords, I too congratulate and thank alliances. Perhaps it may be considered that there is my noble friend for proposing this important and some attractiveness in the fact that in a coalition the timely debate and, indeed, for her skilful analysis of differences of opinion are sometimes rather more clearly all the issues. It is a pleasure to follow the important recognisable and understood and made more explicit. and thoughtful speeches that have been made, including I hope that will be so. The coalition partnership agreement the one we have just heard from the noble Lord, Lord refers to that point in its foreword, written by the two Maclennan. I very much look forward to hearing the leaders. It says: rest of this debate. “So we will extend transparency to every area of public life”. Coalition government is a novelty in the recent history of this country but it is already becoming clear I very much hope that that includes transparency in that it has significant constitutional and parliamentary respect of the work of the coalition Cabinet and of the effects. Some are inherent in the nature of coalition two leaders themselves. Their position as a coalition Governments; some are the result of the particular will command greater public trust if it is recognised circumstances of this coalition Government. It is clear that the differences of opinion are real and that the that these effects are likely to develop and evolve contribution to debate is not one of parties entrenched further in the months and years ahead. and firing against each other but a genuine part of the democratic debate. I want briefly to rehearse what seem to me to be some of the most significant effects so far of this We have had other examples of Government in coalition Government and then to make a suggestion which differences of opinion have been recognised to the Government on how they might respond. These in modern times—perhaps most notably in respect of are clearly uncharted constitutional waters. Parliamentary the referendum on our membership of the European conventions, for example, that depend on the primacy Union in which Tony Benn and his colleagues were of the manifesto commitment have been cast into permitted to speak out against the view of the majority doubt by a coalition agreement that has jettisoned of the Cabinet. That was a coalition in all but name. I election commitments made by one or other or both prefer the version that we have now. of the parties to the coalition agreement precisely in The major issue raised by the coalition’s existence is order to secure that agreement. I make no judgment whether it will confront what was recognised before on this, I simply remark on the fact. Again, the doctrine the election as the biggest problem about the British of collective responsibility has been called into question 557 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 558

[LORD WILLS] in our political culture and in our media. Nor do I by the coalition agreement, which sunnily asserts that think that this is axiomatically a problem. I have long it continues to apply, except when it does not. In this believed that it is generally better to approach House, again, for example—I will not dwell on this—we constitutional change rather as a physician healing have seen how difficult this new world can be with the what needs to be healed than as an engineer constructing bitterly contested PVSC Bill. radical new structures from a blueprint. However, In the past, one important way that your Lordships’ there is much to be said for a systematic examination House has tackled contested and contentious legislation of these issues that places them in the broader context is through negotiation and compromise. But this of the state of our constitution. Government—again, I make no judgment on this; I Noble Lords have said that this may well not be the simply remark on the fact—have clearly found great last coalition Government that we see in our lifetimes, difficulty in reaching for this solution with this Bill. I and that the coalition is as much the product of do not think that that is because these are unusually political change as the cause of it. The politics of our stubborn Ministers; rather, it seems to me to be a democracy are clearly changing. The noble Lord, Lord product of the origins of the Bill in the coalition Tyler, set that out very well. The consequences of agreement. these changes need a properly informed debate that is We can all read daily in the media reports of deep not confined to the committee rooms of Westminster unease among Back-Benchers in both parties to the and Whitehall and should not necessarily be confined coalition that their interests are somehow being sacrificed to the specific issues generated by the coalition to those of the other party. This is inevitable when Government. For example, how far would a move to a there is no history of co-operation between the two fully codified constitution help tackle these issues? parties and there has not yet been any time for these Reference has been made to the Cabinet manual. That parties to build up any real trust between them. This is seems to me to be part of the creeping codification of only to be expected when a coalition has to be put our constitutional arrangements, and it should surely together so quickly and unexpectedly. be scrutinised in the light of that wider debate. This Such suspicions may be understandable but when debate should not be dictated by the Executive. It the Bill yokes together two different political agendas, should start with the people whose constitutional with Part 1 representing, as it were, the Liberal Democrat arrangements we all seek to serve. Their views should part of the Bill, and Part 2 the Conservative part, it be solicited through a range of mechanisms including makes it very difficult for the Government to adopt deliberative exercises, such as citizens’ summits, which obvious solutions such as splitting the Bill into two should inform any policy formulation by the Executive and adopting different timetables for the two parts, before they present any proposals to the legislature. which would remove a lot of the problems that we This discourse needs to start with a set of rigorously have seen over the past few days. Compromise in one researched, independently validated propositions. At part of the Bill but not the other would inevitably lead the risk of repeating myself from previous debates, to significant unrest in the parliamentary party whose these could be provided by the working group on the agenda had been compromised and would weaken the constitution established by the previous Government. coalition. It is this, in my view, which helps account for That included distinguished and expert Members from the unusual inflexibility of the Government over the all sides of this House—lawyers, prominent academics Bill. Again, I am not seeking to pass judgment but and others—but, despite repeated requests from me, merely to understand what is going on here. the Government have still to convene it. I am unclear Governments who are the product of a deal clearly why the Government are so slow to do that. It is a find it difficult to do deals. It appears on the basis of modest proposal, not in the sense that Jonathan Swift this admittedly limited evidence base that if the deal meant a modest proposal but a genuine modest proposal. that sets up a coalition is particularly rapid and pressurised, It is as much in the interests of the Government as of the more difficult it is for the Government to do a deal everyone else that our discussions on this issue should with the Opposition over legislation. As a result, there be informed by such expert deliberation. have been all-night sittings and passionate complaints I would be grateful if when he winds up the Minister from both sides of this House that the proper role of could give some indication of whether he will get your Lordships’ House has been sabotaged by the this group—or a similar group; he does not have to other side. accept it exactly as it was constituted by the previous I am sure that as today’s debate continues we will Government—under way and, if he will, when. If the hear further examples of the effects of this coalition Government are not proposing to do that, I would be Government but I conclude my remarks by making a grateful if he could give some indication of why not. suggestion to the Government about one way they could begin to respond to these new circumstances for 1.03 pm our constitutional arrangements. The Government have not rushed to recognise that their formation raises Lord Goodhart: My Lords, some time between 5.30 and significant constitutional issues. In so far as they have 6.30 yesterday afternoon, it became apparent to me done so, it appears that their actions have been piecemeal thatyourLordships’Househadenteredaseriousconstitutional and reactive. They have been making it up pretty much crisis, and I have decided to make that the centre of my as they go along. Again, I am not seeking to criticise speech today. the Government. It is perhaps inevitable that that What has happened is that it has become apparent should be the case in the light of the general absence that a minority of the Members of your Lordships’ of significant constitutional discourse on these issues House can use their power to block legislation that has 559 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Counterterrorism 560 been introduced by the Government and has been which may have to be passed under the Parliament supported by a majority of your Lordships’ House. Act. We need that in your Lordships’ House. The minority can do this by a large number of Members I would hope that any such legislation would act in making speeches that are of great length and repetitive a way that prevents anything like we have been facing and by not accepting groupings. The only weapon now for the last couple of weeks happening again. It must available to the majority of your Lordships’ House in not allow for the guillotine because it is central that we the battle that seems to be happening is closure, but do not have a guillotine in your Lordships’ House, and that weapon was designed for other purposes and is it must also prevent the misuse of time for debates. not very efficient in stopping the tactics of the minority. What has happened over the last two days is seriously In the long run, the House of Commons can, of damaging to the future of your Lordships’ House and course, overcome the blocking of Bills in your Lordships’ is something that is going to concern this House not House, but only by the use of the Parliament Act, and just for the next few weeks, but for a very considerable that means a delay of a year or more. The Parliament time. Act was created to allow the House of Commons to override decisions taken by the majority in your Lordships’ House, not to deal with the actions of a minority. Lord Sewel: In making comparisons between what Having separate actions by a minority was, no doubt, is happening now with what has happened in the past, hardly foreseen in 1911. has the noble Lord not excluded or failed to mention one very important factor? Now, the coalition Government The use of minority blocking has not previously have what is really an effective majority in your been seen in your Lordships’ House, at least during Lordships—an effective majority, not an arithmetical the 13 years during which I have been a Member. At one—where the last Government were clearly in the the time of the debate on the House of Lords Bill in minority? That is the very fundamental difference. 1999, it was rumoured that the noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury—then Lord Cranborne and the Conservative Leader—had persuaded the noble and learned Lord, Lord Goodhart: My Lords, that is perfectly true. Lord Irvine of Lairg, to agree to the retention of 92 However, for centuries—for decades—before 1999, the hereditary Peers by a threat to upset future government Conservative Party had a clear majority in your Lordships’ timetables in your Lordships’ House. Whether that House. would have happened if there had been no retention of After 1999, or after 1997 perhaps, the then Prime hereditary Peers, I do not know, but that was a case Minister said—I think he was right—that the two that involved a majority and not a minority of the largest parties should have an equal number of Members Members of your Lordships’ House. The problem and the third party, which was, of course, my own, now is that the powers of a minority in the House have should have a proportionate share. The meaning of been displayed to all who may become interested. “proportionate” was never quite worked out. All that That could well apply to other legislation at a later has happened here—and what happened between 1999 date, and particularly to legislation for the reform of and now does not make any difference—is that two your Lordships’ House, where some Members may parties are on the side of the Government rather than well wish to frustrate or delay reform in all or some of two parties being on the side of the Opposition. We its steps. have to prepare for situations where one or both of Of course, the powers of minority decisions could these events may happen. go much wider than that. There could be frustration I have said all that I intend to say. I hope that we of almost anything. To my mind, the use of delaying will see something that will get us around the serious tactics by a minority, whatever that minority may be, position we are now in. It will need very careful is damaging to the constitution and to the future of treatment to get us out of it. your Lordships’ House. The Motion of the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, calls, “attention to the constitutional and Parliamentary effect of coalition Counterterrorism government”. Statement I believe that this is not in fact the issue. The problems have been created by Labour-Party delaying tactics. 1.12 pm Those delaying tactics could arise whether the majority was a single party or a coalition, so it is not the The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- coalition that is the significant issue here—it is the Jones): My Lords, with the leave of the House, I Opposition, the Labour Party itself. The real issue is should like to repeat a Statement made earlier today in the behaviour of a minority Opposition. another place by my right honourable friend Damian Green, the Minister of State for Immigration. The Some of the speeches made during the debate yesterday Statement is as follows: after the closure vote think that the problem can be settled for good by friendly negotiation. Negotiation is “Mr Speaker, the Home Secretary is currently in now undoubtedly desirable, but it is not enough for Budapest at an informal meeting of the Justice and the future as a whole. The action of the Labour Party Home Affairs Council, and so I will be responding on has, I believe, opened up possibilities which may well her behalf. reappear later, perhaps to its own detriment. What can As the Home Secretary, Prime Minister and Deputy we do to meet this problem? For the present, it looks Prime Minister have made clear, the first duty of any as if we have to leave the matters to negotiation, but Government is to protect the British public, and we for the longer term we are going to need legislation, will not do anything that puts our security at risk. The 561 Counterterrorism[LORDS] Counterterrorism 562

[BARONESS NEVILLE-JONES] 1.15 pm arrests of individuals for terrorism-related offences before Christmas, the cargo bomb plot in October and Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I thank the the bombings in Stockholm in December have all Minister for repeating the Private Notice Question in demonstrated that the threat from international terrorism the other place as a Statement. However, it is disappointing remains a serious one. that the Statement had to be dragged out of the Government by means of a PNQ this morning. When On 13 July last year, the Home Secretary announced the Conservative Party was in opposition, it made that she was renewing the current order for 28 days’ much play of the need for the Executive to respect pre-charge detention for six months whilst the powers Parliament and parliamentary procedures. In office it were considered as part of a wider review of has acted rather differently. I will return to that in a counterterrorism powers. As the Home Secretary will moment. be giving a full Statement to the House on Wednesday Keeping the public safe and striking the right balance on the outcome of that review, it would be wrong of between security and protection of fundamental liberties me to pre-empt her statement by giving details of the is one of the most vital challenges facing any Government. review today. As a responsible Opposition, we seek to support the This Government are clear that the power to detain Government on issues of national security and on terrorist suspects for up to 28 days’ detention before their review of counterterrorism powers, provided that they are charged or released was meant to be an decisions are made on the basis of evidence, solely in exceptional power. This has always been Parliament’s the national interest and following an orderly process. intention, but under the last Government it became That is still very much our intention. That is why we the norm, with the renewal of 28 days repeatedly said before Christmas that if the evidence shows we brought before the House. This was despite the power can go down from 28 days’ pre-charge detention without rarely being used; since July 2007, no one has been impeding the police and security services in doing held for longer than 14 days despite the many terrorists their job, we should do it. arrested since then. This is a testament to the efforts of However, the process has not been at all orderly; it our prosecutors, our police and our intelligence agencies. has been delayed considerably. It was to be completed As I said, the Home Secretary will next Wednesday after the summer Recess, then in November, then by announce to the House the findings from the wider the end of the year and then last week. During that review of counterterrorism and security powers. time there have been considerable leaks to the media. The Home Secretary will set out the detailed On only 15 January, the Sun reported that £20 million considerations of the Government in determining whether of extra funding would be required for the security the current regime of 28 days should be renewed and, services to implement the changes to control orders, if not, what should be put in its place. In the interim, I which were agreed as part of the Government’s can announce that the Government will not be seeking counterterrorism powers review. That was followed by to extend the order allowing the maximum 28-day detailed reports by the BBC and other newspapers last limit and, accordingly, the current order will lapse on week. For example, the BBC reported the coalition 25 January and the maximum limit of pre-charge plans to replace control orders with a new range of detention will from that date revert to 14 days. restrictions to keep terror suspects under surveillance. We are clear that 14 days should be the norm and One working title for the new curbs, according to the that the law should reflect this. However, we will place BBC, is surveillance orders. These would restrict suspects’ draft emergency legislation in the House Library to movements but end overnight curfews and a ban on extend the maximum period to 28 days to prepare for mobile phones if numbers were supplied. The Daily the very exceptional circumstances when a longer period Telegraph reported the following from political sources: may be required. If Parliament approved, the maximum “Curfews for terrorism suspects are to be abandoned as part period of pre-charge detention could be extended by of a government overhaul of control orders, it can be disclosed”. that method. In our announcement on the wider review, There have been all these briefings and leaks in the the Home Secretary will set out what contingency media, but we are told today of the conclusions of the measures should be introduced in order to ensure that Government’s review, as the noble Baroness has set our ability to bring terrorists to justice is as effective as out—of a reversion to 14 days and draft emergency possible. legislation to be brought to extend the maximum period to 28 days in the circumstances that the noble This country continues to face a real and serious Baroness described. We must, however, wait until next threat from terrorism. That threat is unlikely to diminish Wednesday for a full justification for this decision and any time soon. The Government are clear that we need the details; yet the powers to detain terror suspects for appropriate powers to deal with that threat, but those 28 days expire, as the noble Baroness has stated, next powers must not interfere with the hard won civil Monday. Why are we not receiving a full Statement liberties of the British people. There is a difficult today, before the reversion to 14 days? Have the police balance to be struck between protecting our security and the security services agreed that, on the basis of and defending our civil liberties; the outcome of our the evidence, the power to detain suspects beyond counterterrorism powers review will strike that balance. 14 days is no longer necessary? Will this evidence, if it It is this Government’s sincere hope that it will form is available, be published in the review outcome, which the basis of a lasting political consensus across the I assume with be published next Wednesday? Has the House on this fundamentally important issue”. Minister’s department established a leaks inquiry into I commend the Statement to the House. That concludes the series of disclosures that we have seen in the media the Statement. in the past few weeks? 563 Counterterrorism[20 JANUARY 2011] Counterterrorism 564

This party is determined to do everything that it at one stage that this period could go up to 90 days, can to support the Government in any appropriate then to 48 days, will greatly welcome this decision by and necessary national security measures. However, the coalition Government? It is a decision on which the Government’s conduct on this matter has not this House can claim to have had a considerable given us any confidence in their approach. influence. It is also the end of a rather shameful period in which many of us feel that we reacted to the undoubted threat of terrorism, which was and remains 1.20 pm great, by reducing our intrinsic and long-standing Baroness Neville-Jones: My Lords, I welcome the respect for civil liberties. Opposition’s intention to support the Government so far as they can in this very important policy area. When the full Statement has been made and the review Baroness Neville-Jones: I am grateful to the noble published, I hope they will feel able to support the Lord for his statement. This House has indeed striven Government’s position and proposed legislation in to be a guardian of civil liberties, and many noble their entirety. Lords have played an important part in that role. As a I will say something about the review. As the House House, we shall always strive to do that with due would expect, I have been fully involved in it. The regard to the security of this country. word I would use to describe what we have been doing is “painstaking”. It has undoubtedly taken us longer than we thought it would. I make no apology for that. Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, this is indeed welcome It is much more important to get the outcome right, news. I welcome, too, the proposal to put forward get the balance right and go into all the possibilities. draft emergency legislation. There may be other contexts As we did the work, we found that there were more in which having legislation on the stocks could be angles and aspects that we needed to consider than we useful. I hope the Minister will take back the view, had realised at the outset: otherwise, we would not which I suspect not only I take, that it would be useful have stated in public the timetable that we did. We to have an opportunity to scrutinise the draft legislation have been at pains to do extremely careful work, and and not simply publish it, leave it there and hope it is to ensure that all those involved in government agreed okay. There needs to be a formal opportunity to with the outcome. The Home Secretary will set this scrutinise it. out in detail on Wednesday. On the 14 days, which will “be the norm”, detention The noble Lord asked a number of questions. I will on the basis of suspicion for as long as 14 days is endeavour to answer them. First, there will be a full significant and must have an immense impact on an Statement. The police and security services have made innocent individual. Has any progress been made on it clear that they are able to work within the limits that work, particularly intercept evidence—the noble Baroness have been set. I do not wish to go into great detail will not be surprised by that question—that might because it would be wrong to anticipate the Statement. enable a reduction to less than 14 days? However, we will set out the considerations that lie behind the contingency that we will put in place because, like everyone else, we realise that the terrorist threat Baroness Neville-Jones: I thank my noble friend for can change and therefore that it is right and proper to her sentiments. On the 14 days, more detail will indeed have an arrangement to enable us to respond to that, be set out about the context in which 14 days will but with the sanction of Parliament. That will be one become the norm. Perhaps she will forgive me if I do difference between the arrangements that we will put not go into that now. Some of the detail will respond forward and those that were previously in place. precisely to the points that she just made. There has undoubtedly been significant and I have no doubt that the Home Secretary will have considerable press speculation about what the Government something to say about the use of interceptors’ evidence. were going to decide. I have no doubt that journalists All I will say to the House at the moment is that the talked to people. However, there has been no leak and work that is being done on that subject—and a new no statement by the Government of a kind that anticipated round of work is being done—is continuing. what they were going to say to Parliament. It is in response to the Urgent Question put down in the other House that we have chosen to respond to the Lord King of Bridgwater: My Lords, I apologise to part of the CT review that is urgent—the part that the House for arriving late for my noble friend’s Statement. relates to the expiry of the pre-charge detention period— As one of the survivors of the 90-day ping-pong and to make it clear that it is the Government’s between the Houses, when fortunately the robust position intention to allow the 28-day limit to lapse and to of so many of your Lordships at that time ensured revert in normal circumstances to 14 days. The evidence that a very serious error was not made, I welcome the since 2007 shows that this has been sufficient time for Statement that my noble friend has repeated today valid charges to be brought. and look forward to further details that will emerge next Wednesday. 1.23 pm Lord Owen: Is the Minister aware that although Baroness Neville-Jones: I thank my noble friend. In there is no collective view on the Cross Benches, we on making the Statement on Wednesday, I hope that we these Benches, after a very difficult period in which will be able to give the full context in which the 14-day our civil liberties have been threatened by suggestions decision rests. 565 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 566

Coalition Government going to welcome them with open arms on every single occasion. A slight hint had been given by our behaviour. Debate (continued) That is something which people should bear in mind. If we are going to continue with this debate, we 1.28 pm must bear these things in mind—the fact that we do Lord Addington: My Lords, we now continue with have a right to form alliances and coalitions; the fact the debate. I apologise for the slight change in the that behaviour in this House will be affected by them; speaking order between myself and my noble friend and the fact that if people are appointed to this Lord Greaves. Communication between offices, Chamber for life, it will lead to time lags and blocks. If particularly after last night, was not perfect. I hope we are worried about how this Chamber functions, we that the House will forgive us for slightly confusing must look at having periodical culls. I speak as a what is going on. It is also unusual to be speaking in a hereditary Peer who has felt the breath of the whetted debate when most of the people you wish to address axe at least once. I have voted for reform in this House; your remarks to have not made it back in. But, with I have admitted to doing it with gritted teeth, but I did perfect timing, the noble Baroness has arrived. That is it. We are going to have to look at reform. quite understandable. The fact of the matter is that it has been proven, or The idea of the coalition and the constitutional the House has been reminded, that a small group can settlement in this House has, as the noble Baroness delay things. Whether it was a filibuster or not does not rightly mentioned, been affected by what has happened really matter. Travelling at the speed of an arthritic over the past few days. I appreciate that I am biased snail amounts to the same thing, particularly on this when I make these remarks, but over the past few days occasion. If we are going to continue in this role, we we have heard a great many things a great many times. will have to look at our own procedures. I do not like One is that we now have an iron majority on these the idea very much but we do have a rather blunt Benches that can ram everything through. It is quite instrument available to us at the moment—and I put odd that a minute after we had our last big row on my hand up as being a Teller when it was used. We that, in which I had a small part, we then had a must either accept its use more regularly or, if this Government defeat inspired by a Government Back- behaviour continues, we must give the power to someone Bencher. The Isle of Wight may not be an issue that else. Alternatively, we must have a self-denying ordinance will bring down Governments, but it proves that even that we do not incessantly delay procedures. Unless under this new monolith of control, there is a degree these things are talked about, the nature of this Chamber of flexibility. will change. Also, there is the fact that this House could change Many of my noble friends have spoken about the things quite happily. Before there was a balance, which nature of politics and the noble Baroness put great I do not always regard as having been the sunny emphasis on what goes into manifestos. I can tell you uplands, having spent so much of it sitting over there one thing about the coalition document for my own and voting against the now Opposition party. Sometimes party—and I suspect that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, we found ourselves struggling to be heard; sometimes might agree with me. We did not sit down and talk our current partners in the coalition did not agree with about the subtext that we would have to present to the us; sometimes we found ourselves being the major Government if we did not win, if we came second. We opposition on Bills. There were changes going on, and assumed we were going to win. Maybe we were being a situation that was rather more dynamic than has very arrogant. Maybe the party that lost, when it wrote been painted. its manifesto on the basis that it was going to win, was It was nice to hear the noble Lord, Lord Wills, being a little arrogant. Maybe the party that came best speak for only eight minutes and make a coherent out of all the people who did not quite win was being point. I hope that many of the people in this House arrogant. But we all did it. Unless you are going to will take on board the fact that you can do things make us go away and rewrite our manifestos and come efficiently and well. back later, we are going to have to accept that they are If we are going to try to make this House work, we guidelines and principles as opposed to a shopping list will have to take a long hard look at ourselves and how of what you are actually going to do. things function. I feel that various political parties have a habit of forgetting about their opponents and Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, putting them in certain boxes, based on the last time could the noble Lord explain why the Secretary of they had a look at them. The last time that happened State at DBIS, Mr Cable, said that he would never with the party opposite was sometime in 1997. I have signed the pledge on tuition fees had he known remember on one occasion about two years ago when that he was going to be in Government? How does he I was here at about 10.30 at night having a drink that square those two things up? had been bought for me by a Member of the now Opposition. It was suggested to me and another of my Lord Addington: My Lords, I do not know if I can colleagues that all we really wanted was to keep the really explain that. Maybe it is part of the learning Tories out—those were the exact words. “That’s what process, one that we will have to take on the chin. I put you really want”. As that Member of what is now Her it like this. When tuition fees were first introduced by Majesty’s Opposition had bought me a drink I did not the noble Baroness’s party, I opened a bank account rant and rail there and then, but the fact that I was for my daughter to pay her tuition fees. I looked to there at 10.30 at night to vote against that Government what was coming and listened to the academics, who should have been some indication that we were not were lobbying very hard for increases even then, saying 567 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 568 that the fees were too low. That was what I thought the The second alternative justification is that the electorate reality was. My own party made other judgments, and voted for a hung Parliament or coalition. This is a they were not ones I agreed with. rather difficult claim to justify. You only need to read To conclude, this House is going to have to learn to John Stuart Mill on the fallacy of composition to see behave slightly differently, or bring in an outside authority, how fallacious that kind of argument is. Certainly, you if we cannot behave ourselves and take our practices cannot attribute or impute to the electorate an intention from another place, which are determined by an outside to do any such thing. It is an outcome of millions of authority. We will have to accept that we as a House individual intentional acts, all of which were perhaps are stuck with our history, which means that we are undertaken for quite different reasons, so you cannot here for life at the moment, and there is always going do that. to be a time lag, and we cannot change our membership The issue of how to legitimatise a post-election with elections. coalition brings us back to the issue of its mandate. This means that, for this Government, we must just say, “We are where we are. It is not ideal, but this is 1.37 pm what we have got”. It seems that we must be much Lord Plant of Highfield: My Lords, I shall focus, as more careful and deliberate in future coalition formation. my noble friend Lady Symons did at the beginning of If swing parties such as the Liberal Democrats—third her speech—and I thank her for inaugurating this or fourth parties—are going to claim legitimacy for debate—on the issues of manifestos and mandates in coalition deals that they might subsequently make, the context of coalition. Over the past generation at they will have to be clear before an election who their least, the party manifesto at elections has become preferred coalition partner is. rather akin to a quasi-contract between government The idea of equidistance, which the noble Lord, and the electorate. It is clear why that should have Lord Ashdown, argued for when he was leader of the happened. What is often called in the literature expressive Liberal Democrats, is not sustainable in an election voting, which is what the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, campaign. Given that there has been this coalition, it meant when he talked about people having a kind of is just not going to be feasible for Liberal Democrats loyalty to a party that they have grown up with and to say in future that they are equidistant between the which is linked to social position, religious outlook other parties and will make some coalition deal after and class, has declined tremendously in favour of what the election in the light of how things turn out and has come to be called instrumental voting, whereby what their interests are. The Liberal Democrats will people vote for parties in relation to how they see their have to commit themselves in advance at least to the interests at a particular time. idea that, other things being equal, this party rather A manifesto might be a way of trying to address the than that party is the preferred coalition partner. That issue of instrumental voting, so that people look at links to the issue of legitimacy. It is only if a party what they will get out of a Government, whether it is such as the Liberal Democrats do that that people can in their interests and so forth. The fact that there is a choose to vote for or against that preferred coalition, manifesto provides a basis for building up a degree of rather than its being the result of a post-election deal trust between the electorate and the Government. of the sort that we have now. That will be an important Acting on the manifesto provides the Government element of any future coalition. Equidistance is just with their mandate and authority. That idea reached not a feasible or morally legitimate position, because its zenith, for good or ill, in 1997, with the Labour it perpetrates a kind of sleight of hand on the electorate. Party’s pledge card, which was very much promoted The other problem with coalition in this country is by my noble friend Lord Prescott. Indeed, all the that we have only the Liberal Democrats as a plausible pledges were fulfilled. That card was an attempt to third-party coalition partner. In other countries, there forge a link between government and people in a is a wider range of choices. Certainly, if the AV narrow sense but also in terms of what the Government referendum is successful, I hope that there might emerge could be held to account to do and trusted to do. other possible swing parties. The Greens might be the The doctrine of the manifesto and the mandate most obvious; the nationalist parties might be, too, if becomes intensely problematic in a post-election coalition they saw that there was a benefit in developing more deal. The coalition agreement, according to Mr Vince United Kingdom-oriented policies as opposed to just Cable, superseded the manifestos of the two separate pursuing a narrower, nationalist agenda. It seems to me parties, but there is then a question of legitimacy, that in those circumstances it is not going to appear all when some features of the coalition agreement were that acceptable to the British people to have a party, not part of either party’s manifesto. whichever it might be—it would be the Liberal Democrats in the circumstances that I am outlining—that receives The counterargument to that has been that a coalition a minority vote but is almost permanently in government Government in these circumstances may claim legitimacy as a swing party and in a position to join a coalition. because they are governing in the national interest. There should have to be at least the opportunity for Okay, nobody voted for that coalition and nobody some kind of competition for the position of being a voted for that coalition agreement, but it still might be partner in a coalition and I hope that that will emerge claimed that they are legitimate. This is a controversial over time. Overall, I am arguing that we should, if claim, just as what is in the national interest is a possible, avoid what happened this time with the post- controversial topic. In saying that they are legitimate election deal. because they are governing in the national interest, the Government are judge and jury in their own case, as Lord Marlesford: I am sorry to interrupt the noble they determine the national interest. Lord. What he said sounded very interesting, but I 569 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 570

[LORD MARLESFORD] by a draft chapter for an intended Cabinet manual, simply did not understand it. He said that he felt that modelled on what exists in New Zealand. One could there should be some sort of competition. What did he argue also that drawing up a coalition agreement mean by that? followed practice adopted elsewhere. Where we differed from practice elsewhere was in the speed with which a Lord Plant of Highfield: If the AV referendum goes new Government were formed. The process was slow through, more people may well vote Green or for the by UK standards but rapid by international ones. nationalist parties and so on, and it may well be that In the time available, I shall touch upon three over a number of elections other parties will rise up aspects already mentioned in the debate: the draft the electoral ladder so that they can, as a minority Cabinet manual, the coalition agreement and the Salisbury party, be in competition with the Liberal Democrats. convention. The last two are inextricably linked and At the moment, the Liberal Democrats are the only lead to a consideration of how Parliament treats feasible coalition partner that we can envisage in ordinary constitutional measures embodied in the coalition circumstances. However, if AVcame about, other parties agreement. might grow sufficiently strong to be potential coalition The draft Cabinet manual now covers the situation partners. That is all I meant and I am sorry if I did not in which no one party achieves an overall majority. It articulate it very well. is designed to create the framework for the resolution The thrust of what I am saying is that I think that it of negotiations. At paragraph 49, it states: will be much better for the legitimacy of any future “Where a range of different administrations could potentially coalition to avoid purely post-election deals which be formed, the expectation is that discussions will take place would arise out of the third party claiming to be between political parties on who should form the next Government”. equidistant between the two major parties competing for government. That is bound to lead to questions This takes us beyond description of a political decision about the legitimacy of the coalition-making process to a constitutional precept. It says that discussions and the sort of document that we have at the moment, “will take place”, not that they may take place. This is which, according to the Business Secretary, supersedes not only questionable as a statement of practice but, if any of the manifestos. I think that that is highly maintained, could give rise to legal challenge. unfortunate and that we need to be much more explicit It is not intended that the manual should have any with the electorate about those with whom deals are legal effect, but a political party excluded from discussions, going to be made. even if there is no realistic chance of it being part of a coalition, could conceivably seek judicial review of the Baroness Verma: My Lords, perhaps I may remind process on the basis of what is stated in the manual. Back-Benchers that there is a limit of 10 minutes on This gives rise to wider questions about not only the speeches. legal status of the manual but also the extent to which it embodies statements of practice, and statements of 1.48 pm what civil servants understand to be the constitutional Lord Norton of Louth: My Lords, it is a pleasure to position—in effect, between statements grounded in follow—although it is a bit of a surprise to do it so precedent and those that are not. This takes us wider quickly—the noble Lord, Lord Plant of Highfield, a than coalition formation. Given that, I do not wish to graduate of the University of Hull. Unfortunately, stray on to these matters, but rather invite my noble another Hull graduate, my noble friend Lord Cormack, friend the Leader of the House to indicate if time may is unable to be with us to make his maiden speech be found to discuss the draft manual. I think there is today. He is presently recovering in hospital. I shall value in discussing before, and not simply after, it has not follow on from the noble Lord’s comments but become a Cabinet manual. I thought that he made an extremely stimulating I turn to the coalition agreement. As we have heard, contribution. this occupies an unusual position as it is a post-election There are two aspects to looking at the constitutional agreement—in effect, a post-election manifesto. It differs dimension of coalition government. There is the formation from election manifestos in two respects. In one respect, of the coalition and the policy agreed as a consequence it is stronger; there are key provisions to which both of parties forming a coalition. On the first, following parties are committed, and delivery is therefore central what the noble Baroness said in opening the debate, it to maintaining the coalition. In the other respect, it is is important to stress the unique situation in which we weaker in that it does not have the endorsement of the find ourselves. We have had hung Parliaments before, electorate. The agreement sanctions behaviour that is resulting in minority government. We have had coalitions constitutionally distinct, though not without precedent: before, but not as a consequence of an indecisive for example, allowing one party to abstain on a measure election. In the 20th century, coalition Governments embodied in the agreement and, as a consequence, existed for a total of 18 years, but for 15 of those the suspending the convention of collective responsibility Conservative Party could have governed as a majority for those Ministers in the abstaining party. Administration. That distinctive status brings me to the position of The invitation by David Cameron to the Liberal this House. There are two consequences. One is in Democrats to enter into negotiations led to a series of relation to numbers. A coalition of two parties necessitates events for which there was no precedent. In many certain changes in procedures and practice. It has been respects, the lessons to be learnt were learnt from claimed—we have heard it today—that the numbers practice elsewhere as much as from our own history. also create a majority for the coalition in the House, As has been touched upon, the process was informed running counter to the principle, though possibly not 571 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 572 yet a convention, that no one party should have a that the Constitution Committee has already done an majority in the House. That is not correct, either on admirable job in its examination of Bills of constitutional paper or in practice. Up to the Christmas Recess, there significance and in alerting the House to concerns it had been 31 Divisions in the House. The Government has about those measures. We need to build on that to lost nine of them, including one on the Parliamentary achieve an agreed framework for examination. We Voting System and Constituencies Bill. They would need to play to our strengths. In some respects, we are still not have triumphed in all those had all the recently getting there; in other respects we are not. We should announced Peers been introduced, so I set aside that claim. be prepared, as my noble friend Lord Strathclyde put What is of importance constitutionally is the it in his 1999 Politeia lecture, to insist on our right to implication for the Salisbury convention. As has been scrutinise, amend and improve legislation. noted, the convention rests on the Salisbury/Addison In terms of detailed scrutiny under our existing agreement of 1945, essentially updating the thesis procedures, I offer proceedings on the Public Bodies advanced by the third Marquess of Salisbury regarding Bill as an example of good practice and proceedings the mandate. The basis on which the convention was on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies advanced has long been spent but the convention has Bill as an example of bad practice. I hear what the been maintained. There is some imprecision about the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, says, but I believe that it convention, in itself no bad thing because it allows for is not too late for an outbreak of common sense on some flexibility and because a rigid application is not both sides to prevent the creation of conditions which in my view compatible with a Conservative view of will be to the long-term detriment of this House and what constitutes “the people”. therefore to the quality of legislative scrutiny. On the As my noble friend Lord Wakeham observed, the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill, convention has in practice been extended, as the I believe that the will of the House was expressed Cunningham committee reported, to Bills included in eloquently last night by my noble and learned friend the Government’s programme for the Session. We Lord Mackay of Clashfern, and I trust that both therefore do not vote against a government Bill on Front Benches will act on the basis of what he said. Second Reading. That practice in many respects protects This is not the time for finger pointing. It is a time for the status of this House as a revising Chamber. We do maturity on both sides, and the House should expect not normally challenge the ends of a measure approved that. by the other place but we focus on the means. We This House is a Chamber of experience and expertise. engage in detailed scrutiny; that is our strength and It complements the other place. At times, Members our justification. We are here to probe and improve must be prepared to put this House, and the health of legislation, not to attempt to deny its passage, other our constitution, ahead of any tribal loyalties. There is than in the most exceptional circumstances. Exceptional a higher good than party, and it is essential that this circumstances may arise—Lord Simon of Glaisdale House works, as a House, to fulfil the tasks detailed by sought to adumbrate what these may be in an interesting my noble friend. As he said in his lecture, that right to debate that he initiated in 1993—so that we need to scrutinise, amend and improve is also this House’s retain what is, in essence, a reserve power. purpose and its duty. The Salisbury convention is relevant for present circumstances, and here I bring my points together. 1.59 pm The constitutional Bills brought forward by government do not necessarily have their genesis in the manifesto Lord Morgan: My Lords, that great man Benjamin of the winning party. Indeed, as the noble Baroness Disraeli is renowned for two famous observations, said, there is no single winning party. The fact that both of which are being confirmed by the present measures derive from a post-election agreement, one Government. The first is that this country is divided constructed in some haste and producing some measures into two nations, the rich and the poor—we have seen introduced in haste, places a particular burden on this that confirmed—and the second is that England does House to subject Bills to rigorous scrutiny. My view is not love coalitions, which is a view that has been that the circumstances therefore dictate two levels of confirmed in recent opinion polls, not to mention by scrutiny. One is our usual rigorous scrutiny of measures the good people of Oldham and Saddleworth. that are not of constitutional significance, and for We have had three peacetime coalitions of Liberals measures that are, we must employ an enhanced level and Conservatives in this country in recent times, and of scrutiny. they have all been catastrophic. The coalition of 1895 I listened with considerable interest to the speeches dragged us into the Boer War and presided over the of the noble Lords, Lord Hart and Lord Wills. Like death of 27,000 Boer women and children in concentration the noble Lord, Lord Hart, I am a member of the camps. The coalition of 1918 took us into the Black Constitution Committee. I was the first chairman of and Tans period in Ireland and into the depression of the committee, and we produced a report on the the interwar years. Under the 1931-32 coalition, the process of constitutional change. We need, as a House, social consequences of that depression got much worse. to revisit the means by which we examine constitutional However one evaluates their effect on the country, the Bills. It may not require a commission of the sort effect on the Liberal Party was particularly calamitous. proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Wills—I believe I The 1918-22 coalition saw the party divide into two am one of those scheduled to be on it—but we need, in and it ended the front-rank careers of both Asquith effect, to draw together and confirm, as a House, the and Lloyd George; today, coalition still produces certain principles developed by the Constitution Committee, anomalies. It is rather striking to compare the fate of as detailed by the noble Lord, Lord Hart. I believe Lord Addison—Dr Addison was sacked in 1921—and 573 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 574

[LORD MORGAN] Incidentally, I am delighted that the convention is Dr Cable, who was demoted in the recent past. The called the Salisbury/Addison convention. I wrote a life two are similar in many ways, except that I am not of Lord Addison, so I am glad that he has had his aware that Addison had any skill at ballroom dancing. mead of fame at last. However, it is worth pointing The 1931-32 coalition provides an even clearer analogy, out, given that the Government’s programme of reforms because it produced the famous and notorious “agreement is said to be the greatest since 1832, that the Great to differ”. The agreement to differ over free trade saw Reform Act 1832 followed two general elections, in the Liberals resign en masse, with the effect that they which it was clear what people were voting for, even were no longer a party credibly of opposition let alone with the limited franchise that existed then. of government. Secondly, as we have said, the Government have no Such coalitions have led to constitutional anomalies, mandate. They rest their authority not on a programme and both the 1918 coalition and the current coalition presented to the electors, but on something called a have affected your Lordships’ House in fundamental coalition agreement. The Liberal Democrats manifesto ways. The 1918 coalition attempted to flood the House spoke of moderate financial cuts on Keynesian lines, of Lords through the sale of honours—the work of not increasing VAT and making PR an essential my countryman, David Lloyd George—and the current precondition of Government. The Liberal Democrats coalition has seen not the sale of honours but the also declared against an increase in tuition fees, on creation of a large number of new Peers to enhance which, as we know, candidates made a pledge. The the already very strong majority that the Government coalition agreement has imposed immediate swingeing have. As I have mentioned, in 1931 we saw the agreement cuts in public expenditure and the welfare state, raised to differ, with the Liberal Ministers resigning; now we VAT, offered an electoral proposal on AV—a policy of have the agreement to differ over the views that will be neither the Conservatives nor the Liberal Democrats—and taken in the referendum. raised tuition fees while cutting university spending by The current coalition is significantly different, though, 80 per cent. That does not add to the credibility or the as my noble friend Lady Symons observed in her honour of the political process in this country or to admirable speech, because it is scarred by its origins in the honour of the Mother of Parliaments. a deeper way than the earlier coalitions. The coalition of 1918 was scarred by the coupon—the private pact Thirdly, I will refer to two other points that I do not between the Conservatives and the Liberals to share think have been mentioned. The Ministers that Parliament out the seats in an arbitrary and vindictive way. The confronts are not Ministers chosen by the Prime Minister 1931 coalition was scarred by rumours of its originating and are not part of a familiar team who campaign in in a bankers’ ramp—the private negotiations between the country but the product of private manoeuvres politicians and bankers and perhaps people at the between two sets of party managers. Ministers are courts. The current coalition, again, is the product of chosen not necessarily for their experience or their a private negotiation. It is not the result of what David suitability for office but because of the demands of the Lloyd George called the greater size of the people but managers of the coalition. That is the kind of thing the result of a secret conclave. Unlike in 1918 and that has led to the disapprobation of Parliament in 1931, the outcome was a Government for which no countries such as Italy. one has voted. The current coalition has arisen not openly through the popular will but privately through Finally, it seems to me that civil servants now have a secret manoeuvres. different kind of role. They serve not only the Cabinet but a coalition committee or committees that are As has been said by previous speakers, including designed not to govern the country but to maintain the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, the earlier coalitions proper relationships between two parties with significantly were all formed before an election, so people knew different outlooks. One might also say that, within the what they were getting. There was a coalition manifesto two parties, there are different outlooks, given that the in 1918 and also in 1931. In 1918, 5 million people Liberal Democrats have, on the one hand, right-wing voted for Lloyd George’s coalition; in 1931, 13 million Liberal Democrats such as David Laws and Danny people voted for Ramsay MacDonald’s coalition; no Alexander who are of the type that contributed to The one, however, voted for the coalition that we have Orange Book and, on the other, more traditional social today. Indeed, many people voted Liberal Democrat democrats whose affinity is with the Labour Party. on the basis of the avowals of that party that voting Liberal Democrat was the way to keep the Tories out The coalition has created great difficulties for of office, so we have this anomalous backdrop to the Parliament. It has been harmful to democracy, it has Government as a result no popular will behind its formation, and it has no The implications for Parliament are quite numerous obvious doctrine of collective responsibility to keep it and have been broadly spelled out already. The together. The strange pattern that is being offered to Government have no clear manifesto. That is not the the electorate is very similar to that of 1918-22, when same as the divisions that might exist within parties. there was no amalgamation of the parties at the grass The Gaitskellites and the Bevanites adhered to the roots and the Liberals and Conservatives who supported same manifesto in 1951 and 1955; on this occasion, the coalition were, in a sense, in partnership and in there was no manifesto. That means that fundamental rivalry at the same time, with very different rival questions can be asked, as my noble friend Lord Plant interpretations of what might happen at the next observed, about the legitimacy of the Government. It general election. The coalition is a monument not to certainly means that the Salisbury convention no longer parliamentary sovereignty or popular sovereignty but has any meaning. to the connections of an ingrained political class. I 575 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 576 once wrote of Gladstone as “the people’s William”; I had waited long enough to hear the detail of the would now say to the people’s Benjamin, “Come back, negotiation, they could have chosen the system. They all is forgiven”. would presumably have made a choice between AV-plus— the recommendation of the Jenkins commission—and STV, which most of them preferred, but they may well 2.08 pm have thought they had less chance of getting that Lord Owen: My Lords, the circumstances in which through. It was a perfectly rational offer. this Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition came The other negotiation was over AV and first past into existence need to be recalled. It was against a very the post. The mistake was to offer a referendum on serious financial crisis, a large structural fiscal deficit this basis, because that is taking a party-political fix and a feeling in the country that, as a result of the into a referendum. That is not legitimate. If you wish negotiations, we had to have a Government which to have this issue resolved by referendum—which I would, first, carry conviction in international markets— personally think is good and right, as I do not think it their first challenge, which they met very successfully—and, should be forced by a party fix—then the people must secondly, start to deal with the structural fiscal deficit. be given a proper choice, and a proper choice should They have started on that and I hope the jury is out, include the third option of proportional representation. certainly among economists, as to whether they have It is a democratic disgrace that we in this House, it moved too swiftly and too harshly or whether they seems, are incapable of bringing this about. We already have judged the situation correctly and that it will be have had an amendment discussed. At the moment, proven in the next year or two. the indications are there is no chance of getting this So I think we can be generous to the coalition for its through this House, and I cannot understand why. primary task, which was responding to the financial The best solution would be if the Prime Minister challenge facing the country. Where it seems to me and the Deputy Prime Minister came to their senses that the coalition went wrong was in its private and offered a proper referendum choice—a three-part negotiations, and it is about the crux issues which we choice. That is the democratic solution. If they do not are facing. The House is now considering two Bills in do this, this House will then face another question: this Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies should we do what was done in 1978 and put in a Bill. One deals with changing the voting system and threshold of legitimacy? the other deals with changing the constituencies. Both are highly sensitive in politics, and we should recognise I looked up that famous debate when the House of that because it is at the root of who wins the next Commons decided that there had to be a 40 per cent general election. The other constitutional Bill, the threshold for Scottish devolution. I am glad to say that Fixed-term Parliaments Bill, is crucial to it. It has not I did not vote, so there is no embarrassment; however, yet been debated in this House, but we need to understand there is no doubt that it was premature. I supported that five years allows for the changes to the constituencies, Scottish devolution—I am a long-standing supporter—but and that is the essence of why five years has been in 1979 it did not have the wholehearted consent of chosen. Four years would have been running it very the British people, and certainly not in Scotland. In tight. retrospect that extra 21 years after which there was the It is helpful and pleasing that the Leader of the wholehearted consent of the Scottish people on the House and the Leader of the Opposition in this House referendum was time well spent. We need to be very are here today. We all know that we are now into careful. It seems quite wrong to have a referendum negotiations. I welcome those negotiations, and I must limited to AV and first past the post and run the very say that I am not shocked. I did not participate—I am distinct possibility of an extremely low poll because it too old to participate in all-night sittings—but I am a has been forced through. veteran of all-night sittings in the other place, and we I then come to the second compromise area. Why all know perfectly well that it is when you go through are we forcing it through? There is going to be a the Lobbies at three or four o’clock in the morning five-year fixed-term and the Liberal Democrats in my that you start to question why you are there. We also view have made a historic misjudgment. They had the know that it has often been the case that—as a result opportunity to demonstrate the coalition’s worth to of using the power of delay, the strongest power in a the people of this country. If they had only been democracy—negotiations are forced and common sense careful and waited, say, three years, during which time comes about. So I wake up each morning to wonder they might have seen an economic recovery for which whether your Lordships are all sitting, and I was not they would deservedly get benefit and three years of a sure that this debate would even take place. I am successful coalition, and I think they would have won therefore not at all shocked by it, and I hope that wiser the referendum, even if just confined to AV. However, heads will prevail. by insisting that it coincides with the May elections it May I offer a few possible solutions? The previous is very likely to coincide with a period of massive Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, is not often given unpopularity. The compromise will not change this, enough credit for some of the things he has done. In but the compromise would be to fix the date of the the negotiations, he offered the Liberal Democrats a referendum by regulation in the legislation. Again, solution to their real problem, which is their aim to this is practical common sense. Who wants to fix a change the voting system. He offered them a three-option date for a referendum—which they want to win— referendum: first past the post, the alternative vote—which effectively a year in advance, without any knowledge his party at that time was keen on—and proportional of what public opinion was likely to be? That was the representation. Effectively, as I understand it, if they fundamental mistake. I suspect the Conservative Party 577 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 578

[LORD OWEN] The magnanimity of the coalition parties appears to and the present Prime Minister gave the Deputy Prime have been exhausted in five days of negotiation last Minister what he wanted and let him choose—it is his May. issue and the Prime Minister does not agree with it Of course, our constitutional tradition leads to an anyhow. This is the nub of the issue, although you expectation that the Opposition in Parliament will may, in negotiations, deal with lots of other issues, and challenge, interrogate and hold the Government to there comes the question for the future. account. I am not arguing that in a hung Parliament There is no doubt that pre-legislative committees there should be parliamentary ecumenism. However, have proved themselves. They ought to be mandatory given the vast powers that our system of the Executive on constitutional questions and I think the sooner we in Parliament provides, there is also always a constitutional make that change the better. If we choose to use expectation that Governments will act with some self- referendums—and to be honest, we choose to use restraint. Where there has been no electoral endorsement them usually when it is a big issue and the parties are of a Government, it would be all the more proper for divided among themselves—it would be a very good the coalition to act with restraint. It has a duty to thing to give the Electoral Commission a locus on the govern, but it has no entitlement to implement a legitimacy of the question, not just on the wording. It radical programme. As always, but more so, a coalition is illegitimate to have a referendum that is not a fair Government without an electoral mandate have a choice of options for the British people. duty to consult and to proceed as far as possible by Then we come to the whole question of how we agreement. handle the other various issues. We had three successive So far from that, however, this coalition has the bit contributions from constitutionalists and historians, if between its teeth and is driving a radical legislative I can put that way. The noble Lord, Lord Plant, very programme through Parliament in a raging hurry. The accurately said that the manifesto has become a quasi- coalition did not win, but it is taking all. It is immoderate. contract. The noble Lord, Lord Norton, expressed his It is insisting on enacting policies that were not only belief in the value of pre-legislative committees and not endorsed at the election but were not even exhibited the value of negotiations, which, all together, are to electors at the general election. Some policies, such crucial. We also heard from the noble Lord, Lord as reform of the National Health Service, about which Morgan, about the history of the way coalitions work. the noble Lord, Lord Owen, spoke, are doctrinaire We have a lot to learn about coalitions and need to and reckless. I agree with him that that policy is not pace ourselves. A coalition Government coming about legitimate. It is certainly not legitimate for the coalition in the circumstances of the present time need a little to pursue this legislative programme given the background more modesty. of the conditions in which it came into office. The I end by asking if anyone thinks that the Health reform was not even in the coalition agreement, the and Social Care Bill—two volumes, double the size of so-called Coalition Agreement for Stability and Reform. the Bill that brought in the National Health Service—is Where do we see the coalition’s concern for stability? not, in the words of the head of the NHS Confederation, a revolution; or, in the words of the Conservative MP It is interesting to contrast the approach of the for Totnes, herself a GP, that the Government have coalition with the approach of the Obama Administration. not tossed a hand grenade into PCT-land. This, in my The policies of President Obama were presented at view, is a Bill that has no mandate and no possible length to voters across the United States during the area of support from the parties that are now forming presidential campaign and led to massive electoral a coalition. They should think about that as well. endorsement. However, President Obama in office has proceeded consultatively; he has sought to build consensus; he has always been willing to compromise; and he has 2.19 pm always been reasonable. In his remarkable speech in Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, the coalition Tucson, he reproached the intransigents in modern was formed of two parties, neither of which won the politics. That is a speech that not only the Leader of confidence of the people at the general election. The the House but the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime manifesto of neither party was endorsed. The coalition Minister would do well to read and reflect on. agreement is an important document, but it does not Here, by contrast, the coalition received no electoral have the status of a manifesto and is not holy writ in endorsement, but has it proceeded to build consensus that sense. In these political conditions, we would or been willing to compromise? Where have been the expect humility, even diffidence, on the part of the Green Papers? What preliminary debate has it inaugurated Government. Of course the country needs decisive before moving to implement policy? Where has been and effective government—it always does—but it is the pre-legislative consultation about which my noble reasonable to expect, as the people of this country do, friend Lord Hart of Chilton and a number of other that the approach of a coalition Government should noble Lords have spoken? For example, we are seeing be consultative and consensual. the coalition exploit the constitution in their extreme I acknowledge that the country welcomed the coalition. and reckless approach to reducing the fiscal deficit. There has been a great dislike of adversarial politics in The noble Lord, Lord Owen, was overgenerous to the the country and many people were delighted to see coalition on that score. To take public sector demand what they took to be an outbreak of courtesy and a out of the economy on a substantial scale when one in new spirit of co-operation between political parties. five young people is unemployed and to remove the The problem has been that that courtesy and co-operation Future Jobs Fund, the policy intended to mitigate that have not been extended to the parties not in government. disaster, is hardly likely to lead to appreciation of our 579 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 580 parliamentary system or loyalty to the constitution House will not willingly be crushed. The House of among this generation of young people. No one disputes Commons, as the noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, suggested, that the deficit needs to be reduced, but we are not emasculated itself some years ago in agreeing to timetable seeing pragmatic policy on the economy within an all legislation. But when this House, too, can be intellectual consensus; we are seeing an ideological browbeaten by the Executive, nothing stands in the crusade against the state, dressed up in a spurious way of the narcissism and shallowness of Ministers. rationale of crisis and masquerading as fiscal responsibility. They feel no need to respond to reasoned argument and to the knowledge and the experience of Members The coalition is set to exploit its exceptional dominance of your Lordships’ House. They will not negotiate; of both Houses of Parliament to marginalise elective they will not agree that their legislation should be local government. Britain’s excessively centralised amended. I hope that the Leader of the House will government is to be made more centralist still. In the heed the wise words of the noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, drive to see more free schools and academies created, about negotiation. elective local education authorities are to be swept aside, exacerbating a baleful tendency over recent Referendums are a threat to parliamentary government. decades to reduce the role of local government. The Why are we having a referendum on the alternative Localism Bill has very worrying implications for local vote? I personally believe that it is right that major democracy, that important part of our constitution. constitutional issues should be put to the people in a In higher education, we have seen the coalition take it referendum because it is their constitution, but we are upon itself to triple student fees, which of course has having this referendum to prop up the coalition. The led to a stirring of national resentment, to extra- Liberal Democrats wanted electoral reform; the parliamentary resistance and to much damage to trust Conservatives did not. The coalition’s solution is to in politics and our constitutional processes. have a referendum. There will be no accountability of Ministers to Parliament in this situation. The legislative We are seeing an abuse of the constitution. The decision will be made directly by the people. So, as the doctrines of winner takes all and the omnicompetence price of coalition, populism replaces parliamentary of Parliament have always seemed to me to be dubious, sovereignty. but not only is what we are seeing improper constitutionally, but it is also foolish. Bold propositions With the falling away of support for the two main on the part of the Government are fine, but crude parties, we are led to expect that we shall see more imposition of policy is wrong and alienates the consent coalitions. Therefore, there will be more pressures on which our system of parliamentary government is from minority parties to be bought and appeased. predicated. The coalition would be wiser to allow full Shall we in the future, for example, see referendums to public debate. In the process of that, it would be able satisfy UKIP or the Greens as potential coalition to discern what is special pleading, what is merely parties? Coalition in modern conditions risks being defence of vested interests, what is timid orthodoxy the death knell of parliamentary government in any and, on the other hand, where the genuine dangers lie. worthwhile sense. It would allow assent to grow where its propositions proved genuinely persuasive. But that is not the character 2.30 pm of this coalition. Lord Clinton-Davis: I pay tribute to my noble friend The implications of coalition parliamentary Lady Symons for making a masterful contribution to government in our time may be disastrous. We are this significant debate. The noble Lord, Lord Morgan, seeing a torrent of constitutional legislation, unheralded, treated the House to a relevant review of the past, unauthorised by the people at the election and timetabled demonstrating how that departed from the present so that scrutiny in the House of Commons is cursory and illustrating how the two parties in the present and scrutiny in the House of Lords is under severe coalition Government behaved in the recent general threat. The constitution is not a toy to be played with election. In so doing he has demonstrated how relevant by the Liberal Democrats while the Conservatives that proposition was. gratify themselves in other policy areas. So far, this coalition Government have made a The problem is being seen particularly vividly, as deliberate attempt to truncate debate, a tactic which— many noble Lords have noted, in your Lordships’ House at the moment. The struggle over the Parliamentary Noble Lords: Oh! Voting System and Constituencies Bill is a struggle over the future of your Lordships’ House as a revising Chamber. Our present difficulty derives not only from Lord Clinton-Davis: Why do you laugh? It is absolutely the lack of trust between the coalition parties, as my true. I submit that their tactic has brought this House noble friend Lord Wills suggested, but also from the into disrepute, and I hope it will fail. The situation is arrival of the coalition with an effective majority of not helped by the belligerent attitude of some Conservative the coalition parties over the Labour opposition party and some Liberal Democrat Peers. We were shown in this House. What has differentiated the House of today by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, whom I Lords from the House of Commons in the past, until normally hold in high repute, how intolerant he could the arrival of the coalition, is that, since no one party be. I do not think that he has served the House well. had a majority over the others in this House, the The Opposition in this House have a very clear Government have always had to win the argument. duty and I hope that they will not be deflected from it. But now the Government fancy that they can bulldoze Their duty is to scrutinise carefully all legislative proposals. this House as they can bulldoze the other place. This No such proposals have ever been incapable of 581 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 582

[LORD CLINTON-DAVIS] Lords, which are much more considerable and tangible— improvement, and that requires constructive dialogue. occasionally you can get hold of them—than those of It takes two to do it but there are too many in this the House of Commons, where I was 27 years. I was coalition Government who seek to prevent any sad to be defeated at the 1997 election and subsequently constructive dialogue taking place. changed parties, as small numbers of people in our I had some experience as a Minister and a European system have done, with justification. I did not feel that Commissioner, but never did I consider that it was my I had changed my basic ideas about the political job to ride roughshod over my opposite number or priorities of our programme formations, in the old over those who disliked the Commission. Indeed, I days and perhaps in the future, because I had a set of sought, not always successfully, to co-operate with beliefs. them and to improve the consensus, an ambition The cruelties and barbarities of the House of which we often shared. That is no longer so. Commons affected all of us Members over a long Ill-tempered lectures from the Deputy Prime Minister period. Although the times were interesting and amusing, serve no useful purpose; indeed, he should be trying to and provided a great political game and an excitement bring people together rather than dividing them. That that is unforgettable, it was a tremendous relief and is what he should have attempted to do instead of honour to come to this place and find the rational sowing dissension. The same is true of tuition fees, parliamentary Chamber par excellence—the kind of of the so-called reform of the National Health Service thing that, surprisingly, one still finds in the lower and of the Bills that affect the stability of this House. House equivalents in other countries, where they have There are other examples, but as far as concerns those regular coalition politics and regard it as a good rather three things, we should be especially careful. My noble than a bad thing. That is why I was very excited when friend Lady Symons cited in her remarkable speech the new coalition started. I thought that it was a great several examples that should be followed. This opportunity for this country to have, as Nick Clegg Conservative-led coalition closes its ears because it said, new politics. I am afraid that, having said that, he chooses to do so. It prefers to throw ideas into the air slipped rather rapidly back into the old politics when and hope that they will survive. There is no attempt, he and others immediately criticised the Labour even when major constitutional proposals are broached, Government for having left an economic and financial to reach any agreement with the opposition Front mess. Bench. Leaving some of the detail at the margin outside Of course there is time to change course, and to that argument, my impression was that the Gordon advance a reasonable exchange of ideas rather than Brown Government had been praised by the famous continuing on the disastrous course of imposing Bills international institutions governing these matters for that reflect only one point of view, especially when having dealt with the financial and economic crisis—the there has been no pre-legislative scrutiny. We should world crisis, not the British crisis—very successfully. I remember that millions of our people, young and old do not think that one loses any political power by alike, will be affected. My noble friend Lord Howarth saying that if you are a member and representative of of Newport referred to the plight of young people. An another party. That is what I think the public prefer in increasing number of them will not put up with what this country. They still do not like the old yah-boo they are subjected to at present. They must be heard. I politics and the artificial adversarial struggle. Therefore, fear that their anger will spill over, leading to further I believe that the public, too, in this country were very protests and agitation, and threatening the security, excited about the formation of the new coalition. stability and cohesion of our nation. Of course change has to take place—it is not too late—but this approach One can understand that inevitably mistakes will demands an exchange of views and a willingness to arise, and I make no criticism at all of colleagues in my hear as well as to speak. own party and those in the Conservative Party who were involved in these very difficult processes, which were all done at great speed, as they apparently had to 2.37 pm be under our system. However, I am not sure that I Lord Dykes: My Lords, I, too, thank the noble agree with that. I rather like the idea of careful coalition Baroness, Lady Symons, for her truly outstanding formations—giving information not only before an speech at the beginning of this debate, and for initiating election but also afterwards if complicated and difficult and launching a debate on this crucial subject at this negotiations are needed on certain problematical high- stage. It is helping the House to think ahead and, I profile and leading areas of policy formation. Therefore, hope, to come to rational conclusions. She and I have it was a great opportunity for this country to get away been colleagues in the European-Atlantic Group for from the old yah-boo politics—the stuff that made some time, and it has been a pleasure to see how other visitors to the House of Commons go tense when they countries have conducted their own constitutional heard the shouting. By the way, they still do that at relationships, and to take the good examples from Prime Minister’s Question Time. It is a great spectacle some while avoiding the bad examples from others. but it is also very depressing for all observers, including politicians. This is a difficult time, as the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davies, said. It is a time when this House When mistakes were made, they were natural mistakes should come together. However, I appreciate that that made by new colleagues forming the coalition sounds pompous from someone who has been here Government. They did so with great excitement, and I only since 2004. One needs to be here a long time to can understand that too. I can understand Cameron understand the amazing subtleties of the House of being literally quite desperate to be in power after 583 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 584 spending so many years rescuing a party which a few You have to think again. That happened with Mrs years ago was regarded as totally written off. The Thatcher on the poll tax as well, when my friends in change came remarkably quickly under his skilful Paris phoned me up in amazement and said, “You leadership. Equally, I can understand Nick Clegg being must be making this up. The British papers are talking absolutely desperate—I use that word in praise, not in about the poll tax—the capitation—which is one of criticism—to become Deputy Prime Minister and to the 10 things that caused the French Revolution”. bring his party into government for the first time after Look what happened in those days too. so many years that, due to senescence and the passing We need to return now to the new politics that we of the years, many Liberals and Liberal Democrats promised—David Cameron used a similar phrase; the cannot remember the last time. It was therefore a great involvement of civic society in these processes is also opportunity and there was a lot to be done. of crucial importance—and produce absolutely first-class The difficulty arose in putting the coalition agreement legislation from now on. The main opportunity, into such a complicated and extensive framework, unfortunately, will take some time to come, because it with far too much detail and too many offerings of will be from the next Queen’s Speech onwards, which I what was going to be presented by way of legislation, assume will be in October or November 2012. That is first in the Commons and then here, with one or two the chance for the coalition Government—who, as we Bills starting here and then going to the Commons. discussed, will continue the distance, because they This being a rational, sensible and pragmatic Chamber, have a guaranteed majority effective in both Houses. where tolerance of other people’s views is much higher The Government must then produce a list of measures than in the House of Commons, means that we have to restore the confidence of the public. There is a lot to pay attention to the details of these matters. The of work to be done in the mean time, including, I ironical mistake that has come out of this accidentally—it hope, winning the AV referendum. was no one’s fault; it has just happened because it was The old politics must go. There are too many Bills all new territory and no one knew how it was going to whenever a new Government come into power, but work out—is that the provocative nature of some of there is not enough thought about them, with the the contents of some Bills has now inevitably meant Whips saying that passage is automatic. There is the that, once again, the new politics have been replaced testosterone that comes out of the mostly male leaders by the old. The noble Lord, Lord Owen, mentioned saying, “We will make no concessions or changes at all the Health and Social Care Bill, which is now being to this wonderful Bill. It is written down so you cannot promulgated, and it is certainly a Bill that we will have change it at all”. There needs to be much more pre- to look at very carefully. legislative scrutiny with careful examination. The Voltaire, when talking about political action and committees of this House are excellent in that field political legislation in any country, always made a and need to be used more and more. Life is too distinction between superstition, as he called it, and complicated, so bring out the simplicity in Bills. Do philosophy—or perhaps we would say superstition not make them long just because it makes them look and wisdom. When Bills are based on superstition and more impressive. I have great concerns that if that ideology, you may be heading for trouble if you have a attitude does not change and if we do not make sure guaranteed majority and can ride roughshod over that we genuinely embrace the new politics, there will everyone else because of the numbers game involved be continuous trouble—indeed, even disorder—in our in a coalition. Incidentally, on our side we need to society. remember that there is no weakness in that. Labour had 29 per cent of the vote, whereas we had 23 per cent. There is no harm in remembering that and 2.47 pm bearing in mind that the party which was recently in Lord Desai: My Lords, at the outset I thank my government and is now in opposition also has some noble friend Lady Symons of Vernham Dean for ideas about what this country needs to do to get out of introducing this very timely debate. Our difficulties are its difficulties. Youth unemployment is probably one partly systemic and partly contingent. We are in danger of the most serious ones, and on that, I am sure, we of raising the contingent difficulties to be systemic, need consensus. while the systemic ones we may just ignore. Let me Therefore, superstition in Bills needs to be replaced explain. We have a coalition—yes, there were coalitions by wisdom in other Bills, but that will come from in the past, but this one seems to be rather a novel realising the mistakes that have been made unwittingly experience—and because our constitution, at least at by the people who form the coalition Government. Westminster level, is majoritarian, there is an assumption Therefore, I believe that it is right to carry on supporting by an incoming Government who command a majority, this coalition and I do so very strongly. I think that I whether that Government are of one party or two, have voted with it on all occasions with the possible that they get their legislation through, as the noble exception of one vote on student fees. Incidentally, Lord, Lord Wakeham, said. That is an assumption on that, too, is a matter that needs very sober reflection. which the system is based. If a Government—even a single-party Government, In the devolved constitutions, we have overcome let alone a coalition one—have civic disorder and the majoritarian bias and deliberately encouraged what rioting several months after their formation, they have are called consociational arrangements, whereby parties to pause for thought about the background to that co-operate and work out a compromise. However, in civil disorder and the riots and so on. You cannot just Westminster we have that majoritarian bias in the brush it aside and say, “There are troublemakers in constitution. It is not true, as many of my noble society. We will go on with what we are planning”. friends have said, that this is the first experience of a 585 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 586

[LORD DESAI] One of the things we will have to do is re-examine built-in majority in your Lordships’ House. I arrived our Companion. I had the privilege of twice being on here in 1991. At that time, there was a built-in Conservative your Lordships’ House’s committee on the speakership, majority no matter who was in power, which is how we and throughout those negotiations, when we installed got the Salisbury/Addison convention. After 1999, an elected Speaker the greatest care was taken not to when an arrangement was made whereby no single give any power to the Lord Speaker and not to deviate party would have a majority, the Salisbury convention at all from the convention that your Lordships’ House should have been given its day off. Since then, it has is a self-governing entity. That is what we are about to not been relevant. lose, because if this sort of stalemate continues—and A related difficulty with the Salisbury convention this Bill is just a beginning as there are three more also arises from the majoritarian nature of the constitution: constitutional Bills to come, and a health Bill—we will that, as my noble friend Lord Plant said, manifestos face the problem of the Government having a radical, have acquired the sacred status of an implicit contract. revolutionary Maoist tendency and being in a great If we have a coalition Government who do not have a hurry, and I do not blame them. They consist of a manifesto, we begin to question whether the Salisbury party that has been out of power for 13 years and convention can be applied even after 1999. One of the another that has been out of power for 50 or 60 years, contingent difficulties of this coalition is that the so they are in a great hurry. They may not last, so they coalition agreement is much more rigid than a party’s want to get a lot done. manifesto. I did not go to many Labour Party conferences, If those Bills come through, the strain on the but every Labour Party conference was a discussion Companion will be great. We should have a commission about how the Government in power had betrayed the on the constitution, to which my noble friend Lord manifesto. Now the coalition has decided that this is Wills referred, or a meeting of the men and women in the coalition agreement and that it will not be deviated grey suits, or whatever they are called, to discuss how from by an inch. The present difficulty that we face in in the next two or three years we will manage your your Lordships’ House about this Parliament et cetera Lordships’ House and get good work done. Bill is that the Government have no room for compromise. I know why we are behaving how we are. I also In their coalition agreement, they left no room for know that noble Lords opposite do not like the way in manoeuvre. Having left no room for manoeuvre, no which we are behaving because they think that it is matter how long the minority may talk its head off, the unreasonable, but we are in new times. A number of Government will not concede. That is our dilemma. new things are happening. We need to understand our I agree the noble Lord, Lord Owen, and I disagree mutual problems. Away from the Floor of the House, with the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart. The noble Lord, there should be talk about how we can do better Lord Goodhart, said that there is a minority rampant business on the Floor of your Lordships’ House. If we in power. If only. The minority has no weapon in our do not do that, we will be in a stalemate day after day. system other than time and delay. In the Indian Even the newspapers will get tired of taking photographs Parliament, there is also a coalition, and the Opposition of your Lordships half asleep at 3 am. have been so frustrated by not getting their way that This may be a coalition Government, but who they have stopped the Parliament working at all. Every knows whether there will be more? Imagine how much day, it is disrupted. In the entire winter Session of worse the situation would have been if there had been Parliament, not a day’s business was done. It was the a grand coalition, German style, of Labour and only way in which the Opposition could prove their Conservative Members. What would the situation of power. If the Parliament met, the government majority the Liberal Democrats have been? What would they would defeat any proposition by the Opposition. We have done? They would have had to go on hunger are not in that bad a situation, but one has to recognise strike on the Floor of the House to get their voice that here is a coalition agreement, not a manifesto that heard. We have to be prepared for those things. To use a party has some control over, that is like a prenuptial a cliché, we must think outside the box. We still have a agreement, and people are afraid of deviating from it. lot of good will in your Lordships’ House on which we In all the time I have been in your Lordships’ should capitalise to make things better than they are. House, and before that, we have relied on an implicit code of conduct and rules that are written down but 2.57 pm very seldom invoked. In this House, we have had, at least since 1997, and even more since 2010, a big influx Lord Butler of Brockwell: My Lords, I add my of people who have not really absorbed the behaviour thanks to the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, for giving and rules of your Lordships’ House because you do us the opportunity to discuss this fascinating subject. not learn what they are until you have been here There was a time when she and I were sparring partners observing them for five or six years. No one actually in other capacities. I was Cabinet Secretary and she tells you, and reading the Companion is like reading was general secretary of the First Division Association, anything else; it does not tell you how to do things. We and I had responsibility for recording the conventions currently have the contingent difficulty of a Government and rules, political and constitutional. My responsibility who, on principle, have to be inflexible, an Opposition was for recording them, not for framing them. who are very frustrated that they are not being allowed It is not the job of the Cabinet Secretary to make to follow the ordinary procedures of negotiation, and rules, except perhaps for the Civil Service. Rules are a third of or half the membership of this place who made either by Parliament through statute—for example, have not, in terms of age in the House of Lords, even the statutes governing the length of a Parliament or reached their teens. We therefore have this problem. the number of paid Ministers—or by the Government 587 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 588 themselves, as in the Ministerial Code. Rules that the Lord, Lord Wakeham, said, that is not so different Government make for themselves, the Government or from what your Lordships’ House would do to any a successor can change. Bill presented by the Executive. It is always right for this House to give weight to the perceived wishes of As others have noted, the present Cabinet Secretary the elected House. has brought together the rules and conventions by which the Executive operates in the draft Cabinet It seems to me that your Lordships should carry manual. This seems to be a really useful exercise, out a similar exercise of judgment in relation to the which, in my view, has been well done. I have some contents of the coalition agreement. In that context, suggestions to make about its content to which I will like many other Members of your Lordships’ House, I return. But we should be clear; it is not the creation of greatly regret the war of attrition that has been going the coalition which has made it necessary to produce on in the House of Lords this week. I strongly support the manual. The two events are coincidental, although the role of the Lords as a revising Chamber, in causing usefully so. The Cabinet manual was in preparation the Government to think again, particularly about anyway, based on a similar document produced in constitutional Bills and particularly about provisions New Zealand. that may have been forced through the House of Commons without proper debate. However, that should I want to say something on three aspects of the not extend to preventing the Government from passing political and constitutional implications of the coalition; their legislation. that is, the implications for the operations of government, the implications for the Civil Service and the implications The noble Lord, Lord Howarth, referred—I think I for the Salisbury/Addison convention in the House of quote him correctly—to a “torrent” of constitutional Lords. As regards the operations of government, there legislation. There was a pretty good torrent of is a lot of evidence, not least from the Prime Minister’s constitutional legislation in the first year of the new speech on public services earlier this week, that Labour Government in 1997. Indeed, it would be a announcements of government policies are now preceded useful antidote to some of the things that have been by serious discussions and debate in the Cabinet. As a said today if your Lordships were to read some of the believer, like my noble friend Lord Hennessey, in the records of the first year of that Government. idea that well informed debate produces better policy I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, decisions, I welcome that. A coalition was not essential that this is a time for reasonable behaviour rather than for restoring Cabinet government but if, as it seems, it pointing fingers. I confine myself to saying that, like has had that result, long may it continue. the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, I do not believe that As regards the Civil Service, it has been suggested—the the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, is correct in attributing noble Lord, Lord Morgan, was saying this—that there the present situation to the fact of the coalition. are difficulties for an apolitical Civil Service in serving Although the points made by the noble Lord, Lord a Government composed of two political parties. I do Desai, about the nature of the politics of the coalition not agree with that. The role of the Civil Service is to have obvious weight, a similar situation could have serve the government of the day. As the noble Lord, arisen if the Conservatives had introduced the Lord Maclennan, said, all Governments are coalitions Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Bill of people with different shades of opinion—often as a single-party Government. I do not think that this quite widely differing shades of opinion, even when is attributable wholly to the fact of the coalition. they are drawn from the same party. The Civil Service I return to the Cabinet manual. My noble friend is used to reconciling loyalty to their departmental Lord Hennessy suggested that two items that might be Minister with loyalty to the Government as a whole. added to the manual are an up-to-date formulation of An apolitical Civil Service can be seen as the cement the Salisbury/Addison convention and an up-to-date which helps to hold the Queen’s Government together. statement of the convention of what constitutes a That is why I have always taken the view that a single money Bill. It is not often that I disagree with my Civil Service should serve the Government as a whole noble friend but I rather question these; they are two and the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly. matters on which Parliament should take the initiative, In that context, like other Members of your Lordships’ rather than the Executive. The manual could properly House, I will say a word on the position we have got record what Parliament has decided, but it is not for into on the Parliamentary Voting System and the Executive to take the decision. Constituencies Bill. The implications for Parliament, What I would like to see added to the manual, and for your Lordships’ House in particular, have however—this is another matter that some noble Lords been said to be that since the coalition Government have referred to—is some rules that the Executive agreement was not in front of the electorate at the might impose on themselves to improve the quality of time of the general election, it is not covered by the the legislation that they present to Parliament. The Salisbury/Addison convention. That is strictly correct. noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, made this point powerfully. Like the noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, however, I doubt The Government might commit themselves to a clear whether that has much practical effect. The Salisbury/ statement of the policy intentions of legislation introduced Addison convention says that a “manifesto Bill” should and why legislation is necessary to achieve those intentions, be accorded a Second Reading in your Lordships’ as well as adequate time for public consultation and House, should not be subject to “wrecking amendments” pre-legislative scrutiny wherever possible. That is a and should be passed and sent, or returned, to the theme that has run through many contributions to the Commons so that they have an opportunity to consider debate. Such a statement could include an estimate of the Bill and any Lords amendments. As the noble the costs of implementing legislation, including a 589 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 590

[LORD BUTLER OF BROCKWELL] If this is a new type of coalition, as the noble regulatory impact assessment and an indication of Baroness suggested, then it is a completely new targets and performance measures against which the governmental and parliamentary situation. It started effectiveness of legislation can be measured in post- off when the coalition was being negotiated, when legislative scrutiny. In my evidence to the Constitution nobody in the political parties had thought it through Committee of this House, I shall be making properly beforehand. It had to be made up as they representations that the coalition should adopt such went along. It is still being made up, week by week, standards and include them in the Cabinet manual. month by month. The position is still evolving. The noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, a great deal of whose speech I agreed with, said that the coalition had Lord Howarth of Newport: Before the noble Lord had a major effect on the process of formation and the sits down, if the House will allow me, he referred to a resulting policy. Another effect is on the ongoing torrent of constitutional legislation in the early years processes of government, which, as I said, are still of the Labour Government. Will he accept that there evolving. were two very important differences between the circumstances then and those now? First, that Labour My noble friend Lord Steel of Aikwood, pointed Government had offered in their manifesto the out in an intervention that the coalition was put constitutional policies that they were proposing to the together in five days. One of the important lessons people. Secondly, that Government did not have a must be that in future coalition-building in this country majority in your Lordships’ House. after an election really ought to take place at a slightly more measured pace, and to take the normal 10 or As for later constitutional legislation by that 14 days which everybody else in the world expects as a Government—the Constitutional Reform and minimum. The five days led to two defects. First, the Governance Act in particular—I myself was very critical coalition agreement was not comprehensive and missed on the Floor of the House that the Government were great chunks out. What was in was often too detailed, loading more and more items of constitutional reform not always properly thought out and in some cases the into that one Bill. Does the noble Lord agree that bad political implications of what was agreed as a quick fix practice then does not justify bad practice now? had not been thought through at all, notably and most importantly on tuition fees, which have proved so Lord Butler of Brockwell: I agree with the first point harmful to my party. that the noble Lord made, but I point out to him that Secondly, there was no time during that period to the House then accepted the convention that the Executive think seriously about the processes of government, the ought to get their legislation. Even in this new situation, changes that were forced on the Government and that convention should still apply. Parliament by the fact of coalition, and those which With regard to that Government not having a majority were not forced but were perhaps thought to be desirable. in this House, the Government do not have an overall The result was the attempt we have seen to fit a majority in this House now. It is important that that two-party Government into a one-party mould. A should continue to be the situation. I remind the noble great deal of the problems that have arisen with the Lord that since the general election there have been coalition since then have resulted from the application eight or nine times when the Government have been of procedures, customs and practices which have been defeated by votes in your Lordships’ House. designed for a single-party Government when we now have two parties in government together. It started off with all the new Ministers getting a memo from the 3.08 pm Civil Service—I presume it was the one that would Lord Greaves: My Lords, I, too, thank the noble have been sent out anyway—which was inappropriate Baroness, Lady Symons of Vernham Dean, for for a two-party Government. One of the first coalition introducing this interesting and measured discussion documents sets out what is really little different from of very important issues. We have had the usual mixture what had gone before in terms of the way the Government in your Lordships’ House of expert practitioners, expert were going to work and ministerial responsibility. It academics and journeymen working Peers like myself, was basically what had gone before. Since then processes which has produced far more consensus around the have evolved and are still evolving. As members of a Chamber than many of us thought would happen coalition party who are not members of the Government, before this debate started. we are involved in some of those processes but they There has been a slight obsession with the Liberal have not gone far enough. The processes still do not Democrats, perhaps understandably. There is only one really accept that what we have are two parties from that I really want to pick up on. I hesitate to quibble different traditions with different philosophies—a centre- historically with a distinguished historian such as the left liberal party and a centre-right conservative party. noble Lord, Lord Morgan, who went back a long I use a small “l” and a small “c” for the words “liberal” time, though only in this country, to tell us of the past and “conservative”, although they are obviously the history of coalitions and the disastrous effects that party names as well. they had on the Liberal Party. The point is that each of Like my noble friend Lord Maclennan of Rogart, I the ones he cited followed a significant and catastrophic believe that the internal processes of government must split within the Liberal Party. That is not the case be more open and transparent. Both parties will benefit now and it is not going to be the case. We are in this for if their positions are better understood in the country five years and so all of us have to make it work in the and if the inevitable compromises and trade-offs which mean time. are taking place day by day, week by week and month 591 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 592 by month are much clearer to people who are interested. there is an atmosphere of agreement and tolerance There is a need to explain the discussions that are between the different sides of the House. going on and the results of those discussions. It is The Government’s side of the deal is to listen, foolish to pretend that detailed agreement exists between discuss, negotiate and accept some changes, even if the two parties on every issue. It is foolish to see they are not completely thrilled about them. The Liberals going on programmes such as “Newsnight”, amendment about the Isle of Wight that was discussed defending Tory policies in detail that we all know they yesterday is a case in point. That amendment does not do not really agree with, and vice versa: it is foolish to undermine the foundations of the Bill; it does not see Tories trying to defend things they do not agree cause the whole thing to come tumbling down; it is a with which they have had to accept because they are in detail. The detail on the Scottish islands has already coalition with us. As my noble friend said, the foreword been accepted and, if the Government are prepared to to the coalition agreement states that, accept the amendment on the Isle of Wight, it will be “we will extend transparency to every area of public life”. an indication that at least they are beginning to become It is time that it started at the top. a little flexible. People will say that it is very difficult because we The deal on the Opposition is that, in return, they live in a media environment which is one of the worst do not abuse the procedures; they do not destroy the in the democratic world. The media observe policy ability of the House to scrutinise, revise and improve; differences and call it a split; they observe policy and, in particular, they have a duty not to make discussions and call it a row; they observe compromises self-regulation impossible. That is the deal, but it has and call it a betrayal; they observe trade-offs and call broken down on the Parliamentary Voting System and it broken promises; they observe a refusal to agree Constituencies Bill. We can argue about who is right, with consultation responses and call it ideological who is wrong and who is most to blame. I say the stubbornness; they observe changes as a result of Opposition are to blame—but I would accept the consultation and call it a U-turn; and if they do not Mandy Rice-Davies caveat that I would say that anyway. see any of these things they invent them. However, Nevertheless, it does not matter who is to blame; it has that is the media we have to deal with and the difficulties broken down and both sides of the House have got to that we have with the British media should not get in repair it. If we do not, it will become impossible for the way of what should be done. this House to carry out its duties on all kinds of new Bills. For the whole of my political lifetime over 50 years, people have said of the Liberal Democrats, “You are We have a pivotal role—I shall finish with this—in never in power. You can say what you like but it is a that we possess loyalty and support for the coalition. waste of time voting for you”. Now they are saying, We are not going to undermine its fundamentals—we “You have thrown away your principles for ministerial are in it for five years—so do not think anything seats”. They are both points of view, but when they different. However, we are still an autonomous group come from the same people very rapidly it is, at the within the coalition with a distinctive perspective on least, a little annoying. politics. We are also committed to the proper role of this House. Those three matters cause us great difficulties The real problem is that in all these things the at times because they conflict in all kinds of ways. We Opposition—I do not blame the Labour Party specifically are committed to the coalition and will try to make it for this because Oppositions take their opportunities succeed. I hope other parts of the House will understand within the adversarial system that we have—cannot what we are trying to do and help us to do it because it resist joining in; they cannot resist chasing the cheap will help the Opposition if we are able to play that role. headline to feed off the prejudices and the way in which the press works. I am not suggesting that we would not do the same in opposition, but they cannot 3.20 pm resist pandering to pressure groups who thought they Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, we are now would get a particular policy through but now find near the end of what has been a serious and very that things have changed. Those kinds of attacks on searching debate—a debate which, I am glad to say the coalition undermine a sensible coalition environment. after this rather torrid week, has been both temperate I say to the Labour Party, “You may be in coalition and timely. Some people, especially in some parts of the next time or the time after that. Think about it. If the media, have seen the events in your Lordships’ there is a new political environment, perhaps the debate House this week as supporting their negative view of needs to change”. There has been enough material put this place. However, I hope that they will look as hard forward by this Government which can be rationally at today’s debate as they have at those of the past few and constructively criticised, for heaven’s sake. I shall days. Today’s debate has, like so many others, shown do so myself as a Back-Bencher. There is plenty of this House at its best. It has been serious; we have that to do without descending to silly, childish abuse. discussed the issues. It has been searching and we have Many noble Lords have referred to the implications not held back from criticism where we believe that it for this House. It is absolutely vital that legislation has been due. receives detailed and sufficient scrutiny, revision and I welcome the fact that the noble Lord the Leader improvement as a result of constructive and tolerant of the House has judged this debate to be of sufficient interchange. That is what this House is all about, and weight to answer it himself. I am very grateful to him this group is totally committed to continuing that for doing so, especially after this week. I am confident under the coalition environment. As other Lords have that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, will seek to pointed out in different words, this House works because counter the arguments on the issues involved in the 593 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 594

[BARONESS ROYALL OF BLAISDON] friend went out of her way to say that a Government constitutional and parliamentary effect of the coalition, who have the confidence of another place should have which have been put up today by all sides of the commensurate authority.What my noble friend questioned House. However, he has quite a job to do. was the Government bringing forward, without public In her extraordinary and comprehensive opening consultation or pre-legislative scrutiny, constitutional speech at the outset of the debate, my noble friend legislation not specified in manifestos, which was then Lady Symons of Vernham Dean ranged widely from made subject to a closure Motion when this House points about the history of coalitions to their nature was exercising its right and duty to scrutinise legislation. and characteristics, and the effect of this coalition. It Many noble Lords addressed the issue of the Salisbury being such a detailed speech, I shrink slightly from convention. I rather like the suggestion by the noble picking out a particular issue to put to the Minister, Lord, Lord Hennessey of Nympsfield, that a new but its main point was absolutely clear: the legitimacy convention should be introduced to replace the Salisbury/ of this coalition Government, in particular in respect Addison convention with one entitled the Strathclyde/ of seeking to change both the constitution and Parliament. Royall/McNally convention, named after our three As my noble friend Lord Morgan said, this coalition party leaders in your Lordships’ House. While such a was the product of private negotiation. No single place in parliamentary history would probably be elector in this country voted for the coalition or approved thrilling, I suspect that we might do better to stick to its programme for government. We fully recognise the the convention we have, albeit one that is under great constitutional legitimacy of being asked by Her Majesty strain. Perhaps this is a matter that we should discuss to form a Government. However, without the legitimacy further. conferred by election—without the validation of a mandate provided by the electorate—any coalition My noble friend Lord Wills took a slightly different Government should tread warily when they address approach to consideration of new machinery on certain issues, of which constitutional and parliamentary conventions by urging the Government to revive or reform, especially reform of the key central institutions bring forward in a new form the working group on the of our democracy, are paramount. constitution set up by my party when we were in Do the Leader of the House and his Government government. With the establishment of the coalition, accept that, in the light of the circumstances of the there is even greater urgency to look at these issues, formation of the coalition, the Government should be because our system is evolving rather quickly. I would both extremely cautious and extremely careful in certainly welcome the views of the noble Lord, Lord proceeding with constitutional and parliamentary reform; Strathclyde, on this issue. I hope that he will take away and that where it does, it should do so only after the the idea from my noble friend and perhaps pursue it widest possible consultation? Also, I am sure the noble within government. Lord will agree with so many in this House today who The noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, drew both have suggested that for Bills of such constitutional points together. He underlined that the important importance, pre-legislative scrutiny is particularly constitutional position before this House is indeed the important. Does the Leader of the House accept, as Salisbury convention and suggested that the Government we believe he must, that without a democratic mandate— should build on the work of the Constitution Committee without the direct and specific approval of the electorate of your Lordships’ House. I would be very much in for either the coalition or its programme—there can favour of that, but perhaps the issue is of such wide be no mandate for Bills; and that without a mandate importance that an independent body should also be for a Bill there can be no protection provided by the looking at it. Salisbury/Addison convention? Many speakers in this afternoon’s debate addressed My noble friend Lord Hart of Chilton, who is a the issue of the democratic gap at the heart of the member of the Constitution Committee of this House, coalition. My noble friend Lord Plant of Highfield skilfully drew together a wide range of recommendations said that the manifestos were, in effect, quasi-contracts of the committee and stressed the need for rigorous with the electorate. My noble friend Lord Howarth of scrutiny, including pre-legislative scrutiny, which I, Newport said that not only had the policies of the like my noble friend and others, think should be coalition not been endorsed by the electorate, they had axiomatic. not even been exhibited to them. I was delighted that The noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, who said he did the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Bath and not wish to comment on this week’s events, but did so Wells, in a careful and thoughtful contribution, related very skilfully, was wise in many of his comments. I today’s debate to the concerns of the people out agree with him that the decline in standards, as it were, there—the citizens whose views we all seek to voice. started in the other place with timetabling Motions He said that it was important that the Executive did and so on. However, I would say firmly to him and to not bring forward proposals that were not in line with the House, that on these Benches we are completely the will of the people. That is a terribly important against the use of timetabling Motions. The noble point. Lord suggested that perhaps in Opposition we might The noble Lord, Lord Maclennan of Rogart, appeared be in favour of them, but that is absolutely not the to suggest that my noble friend Lady Symons had case. We recognise that if timetabling Motions were to questioned the right of a Government to bring forward be introduced, and I am not suggesting that they will legislation that was not in the relevant manifestos of be, they would profoundly change the nature of this the component parts of the coalition. However, I do House as a revising Chamber, which is something that not believe that she did any such thing. My noble we all cherish. 595 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 596

The noble Lord and others also raised the issue of 3.32 pm whether or not the Government are entitled to get their business. Yes, the Government are entitled to get The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord their business. There is the matter of a sort of self-imposed Strathclyde): My Lords, it is no surprise to me that this timetable on Parliamentary Voting System and debate has been most interesting, given the number of Constituencies Bill, but the Government must get speakers and the quality of noble Lords who have their business. played their part. I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Symons of Vernham Dean, on securing the The noble Lord, Lord Butler of Brockwell, suggested debate—and for her timing, which was excellent. I do that the difficulties we have at present would have not agree with most of what she said; I do not suppose arisen if the Conservatives had been governing alone. that that will surprise her. In instances, it was almost a That is not the case. The problem arose from very fact speech of someone who believes that the Labour Party that there is a coalition Government and the Bill, will never again be in government. I shall develop this which is in effect two Bills, acts as glue for the coalition. theme: saying one thing in government and another in I disagree with the noble Lord that this situation opposition—behaving one way in government and would have arisen if there had been a Conservative-only another in opposition. Government. I very much welcome the contribution of the right I put one thing on the record about what has been reverend Prelate the Bishop of Bath and Wells. I am happening during the past two weeks. It arises from one of those who very much appreciates the fact that the interventions by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, the right reverend Prelates are prepared to give up a and others. The clear will of the House, as expressed great deal of time to play their part in this House. It is yesterday by the noble Baroness, Lady O’Neill, the appreciated by the whole House. I also very much noble Lord, Lord Low, and the noble and learned welcome the speeches by the noble Lords, Lord Butler Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, is that we must find of Brockwell and Lord Hennessey, and my noble a negotiated solution. All around the House, we believe friend Lord Norton of Louth. It may surprise the that that is what we must do. noble Baroness, but I also very much enjoyed the The rumour mill around the House is that discussions speech of the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart. He raised are taking place but they have not been productive to some extremely important issues to which I shall try to date. I am sure that they can be successful; I know that return. the whole House is willing that to be the case; and I I could not help but smile at the great sincerity with very much hope that that will be so. The noble Lord, which the noble Lord, Lord Howarth of Newport, Lord Owen, urged the Prime Minister and Deputy demands humility from this Government. He was a Prime Minister to come to their senses over the supporter for so long of a Government who left behind referendum. I certainly agree with that. one of the greatest financial messes that this country The noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, went further than has ever seen—who brought the country to the brink anyone else in this House by saying that he believed of bankruptcy with this massive deficit. The noble that we were in a serious constitutional crisis. The Lord, Lord Plant, was interesting because he talked noble Lord, Lord Norton, suggested that we could about the relationship between government and the step back from the brink. As I said, I believe that we people under the previous Government. The previous can step do so. The noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, said Government taxed their people, overspent, overborrowed that issues of such seriousness had arisen from the Bill and beggared the people. Worst of all, they wasted the that they might have to be addressed in future people’s money on their own schemes. That is why the legislation—legislation that might have to be passed next few years are going to be so difficult in this using the Parliament Acts. What is the view of the country. An apology might have been appreciated noble Lord the Leader of the House on that issue and early on in this new Parliament. is that Government policy? The noble Lord, Lord Butler, reminded us of the We acknowledge that there are valuable aspects of constitutional hunger of Mr Blair’s Government. I coalition Governments. In times of crises, war or wrote down, from memory, a few of them: the Bank of financial disaster staring our country on the face, England, Scotland and Wales, regional governments, there can be real value in coalition Government with London governments, and, of course, House of Lords real support in the country for political parties joining reform—all without thought, without plan, and without together in the national interest. There is no doubt conclusion still. Mr Blair said the House of Lords was that, at the start of their period in office, this coalition an affront to democracy. If it was that then, what is it Government attracted such support. I believe that now after 13 years of their Government—the abolition there is a decline in that support, as witnessed by the of the Lord Chancellor, the creation of a new Supreme polls, but it is also clear that there is considered and Court, locking people up without charge? Again, there considerable criticism of what the coalition have been is no apology, not even for the disgrace of the doing to the constitution and to Parliament—criticism Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill. Noble in this House, as well as in the country. That is the Lords opposite talking about humility really should conclusion of our debate today.There are many questions take great care to ever take part in a constitutional Bill to be answered. There is cumulative criticism, which I again. And I mock those noble Lords who voted believe that the Government and the Leader of the happily for that Bill in the House of Commons and House have to answer, and I look forward to his then in the House of Lords pontificate and lecture us answer to today’s welcome debate. about constitutional Bills. I mock them. 597 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 598

[LORD STRATHCLYDE] there were coalition Governments: the national What else? Ah, the conventions in this House. Let Government of 1931 to 1940 and the two wartime me turn to the Hunt report. The Hunt of the Hunt Governments. report is not my noble friend Lord Hunt of Wirral, Since the Second World War, we have witnessed the but the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath. He rise of a strong third party in the Liberal Democrats suggested—this is Labour Party policy—that it is wrong and their predecessors and the emergence of strong that a Bill can potentially be in jeopardy because some nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales. In addition, Peers within the rules of the House can threaten to in Northern Ireland, there are a number of parties spend endless time debating a particular Bill. What on that are represented at Westminster. Indeed, the experience earth have noble Lords opposite been doing over the in the devolved Administrations has given further last few weeks? I will return to that. experience of the workings of coalitions, particularly We are seeing a genuine parliamentary tragedy in Scotland, where we initially had the experience of a unfolding before our eyes in this House; a wholesale formal coalition commanding a majority in the Scottish breaking of the conventions, including those on secondary Parliament and have more recently had single-party legislation. The noble Baroness, Lady Symons, mentioned minority rule. So this coalition Government is not that and sought a justification for breaking a convention unprecedented, and the challenges that have been that has withstood the test of time, and several posed to our constitution and to Parliament have, I Oppositions, for the last 35 years—broken last month believe, been met successfully. only to be broken again on Monday. These are important There are two areas I wish to address where the conventions that have governed the relationship between effects of a coalition Government would have been the Labour Party and the Conservative Party; no expected to have been felt: on the operation of the warning, no criteria, just broken. Executive and on the operation of Parliament. I believe that the strength and resilience of our constitution It has been a calm debate and it is important that it and the parliamentary system have been evident. The should be. I very much welcome what the noble Lord, constitution has not had to change to accommodate Lord Hennessey, said about new conventions. It does coalition government. Our institutions were well prepared not really matter what they are called. It may be too to address the situation and to respond appropriately, late for that. We may have gone beyond the time for effectively and pragmatically. In the first area, looking conventions, because conventions require self-discipline. at the Executive, there has had to be some adjustment They require people who give their agreement to behave and accommodation. However, in the second area, in a particular way. Once that behaviour has been that of Parliament, there has been minimal need for broken, it is very difficult to put the conventions back change. together again. There are many benefits of having a flexible, uncodified The other theme is the question of the mandate, constitution that can evolve over time. However, it is mentioned by the noble Baroness the Leader of the also important that there is a shared understanding of Opposition and the noble Baroness, Lady Symons and the constitutional rules and conventions that apply. one or two others. It is always good to have this That is why, in February 2010, the Cabinet Office coupled with the call that we should consult the people published a draft chapter of the Cabinet manual on more and find out what is going on. The coalition, it is elections and government formation. The chapter set said, has no mandate and no legitimacy for its out the key principles that would apply following a constitutional reforms. No one voted for it. We are hung Parliament, including the role of the Sovereign, proposing to give the public a say on 5 May on the the Prime Minister, the political parties and the Civil voting system for elections to the House of Commons. Service. In particular, it stated that it was for the It is noble Lords on the Benches opposite who are political parties to determine the shape of the Government standing in the way of that. What mandate do noble and that the Sovereign would not expect to be involved Lords on the Benches opposite have for the stance that in such discussions; that the incumbent Prime Minister they have chosen? Do they really believe that the was expected to remain in post until there was a clear public will thank them for denying them the opportunity alternative; and that the Civil Service, with the to have their say? While we are on the case of mandates— authorisation of the Prime Minister, could offer support this wonderful new constitutional convention—what for any negotiations between the political parties. That mandate did Mr Gordon Brown have as Prime Minister? offer of support was taken up by a number of parties Who voted for any of the things he did according to in the negotiations that followed the election in May noble Lords opposite? My view of a mandate is that 2010. people elect Members of the House of Commons and whoever commands the confidence of the House of My noble friend Lord Greaves suggested that in Commons governs. That is the mandate that I understand. future we should take longer to form a Government. Given public expectations, media interest and economic Coalition Governments, national Governments, and pressures, those involved in the process this year were minority Governments are more common than usually very aware that a swift resolution was needed and that thought. In the 20th century, five elections produced a there was a real risk that the markets would react if hung Parliament, albeit only one of them post-war, negotiations went on for a longer period. I recognise that of February 1974. Both James Callaghan and that the length of time it took to form a Government John Major saw their parliamentary majorities eroded in May was much quicker than elsewhere in Europe over the course of a Parliament. In the case of the and, indeed, it is possible that in future the negotiation former, that led to the Lib-Lab pact and, of course, period might be longer, but, as the noble Lord, Lord 599 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Coalition Government 600

Owen, said, it was right to stabilise the markets. He conventions governing this place, especially the Salisbury/ said that that was a success. I know he does not agree Addison convention. Let me be clear that I do not with everything else the coalition has done and that he believe that any of the conventions governing the regrets the fact that proper proportional representation relationship between the two Houses has been called is not an option in the referendum, but there is a into question by the coalition itself. Many people—not reason for that, which is that there is no majority for least the most recent Joint Committee on Conventions— PR in the House of Commons or, I suspect, in this have considered the possibility that one day there House. might be a coalition Government. They have not concluded that this would presage a constitutional 3.45 pm crisis. Instead, they have tended to consider maturely and reach the conclusion that our current constitutional Setting out the key principles in advance of the conventions are well thought-out and easily robust election in the draft Cabinet manual helped to reduce enough to withstand the entirely predictable possibility uncertainty for those involved in the process of that government might consist of not one party but government formation. It also made the rules and two or, perhaps in the future, even more parties. conventions more transparent and helped to inform the media and members of the public. The chapter The present Government are the first coalition “Elections and government formation” has since been Government since the Salisbury convention was amended. The principles set out in the February draft formulated in its classic form. Inevitably, there are still hold true, but the text has been developed following some stresses within the system. The Salisbury convention consideration of the recommendations made by the applies to manifesto Bills, but this Government did House of Commons Justice Committee and to reflect not contest the election as a single party under a single the experience of the most recent election. We have manifesto. However, the Government, like all others, also given parliamentarians and other experts a further were formed and are sustained on the basis of the opportunity to lend their experience and knowledge in confidence of the House of Commons. This confidence developing the final Cabinet manual. A draft of the has been secured on the basis of a programme set out full Cabinet manual was published on 14 December, in the coalition agreement. Like any Government, we which allows three months for comment. have brought forward some measures that were in the The noble Baroness, Lady Symons, my noble friend manifesto and some that were not. Lord Norton of Louth and others asked for a debate So the Salisbury convention continues to apply, on the manual, but there is no reason why we should although perhaps it is not as often relevant as when a debate it. As I said, the draft manual is published for single party wins a majority. It is difficult now to public consultation and the Government would very determine what precisely constitutes a manifesto Bill much welcome views on the draft manual from either but, then again, it was ever thus. I think that it was the House and anybody with an interest, as the consultation noble Lord, Lord Morgan, who said that he did not ends on 8 March 2011. The noble Baroness also asked think that the Salisbury convention had much meaning about its status. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord any more. I disagree with him and incline more towards Hennessy, thinks that it is probably the first draft of a the view of the noble Lord, Lord Hennessey, and my written constitution, although I may have misunderstood noble friend Lord Norton. him. He is shaking his head vigorously. I am very glad The Salisbury convention was only ever one that I misheard him, because the Government have no manifestation of the relationship between the two plans to codify the constitutional conventions in operation Houses, which is based, as we all know, on the primacy in the UK or to bring forward proposals for the of the other place. We in this House do not routinely adoption of a codified constitution in the UK. Anyone oppose government legislation, whether or not it derives who reads the document will see that it is an overview from a manifesto. That much was made clear by the of the rules and conventions that relate to the work of Joint Committee in 2006, so it is not special pleading the Cabinet. by a coalition Government. So many noble Lords on The principle of collective agreement binds the all sides of the House cling dearly to the idea that we members of the Government in the usual way. However, are a revising House—a House of scrutiny, not of there are some areas in the coalition agreement where opposition—although you would be hard-pressed to that is explicitly set aside, not least in relation to the believe that when looking at the antics in the House in Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill the past few days. All of us on this side of the House that is currently before the House, where the principle are fond of reminding those opposite what the last will not apply in relation to the positions that the two Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw, said in 2006. He said political parties may take during the referendum campaign. that, We are one Government, but we respect that the “if any coalition or arrangement as in 1977 gains the support of coalition contains two political parties that will take the democratically elected House and endorsed by a motion of different positions on certain issues. These arrangements confidence then the programme for which they gain that endorsement and the different parts of the Cabinet system are should be respected by this House”— working together effectively to promote collective the House of Lords. That was the previous Government’s government, to manage government business and priorities understanding of the constitutional convention regarding and to protect the principles set out in the coalition coalitions. agreement. The noble Lord, Lord Wills, asked about the working A concern was expressed by a number of noble group on the constitution. I must say that I had no Lords about whether and how the coalition Government idea about this great body, but I have made inquiries may affect the more fundamental constitutional and I understand that the previous Government 601 Coalition Government[LORDS] Coalition Government 602

[LORD STRATHCLYDE] Lord Strathclyde: That could have been the case, announced that they would set up such a body to look and no doubt an amendment could have been proposed at law and the relationships between the state and in another place, but the agreement struck by the citizen as well as what principles should be deemed coalition was for AV, which is a method that was in the constitutional. I also understand that the group was Labour Party’s manifesto. It is entirely right that we never in fact convened and did not publish any reports should scrutinise and stick to that. or any other documents, so I suspect that it still However, in the Bill that we are dealing with, things languishes in the bottom drawer of somebody’s desk. have happened that neither I—in the 25 years that I We have no plans at this stage to resurrect it. have been here—nor any of my predecessors as Leaders Another curious theme, which I think explains an and Chief Whips has ever seen before: I refer to the awful lot about the attitude of the Labour Party that wholesale breakdown and refusal of the usual channels has developed over the past few months, was the idea to engage. The noble Lord said that we should negotiate, that the coalition has a majority in this House. That is but we negotiate on every Bill. This is the first time a fundamental misunderstanding between the two sides ever that the usual channels have said, “We refuse. We of the House. The noble Lord, Lord Butler of Brockwell, refuse to tell you how many days we want in Committee”. got it right. I shall not explain it now, but if any noble When they asked for more days, we gave them Lord would like a lesson in mathematics we can look more. I think that it was the noble Lord, Lord Clinton- at the numbers and go through them to see whether Davis, who said that we are rushing the Bill through the coalition has any more of a majority than the the House. He and his friends in the Labour Party are Labour Party had. It is a great mistake to ignore the the only people in the universe who believe that the Cross Benches, and I do not know why noble Lords Bill is being rushed through this House. In 22 hours on opposite do that. The example of the coalition losing Monday, only six amendments were considered. This a Division yesterday is a case in point. As well as the is unprecedented. The idea that this is scrutiny is Cross Benches, there are Members of the DUP, the farcical. Noble Lords opposite who cherish the reputation UUP and even UKIP. It would be very unwise to of this House have no idea how damaging this is to the discount that when considering the arithmetic of this reputation of this House. It is not scrutiny but verbosity. House. It may be too late. You have only to look at the progress of the Public Bodies Bill—let us leave aside the controversy of the AV Bill. My noble friend said that that was the right Lord Howarth of Newport: I am very grateful to the way to do things, and he is correct. An agreement was noble Lord—he must be nearing the end of his remarks. struck on the timing, and there was no problem there; The House always looks to the Leader of the House that is the way in which we behave, and quite rightly. to unify us, to reach across the political divide and to The noble Baroness said that there should be a bring us together as one House of Lords. This, as he referendum on the future of Lords reform. That is the noted, has been a very difficult week for the House. So first time that we have heard of that. In Labour’s last far, the noble Lord has told the House that he mocks manifesto, it took an awful long time to get there. noble Lords on this side. Does he also have anything My noble friend Lord Norton said that there should to say, as my noble friend the shadow Leader of the be a debate in the House on how consideration of Bills House did, in a spirit of reconciliation, to help us bind of constitutional significance should take place. I think up the wounds of this week? that we should have debates from time to time on these issues, and we should also have debates with the Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, before the noble Lord House of Commons about how constitutional Bills twists my words, I mocked those who did one thing in are taken through. I hope that my noble friend will another place and then come here and complain about write to his and my noble friend Lord Goodlad, who is the very behaviour in another place—it was quite looking at the working practices of this House. Again, specific. On reconciliation, yesterday the coalition that is a very timely review of how we are doing things, Government were defeated on an amendment. On when the House has broken with so many of its subsequent amendments, my noble friends and I offered conventions. meetings and reconciliation—the normal way of doing things. How were we rewarded? There was no agreement Lord Campbell-Savours: Having heard the very on finishing the Committee. I would love there to be interesting contribution from the noble Lord, Lord a reconciliation. The noble Baroness and I, who are Owen, on the issue of questions in the referendum, I personally on very good terms, are very keen to find a recognise that the Liberal Democrats—one element in way through this, but very soon, as the noble and the coalition—have historically been very strongly learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, said last committed to proportional representation, but why night, the Bill will not be passed and there will not be a was it that, when decisions on the referendum question referendum on 5 May. That will be because the House were being taken, proportional representation was not of Lords has dragged its heels and we should think included in the question? That might have invited the very carefully before we take that final step. House of Commons to knock out the provision if it I shall finish, because I have gone over time, by did not want to proceed down that route, and that thanking all noble Lords who have taken part and the could have been done on a free vote. It may well be many noble Lords who have come in to listen during that the decision taken by the House of Commons the day. It is a debate, no doubt, that we shall come would have been different from the one that Ministers back to again and again and I thank the noble Baroness, took. Lady Symons of Vernham Dean. 603 Coalition Government[20 JANUARY 2011] Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011 604

3.59 pm is an important part of the Government’s strategy to tackle terrorist activities. We would therefore like to Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I add the organisation Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, the had some concerns that the events of the past few days TTP, to the list of 46 international terrorist organisations might dominate the debate today, so I am grateful that that are listed under Schedule 2 to the Terrorism Act almost all the speakers managed to lift their eyes, for 2000. Having carefully considered all the evidence, the the majority of the contributions, from the narrow Home Secretary firmly believes that the TTP meets focus of the past few days and address the very important the statutory and discretionary tests for proscription. long-term issues inherent in any coalition in this country, This is the ninth proscription order amending Schedule and those that have arisen specifically in relation to 2 to that Act. this Government. The debate was conducted with courtesy almost all Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000 provides a the time and, mostly, with good will. There were power for the Home Secretary to proscribe an organisation important and thoughtful speeches from our constitutional if she believes that it is concerned in terrorism. The experts on all sides of the House—I, too, thank the Act specifies that an organisation is concerned in right reverend Prelate for his contribution—and terrorism if it commits or participates in acts of terrorism; contributions from our own Constitution Committee. prepares for terrorism; promotes or encourages terrorism, including the unlawful glorification of terrorism; or is I especially thank the noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, otherwise concerned in terrorism. for his wise words. I hope that he might take the noble Lord the Leader of the House aside for a bit of a pep The Home Secretary may proscribe an organisation talk. I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Owen, for only if she believes that it is concerned in terrorism. If cheering me up a great deal with his observations the test is met, she may then exercise her discretion to about the timing of the AV referendum. proscribe the organisation. In considering whether to exercise that discretion, she takes into account a number I thank the noble Lord the Leader of the House for of factors, which were announced to Parliament during answering the debate, which was a courtesy. I am sorry the passage of the Terrorism Act in 2000. The factors about his repeated remarks mocking Members of the considered are the nature and scale of an organisation’s House that he leads; I thought that they were inappropriate activities; the specific threat that it poses to the United for a debate such as this. However, I thank him for the Kingdom; the specific threat that it poses to British opportunity to say how much I look forward to a nationals overseas; the organisation’s presence in the Labour Government—he need have no worries on United Kingdom; and the need to support other members that score. of the international community in tackling terrorism. The noble Lord said that he was attracted by the proposals of the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, but I do Proscription is a tough but necessary power. Its not believe that the majority of the House is attracted effect is that the proscribed organisation is outlawed by them; nor, I believe, if I may be a little presumptuous, and is unable to operate in the UK. Proscription are the majority of his Benches. I look forward to a means that it is a criminal offence for a person to debate on the Cabinet Office manual—I will pop belong to, or invite support for, a proscribed organisation. along to see the noble Lord and we will do our It is also a criminal offence to arrange a meeting in arithmetic together. support of a proscribed organisation or to wear clothing or to carry articles in public which arouse reasonable I thank my noble friend Lady Royall for summing suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter up on our side of House in such a measured, sensible of a proscribed organisation. and comprehensive way that looked towards the healing process of the future. I thank everyone who has Given the wide-ranging impact of proscription, the participated, and I beg leave to withdraw the Motion Home Secretary exercises her power to proscribe an for Papers. organisation only after thoroughly reviewing all the available relevant information on the organisation. Motion withdrawn. This includes open-source material as well as intelligence material, legal advice and advice reflecting consultation across government, including with the intelligence and Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed law enforcement agencies. Decisions on proscription Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2011 are taken with great care by the Home Secretary, and it is also right that both Houses must approve the Motion to Approve order proscribing a new organisation. 4.03 pm Having carefully considered all the advice, the Home Secretary firmly believes that the TTP is currently Moved By Baroness Neville-Jones concerned in terrorism. Although, as noble Lords will appreciate, I am unable to go into much detail on the That the draft Order laid before the House on evidence, I am able to summarise. The TTP’s stated 17 January be approved. objectives are: the enforcement of Sharia, resistance to the Pakistani army and the removal of NATO forces The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- from Afghanistan. The group is a prolific terrorist Jones): My Lords, the terrorist threat to the UK and organisation which has frequently perpetrated attacks its interests abroad remains severe and sustained. The in Pakistan. For example, an attack in July last year on Government are determined to do all that they can to a meeting of tribal elders in a marketplace in the minimise that threat. Proscription of terrorist organisations Mohmand Agency killed 104 people and injured 120. 605 Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011[LORDS] Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011 606

[BARONESS NEVILLE-JONES] letter that the Minister sent to the noble Lord, Lord Two recent suicide attacks on army vehicles in Lahore Goodlad, the chairman of the Merits Committee, in killed 57 people in March last year. Although the anticipation of the meeting that the committee had to majority of attacks have been against military and peruse this document, that information has been in governmental targets, the TTP is known also to target the hands of the authorities indicating that since 2007 crowded areas and places of worship; for example, an the TTP has carried out mass-casualty attacks in attack on the two Ahmadi mosques in May 2010 Pakistan and Afghanistan, that it was implicated in an which killed more than 80 civilians. attempted Times Square car bomb attack in May The group is also known to target and claim 2010, and that there were other atrocities in the first responsibility for attacks on western targets; for example, half of 2010, as referred to by the noble Baroness. in June 2010, an attack on a NATO convoy just Although I thoroughly support the making of the outside Islamabad killed seven people and destroyed order, I wonder why it has taken so long for it to be 50 vehicles and, in April 2010, an attack on the US made. consulate in Peshawar killed at least six. The TTP has also threatened attacks in the West and was implicated Lord Reid of Cardowan: My Lords, first, I apologise in the failed Times Square car bomb in New York last to the Minister as I was slightly late in coming into the May. Chamber for her opening speech. However, I welcome the order and I also welcome the fact that time has The proscription of the TTP will contribute to been taken over it. Noble Lords may be aware that making the UK a hostile environment for terrorists when the now Prime Minister was asking us to ban and their supporters, and will signal our condemnation Hizb ut-Tahrir, I said that it is absolutely essential of the terrorist attacks that the group continues to that, when we take action to proscribe or ban, we have carry out in Pakistan. Proscription will also support sufficient evidence to make sure that, however great the emerging international consensus against the our revulsion at what these people are doing, that organisation. The TTP is already designated by the action is taken under the letter of the UK law and that United States and Pakistan, and I understand that we have sufficient evidence of that law being breached; proscription is being considered by a number of other otherwise, when these people appealed, it would be a countries. propaganda coup for them if we were to take action Proscribing the TTP will enable the police to carry that failed. Therefore, I thank the Minister for her out disruptive action against any supporters in the Statement today. I understand how difficult it often is UK. It will also send a strong message that the UK is to get concrete evidence to carry such measures forward, not willing to tolerate terrorism either here or anywhere but I am sure that, even at this stage, we will all be else. Proscription is not targeted at any particular faith relieved that the action has been taken, because these or social grouping, but it is based on evidence that the are very dangerous people. organisation is concerned in terrorism. It is clear that the TTP is not representative of Pakistani or Muslim Lord Harris of Haringey: My Lords, I also support communities in the UK. The organisation has carried the order, but I have one or two questions about the out a large number of attacks in Pakistan resulting in process. It is a very difficult process and I would be mass casualties. I know that the vast majority of grateful for guidance from the noble Baroness as to British Muslims joined us all in condemning those how it operates. The reference to Hizb ut-Tahrir that abhorrent acts of violence. we have just heard from my noble friend Lord Reid is Finally, I have already said that the Government important. I know that, when he was leader of the recognise that proscription is a tough power that can Opposition, there was a desire by the now Prime have a wide-ranging impact. Because of that, there is Minister for that organisation to be proscribed forthwith an appeal mechanism in the legislation, and any and that did not happen. Therefore, I should be interested organisation that is proscribed or any that is affected in knowing a little more about the decision-making by the proscription of an organisation can apply to the process that has gone on in this case and the extent to Home Secretary for the organisation to be de-proscribed. which that provides us with lessons about the Hizb If the application is refused, the applicant also has a ut-Tahrir case. For example, was there a specific request right to appeal through the Proscribed Organisations from the Government of Pakistan or perhaps the Appeal Commission, which is a special tribunal that is Government of the United States in support of such a able to consider the sensitive material that often underpins ban? What consideration has been given to whether a proscription decisions. A special advocate can also be ban makes it easier or less easy to disrupt the activities appointed to represent the interests of the applicant in of this group? It seems to me that banning a group closed sessions of the commission. This is a fair process. under a particular name may simply mean that it There is ample evidence to suggest that the TTP is re-emerges with a different name or in a different guise concerned in terrorism, and I believe it is right that we or simply disappears off the radar altogether. I would add it to the list of proscribed organisations under be interested in what considerations are given to such Schedule 2 to the Terrorism Act 2000. I commend the points. order to the House. Finally, it would be helpful if the Minister could give us an indication of the extent to which the guiding factor was this group being a threat in the UK or to Lord Scott of Foscote: My Lords, I have no doubt British nationals overseas or whether other factors whatever that the House should support this order, were the final motivation in taking this decision. However, and I rise simply to ask why it has taken so long for the I do not doubt that the Home Secretary has made the order to be sought. It appears from the contents of the right decision in this case. 607 Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011[20 JANUARY 2011] Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011 608

4.15 pm they have also taken to targeting journalists and lawyers. I personally know of people in Pakistan who have Lord West of Spithead: My Lords, I support the been sent anonymous letters, whose fax numbers have Motion. I am sure that, now the Minister is in government, been obtained and who have been told by this group, she realises how unbelievably difficult these decisions “We are watching you, we are going to come and get are. The TTP was around when I was Minister for you”. I would have thought there was sufficient evidence Security. It was extremely difficult to pull together to have proscribed them some time ago. enough information to make certain that one needed to do this because, as the Minister pointed out, this is The Government’s statement talks about the possibility quite a step to take. One has to weigh up not just what of de-proscription and my noble friend mentioned it does to stop it being able to do the dreadful things it that 46 organisations have been proscribed under these wished to do, but how much it might garner support powers. Can she tell us how many have applied for within certain ill-informed parts of our community successful deproscription because as a liberal at heart and abroad. That is very difficult to do. I am very conscious of free expression? It worries me that organisations, once proscribed, would find themselves My noble friend Lord Reid mentioned HuT. While in that situation and unable to be deproscribed. I I was in government, we were continually lambasted wonder if she could tell us how many applications about it, but it was very difficult to highlight and pin there have been and how many have been successfully down specifics to enable us to do this within our law. de-proscribed. We must recall that freedom’s struggles We must not step forward quickly and do these things. in other parts of the world involve organisations that—due To do that quickly and wrongly is a terrible mistake. to the exegesis of their operating circumstances—might My noble friend Lord Reid mentioned that. We have have been somewhat implicated in some kinds of to be very measured and careful. Each time, we have to violence. Yet when they revert to the path of peace, it think about what the effects are within our communities is also right that we reconsider their standing at that time. in this country and overseas. Partly in answer to my noble friend Lord Harris, I think that the judgment I hope it is not too wide of this particular order to has to be that if the threat is to our people abroad, not ask the Minister what steps the Government are taking just our civilians but also our servicemen who are out to train up judges, police officers, forensics teams and there doing things for our nation, that is just as great so on, so that Pakistan is better equipped to bring an issue as things happening within this country, and people to trial itself rather than waiting for them to be all of those issues are an important balance. I support unable to travel to other countries. this Motion. These are very difficult issues. They are Finally, on the point made by the noble Lord, Lord not at all party political, but are very important for the Harris of Haringey, a lot of these organisations are nation. We have to be very careful, and we need to known, the minute they are proscribed, to sail under a scrutinise each decision. new flag. In other words, they find another innocent- sounding name but their aims continue as before and Baroness Falkner of Margravine: My Lords, I broadly many of the same individuals are involved in the same concur with what other noble Lords have said in heinous activities. support of this order. I wonder whether the House is Several noble Lords have made reference to the aware that over the past decade 60,000 to 70,000 Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is established perfectly legally in people have been killed in terrorist attacks in Pakistan, the United Kingdom. I would not therefore draw that yet not a single successful prosecution has been brought analogy as it is an entirely different ball game, but can in the Pakistani courts. While proscribing an organisation my noble friend tell us, since it is not clear to me, is indeed an extremely grave and serious matter, one whether this organisation is established in any sense has to live with the reality that if a country that has openly in this country? less than ideal procedures for taking people through due process is unable to take control of these elements Lord Rosser: My Lords, first, I thank the Minister of its population, it rests on the rest of us to ensure for setting out the background to and the Government’s that our populations are secure and safe. reasons for this order, which is intended to help protect I am a little disappointed that it has taken this long our national security and which we support. I will to proscribe this organisation, as I know from a great make a number of points and ask a number of questions, deal of openly available evidence in the Pakistani some of which I recognise the Minister may not feel in communities that it has left its signature against some a position to answer in any detail. Some of the points of the most heinous crimes committed in recent years. that I wish to raise have already been made in one It has a rather innocent sounding name “the community form or another by other noble Lords. of the learned students of Pakistan” and sounds entirely The TTP—the organisation we are discussing today— inoffensive, but in fact it is armed to the teeth, it has was set up some three or four years ago, and about a some of the nastiest propaganda at its disposal and it year after that was proscribed by the Pakistani authorities. particularly selects people who support human rights Last year, the United States took similar action. Are to target. The Minister told us of its attacks on the other countries considering similar action and are we Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan, a peaceful, law- pressing other countries to take similar action in respect abiding, extremely well educated community that provides of this organisation? Proscription—which is based on professionals, such as doctors and others in the most clear evidence that an organisation is involved in difficult professions, who work across the country to terrorism—means that an organisation is outlawed alleviate poverty and hardship. They specifically target and is unable to operate in the United Kingdom, with this community because they have a warped view of it being a criminal offence to be involved in the activities what their religion comprises. In the past two years, of the proscribed organisation. 609 Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011[LORDS] Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011 610

[LORD ROSSER] something so serious. Of course, the possibility of The TTP has been very active in Pakistan since its proscribing the TTP was available to the Government formation. Among the factors that the Home Secretary before this Government came into office. I take the takes into account is the specific threat that an organisation view that proscription is a serious action to undertake. poses to British nationals overseas and the need to I agree with those who said that it is a propaganda support other members of the international community coup for the other side if an appeal against governmental in the fight against terrorism. The Minister said that action of this kind succeeds and that one needs to be the TTP had been implicated in attacks in the West, absolutely certain of one’s ground. As noble Lords are such as the attempted Times Square car bomb attack aware, the grounds are broad terrorism grounds and in May 2010. In very general terms, are there also not others, but it does not just affect the UK, although concerns that the TTP has been, or is likely to be, that is obviously relevant. It also has an affect abroad active in this country? Also in general terms, can the and on our allies. Minister assure the House that there is evidence that previous proscription orders have proved effective in their objective of tackling terrorist activities through 4.30 pm disrupting and preventing the organisations concerned In the end, one cannot seriously distinguish between achieving their aims? the effect of terrorist activities abroad and the security There are 46 international terrorist organisations of the United Kingdom, as if somehow they represent listed under Schedule 2 to the Terrorism Act 2000. As a threat to this country or to our allies only if they are the Minister said, this is the ninth proscription order active in this country. One has to take a view that amending that schedule. The criteria for deciding whether makes it clear that terrorism is a global phenomenon to proscribe an organisation were determined some and that it is extremely interactive in its character. 10 years ago. Do the Government intend to stick with I was asked about representations being made to us. the current criteria; or do they intend to review or Government is a large place and I cannot guarantee amend them? A proscribed organisation can appeal to that no Government have said anything to United an independent committee, and proscribed organisations Kingdom Ministers about the TTP. I am not aware of are currently reviewed annually. Do the Government any representations having been made. The decisions intend to keep the present arrangements; or are they of which I am aware were taken on the basis of views considering more or less frequent reviews or changes within Whitehall and consultation with all relevant in the appeal mechanism? departments. The Minister said that the Home Secretary has exercised her power to proscribe the TTP only after If an organisation adopts the—perhaps I might carefully examining all the evidence and information say—trick, which has happened, of changing its name available from a number of sources. I do not doubt and adopting an alias, although it is the same organisation that. Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister, when he we will do as our predecessors have done, which will was leader of the Opposition, gave a commitment to be to ban it. The law provides specifically for that and ban another organisation, Hizb ut-Tahrir—when it is right to do so. My noble friend Lady Falkner also presumably he had not been able to examine carefully asked a number of questions about our experience all the evidence and information available—can the with this legislation. She is right to say that dealing Minister give an assurance that if the activities of that effectively with terrorism and proscription are not at other organisation or under review, the Home Secretary all the same thing, although I hope and trust that they will make any decision, as she has in the case before us help each other. Simply banning without acting is by today, only on the basis of the relevant information no means the full answer. However, we take the view and evidence available? I repeat: we support the order. that outlawing that kind of activity is a powerful political act and that there are circumstances in which 4.27 pm that is exactly what we need to do. Baroness Neville-Jones: I am extremely grateful to The People’s Mujaheddin, an Iranian-related noble Lords who have spoken for the support that organisation, has been deproscribed. I have to say that they have given to the action that the Government it was done under our predecessor Government, but propose to take. I believe, and I hope I am right, that it they were not very happy about deproscription and we represents the broad opinion of the House. shared their unhappiness. There was a difference of I have been asked a number of questions, to which I view between the Government and the independent shall attempt to respond. In reply to the last question, tribunal that took the view. The difference of opinion we will certainly proscribe only on the basis of relevant probably persists, but it is an example of the fact that criteria. I was asked a number of questions about our the process can be reversed. As I have said, it is intentions for proscription in future. If I may, I will illustrative of the importance of being on solid ground leave that largely to next week’s Statement. We will before you take the action. I will have to write to the continue to conduct a regime that is rigorous in its noble Baroness about the extent to which we are demand in the circumstances in which an organisation engaged in helping to train judges in Pakistan. My is liable to proscription—that it is related to terrorism. belief is that we are active in that area, but I do not We believe that that is an important line that should be have the detail here. drawn when proscribing organisations. I believe that other countries are taking action. We, The question was asked: why not sooner? Some having taken a decision to proscribe, would normally noble Lords felt that we had taken too long to do this; report this to our EU partners, for instance. We will others felt that we need to take our time when doing probably take action with other Commonwealth countries 611 Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011[20 JANUARY 2011] Terrorism Act 2000 (Amdt) Order 2011 612 and make known our action. Other countries will I turn finally to HuT. This organisation was referred often factor that sort of mechanism into their own to quite properly by a number of noble Lords. We are decision-making. We are part of a broader trend. continuing to watch it. However, as I said, the criterion Previous orders have been effective. Clearly, one of for proscription is involvement in terrorism, and one the things that can happen as a result of proscription—this has to be very clear if one is going to proscribe an is a legitimate charge—is driving the organisation organisation that one is applying the legal criteria further underground. My view is that organisations correctly. We remain concerned about HuT, and we that get proscribed are not exactly open; their activities continue to watch it and to follow its activities closely. are already well concealed and they are not in the The organisation not only operates in this country but public interest. I do not believe that the downside of has extensive international activities. It is a global proscription is damaging. It tells young men—it is organisation, but an important part of it is in the UK. usually young men—that they should not go near the organisation. That is important; it sends a broad message. Motion agreed. It is just one instrument—but an important one—in our armoury. House adjourned at 4.37 pm.

WS 17 Written Statements[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Statements WS 18

realistic assumptions and a reassessment of the extra Written Statements costs incurred. As a result the allowance will reduce from £12.41 to £8.50 per day. Thursday 20 January 2011 Living out supplemented rates of local overseas allowance—this allowance achieves the same aims as Armed Forces: Allowances food and incidentals allowance but for personnel based Statement abroad. The allowance has been removed and replaced with food and incidentals allowance paid in local currency. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): My right honourable Home to duty travel—this assists service personnel friend the Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare with the cost of daily travel between their home and and Veterans (Andrew Robathan) has made the following place of duty. At present, individuals are responsible Written Ministerial Statement. for the first three miles of their journey. In future, this will increase to nine miles, even when they have no As part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review, choice in the location of either home or duty premises. the Government announced that the amount spent by This change will be introduced over a period of three the Ministry of Defence (MoD) each year on personnel years to mitigate the affect on individuals. allowances would be reduced by over £300 million. Reductions to civil service allowances will necessarily Recruitment and retention allowance (London)—this be dealt with separately to those affecting the Armed allowance is designed to encourage personnel to serve Forces. I am now able to detail the changes to Armed in London. Since changes to this allowance would Forces allowances, which will achieve a reduction in have the greatest impact on those on the lowest salaries, spend of some £250 million by financial year 2014-15. the allowance will be maintained for all those of the A strong economy is a national security imperative, rank of corporal and below. For all others it will be and the Government conducted the Strategic Defence removed. To allow adequate preparation for this change, and Security Review (SDSR) against the background it will not be introduced until 2012. of a dire fiscal situation, which requires difficult decisions Disturbance allowance—this flat-rate allowance was on reducing public spending. Proper support to our intended to compensate for the necessary additional service personnel is equally essential. An appropriate expenses that arise when service personnel are required set of allowances is an important element of that to move to take up new assignments. In practice, many support, and will remain so in the future. However, it significant costs associated with moving (removals, cannot be immune from careful scrutiny to ensure that storage etc) are covered through other allowances. It is it remains appropriate. Whilst reductions in this area therefore appropriate to reduce the value of this allowance will never be welcome, the package of changes which by 10 per cent. For those with children, the additional we are introducing has been developed in full consultation elements previously paid will be reduced by 53 per with the service Chiefs of Staff and represents the best cent. balance between affordability and fairness. Daily subsistence—this allowance reimburses actual Service personnel are entitled to appropriate notice allowable subsistence expenditure. We have reduced of changes to allowances, and there will be a minimum the maximum rate payable to £25 per day, in line with of three months notice before any alterations which the rates paid by other government departments, and affect those currently serving take effect. In specific made similar percentage reductions in overseas rates. cases the notice will be longer (up to 12 months). Get you home (early years)—this allowance is designed The changes affect the following allowances: to enable junior members of the services to maintain Incidental expenses allowance—this a contribution links with close family as they adjust to service life by to minor expenditure incurred during temporary duty funding four journeys to the family home per year. In involving overnight absence; it is paid at a flat rate of future it will be available only to those undergoing £5 per day. In future this allowance will only be paid to initial training and for all personnel under the age of personnel in hospital. All personnel will continue, as 18. now, to be reimbursed for the actual costs of travel, food and accommodation. Get you home (seagoers)—this allowance is designed to support retention of seagoing personnel by reducing Local overseas allowance—this allowance contributes the impact of routine separation. The current provision towards the cost of living, when service personnel are of 12 journeys to the individual’s place of residence required to serve overseas. We will be modernising the will be reduced to 10. way in which the allowance operates by re-evaluating the items used to construct it, and by reducing the Motor mileage allowance—there are three rates of number of rank-based bands from 13 to three. In view motor mileage allowance currently in use. These will of the significant impact of these changes on some be unified to a single rate of 25p per mile, in line with service personnel and their families, they will be staged the HMRC basic rate. over two years. Commitment bonus—commitment bonuses are paid Food and incidentals allowance—this is a contribution at specified career points, and reward completed service. to the additional costs which are incurred by unmarried Due to current service manning levels and the redundancy service personnel and those serving unaccompanied, if programme we announced in the SDSR we have decided they do not have access to service accommodation or to reduce the value of these bonuses by 50 per cent for messes. In future the allowance will be based on more all new entrants, implemented with immediate effect. WS 19 Written Statements[LORDS] Written Statements WS 20

Specialist pay (reserve banding)—specialist pay is I am today announcing a review led by the National paid to service personnel with specialist skills in order Statistician to decide which independent body should to help recruit and retain them. Reserve banding is have future responsibility for the publication of crime used to facilitate a gradual reduction in specialist pay statistics and to oversee the implementation of when individuals are in positions not requiring specialist recommendations last year from the UK Statistics skills. The period of gradual reduction has been changed Authority. from six years to three, and will cease after the recipient I am concerned that our existing measures of crime has spent three years out of specialist assignments. are confusing and offer the public only a partial picture Additionally, we will remove specialist pay from those of the true level of offending. It is in the public interest who give notice of resignation. We will not implement that we have measures of crime that are clear, meaningful this change until 2012. Outwith these changes, we have and in which the public can have confidence. asked the Armed Forces Pay Review Body to review The UK Statistics Authority reported on barriers all specialist pay as part of its 2011 programme of to trust in crime statistics and made six recommendations work. in their report published in May 2010. I welcome the In addition to the changes described above, we have UK Statistics Authority’s report and have given careful made alterations to a number of other smaller allowances, consideration to their recommendations to improve to simplify the allowance system and contribute to the public trust in the statistics. reductions in our allowance expenditure. While the Statistics Authority saw no evidence of political interference in crime statistics published by Benefits: Sure Start Maternity Grant the Home Office, I believe bolder action is needed to more clearly demonstrate their political independence. Statement For that reason, I have decided to move future formal responsibility for the publication of crime statistics to The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department an independent body. for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): My honourable I have asked the National Statistician to provide friend the Minister of State for Pensions (Steve Webb) advice on this together with the future arrangements has made the following Written Ministerial Statement. for the data collection systems that underpin the statistics The Government announced in the emergency budget as part of a wider review of crime statistics that she that, from April 2011, payment of the Sure Start has agreed to lead. The review will report back by the maternity grant would be protected at the current rate end of April 2011 so that changes can be implemented of £500, but limited to the first child. Amending from April 2012. regulations were laid today restricting payment to I have placed a copy of the terms of reference for families where their new baby, or babies if it is a this review in the Library of the House. multiple birth, will be the only child under 16 in their household. The regulations will come into force on 24 January and apply to babies born, expected, or the EU: Parliamentary Scrutiny subject of an adoption or other analogous arrangement, Statement on or after 11 April 2011. Sure Start maternity grants are available to families in receipt of income support, income-related employment The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth and support allowance, income-based jobseeker’s Office (Lord Howell of Guildford): My honourable allowance, pension credit, child tax credit at a rate friend the Minister for Europe (David Lidington) has above the family element or working tax credit that made the following Written Ministerial Statement. also includes a disability or severe disability element. The imminent annual report on EU Justice and This broad eligibility ensures that the grant is as Home Affairs has provided a useful point of reflection widely available as possible amongst families with on current arrangements for parliamentary scrutiny lower incomes both in and out of work. over Justice and Home Affairs decisions. The Government Restricting payment in this way ensures that the have come to the view that the current arrangements limited resources available support families when they are not adequate and the Parliament has too small a need it most. Expenditure is inevitably highest when a role. new baby is the only child in the household and there I am therefore pleased to announce that the are no baby items that can be reused or recycled. Government have agreed an important package of This measure will save £73 million a year as part of measures to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of EU the Government’s deficit management plans. business, including in the important area of Justice and Home Affairs, to be elaborated and implemented in close consultation with the business managers and Crime: Statistics the relevant parliamentary committees. This Government are committed to upholding the right of Parliament to Statement hold the Government to account on EU issues and this package will provide Parliament with further tools The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- to enable it to do this job effectively. Jones): My right honourable friend the Secretary of The Treaty of Lisbon provides for a five-year State for the Home Department has today made the transitional period after which the infringement powers following Written Ministerial Statement. of the European Commission and the jurisdiction of WS 21 Written Statements[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Statements WS 22 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) will apply to all would have a substantial impact on the United Kingdom’s unamended police and criminal justice instruments criminal or civil law, our national security, civil liberties adopted under the pre-Lisbon third pillar arrangements. or immigration policy. The Government will also put The transitional period began on 1 December 2009 in place analogous arrangements for parliamentary and will end on 30 November 2014. The UK has until scrutiny of decisions to opt-out of measures under the 31 May 2014 to choose whether to accept the application Schengen protocol. of the Commission’s infringement powers and jurisdiction As currently, the Government will not override the of the ECJ over this body of instruments or to opt out scrutiny process unless an earlier opt-in decision is of them entirely, in which case they will cease to apply essential. Where the Government consider an early to the UK on 1 December 2014. opt-in to be necessary, they will explain their reasons Parliament should have the right to give its view on to Parliament through the Statement set out above. In a decision of such importance. The Government therefore these circumstances, it would usually be appropriate commit to a vote in both Houses of Parliament before for the Statement to be made orally. they make a formal decision on whether they wish to The Government are committed to strengthening opt-out. The Government will conduct further their engagement with Parliament on all European consultations on the arrangements for this vote, in Union business as part of our wider work to reduce particular with the European Scrutiny Committees, the democratic deficit over EU matters. They will and the Commons and Lords Home Affairs and Justice review the arrangements for engagement on EU issues Select Committees and a further announcement will in consultation with Parliament, and make a further be made in due course. announcement in due course. The Government are fully committed to rigorous These measures will significantly strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of opt-in and Schengen opt-out Parliament’s oversight of EU Justice and Home Affairs decisions in relation to new proposals from the matters and make the Government more accountable Commission. The Government will continue to honour for the decisions they make in the EU. the arrangements that are currently in place following I have discussed the terms of this Statement with the undertakings of the then Government Minister, the Home Secretary and the Justice Secretary who Baroness Ashton, for enhanced parliamentary scrutiny agree with its contents. of JHA opt-in decisions. The Government will also undertake to extend scrutiny of opt-in decisions with the following commitments. Intelligence Services Commissioner First, following the existing process of parliamentary scrutiny of all JHA measures under Title V of the Statement Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Government commit to make a Written Statement to Parliament on each opt-in decision to The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord ensure that Parliament is fully informed of the Strathclyde): My right honourable friend the Prime Government’s decision and of the reasons why they Minister has made the following Statement. believe their decision is in the national interest. Where In accordance with Section 59 of the Regulation of appropriate and necessary, this Statement may be Investigatory Powers Act 2000, I have agreed to appoint made orally to Parliament. the right honourable Sir Mark Waller as Intelligence Secondly, the Government urge the committees to Services Commissioner from 1 January 2011 to take full advantage of their existing right to call a 31 December 2013. debate on an amendable Motion on any opt-in decision and express their willingness to participate in these debates to ensure full transparency and accountability Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: of opt-in decisions. Wanstead Flats Thirdly, in circumstances where there is particularly strong parliamentary interest in the Government’s decision Statement on whether or not to opt in to such a measure, the Government express their willingness to set aside The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- Government time for a debate in both Houses on the Jones): My honourable friend the Minister of State for basis of a motion on the Government’s recommended Policing and Criminal Justice (Nick Herbert) has today approach on the opt-in. The precise details of these made the following Written Ministerial Statement. arrangements to allow such debates and the circumstances in which Government time would be set aside will be On 16 September (col. 62WS) I announced that the the subject of further consultation with the European Government were undertaking a three-month public Scrutiny Committees, business managers and the consultation on a proposed legislative reform order to Commons and Lords Home Affairs and Justice Select make a temporary amendment to the Epping Forest Committees. These discussions will also need to determine Act 1878. how arrangements would operate during periods of The proposed legislative reform order (to be made parliamentary Recess and dissolution of Parliament. under the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006), However, the Government believe that as a general will enable the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to rule, they would be appropriate to do so in circumstances construct a temporary muster, briefing and deployment where they propose to opt in to a measure which centre on Wanstead Flats, part of Epping Forest. It is WS 23 Written Statements[LORDS] Written Statements WS 24 proposed that this will take place for a period of 90 of the Act. We consider that the consultation remains days during the summer of 2012 to support the London valid and the proposed legislative reform order can 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. proceed. The consultation closed on 9 December and I am Muster, briefing and deployment centres are a tried grateful to those who responded. 24 responses were and tested feature of large scale police operations and received (as well as a further seven responses, which will be a vital element of operational policing plans may have been from the same people, sent to the for the Games. Given that the Government and other Home Office website) during the course of the 12-week parties are in a position to meet the points made public consultation. Of these 31 responses, 18 were during consultation, it will now bring forward the against, eight were broadly supportive of the proposal proposed legislative reform order during 2011. As the or had no specific objections and five were ambivalent consultation document made clear, the order will remove or did not address the consultation questions. the prohibition on the enclosure of land for the fairground The main points to emerge from the consultation site part of Wanstead Flats in the summer of 2012 on were: a temporary basis only. The proposed legislative reform order will make no permanent changes to the 1878 Act the fear that the proposals would set a precedent nor will any lasting powers relating to Wanstead Flats for future development of the area and that the or Epping Forest be conferred on the police or any muster, briefing and deployment centre might remain other public body. Full protection under the Act will on site; resume at the end of the period. lack of information as to alternative sites; A draft legislative reform order and accompanying doubt as to whether the legislative reform order explanatory document will be laid before Parliament would apply for 120 days or 90 days; and under Section 14 of the Legislative and Regulatory doubt that the £170,000 payment in lieu of rent Reform Act 2006 for scrutiny and consideration. The would be forthcoming to provide facilities for children consultation responses have also been published in full and environmental improvements in the local area. on the Home Office website and copies have been placed in the House Library. The Government are confident that these points will be met: the Government have made clear that the security Schools: National Curriculum requirements of the Games are wholly exceptional Statement and that they constitute no precedent whatever for future development of Wanstead Flats. The The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Government can see no circumstances in which Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): My honourable friend something similar on Wanstead Flats would be the Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove) required in the future; made the following Written Ministerial Statement. the MPS has published, as planned, details of its I am today announcing the Government’s intention site evaluation criteria (as well as its long and short to review the national curriculum for both primary lists of proposed sites) as part of its planning and secondary pupils in England. permission application to Redbridge Borough Council. It is my ambition to reduce unnecessary prescription, This showed that no other site met all the relevant bureaucracy and central control throughout the education criteria; system. That means taking a new approach to the the MPS has confirmed that it will only require curriculum. the site for a maximum period of 90 days. This The Government believe that it is teachers, not limitation will be written into the legislative reform Ministers and civil servants, who know best how to order; and teach. We must give our teachers more time and space the City of London Corporation has said (and to create lessons that engage their pupils and enable confirmed in public correspondence) that the £170,000 students to fulfil their potential. The national curriculum payment in lieu of rent will be used to fund long will be slimmed down so that it properly reflects the term lasting improvements to Epping Forest. Local body of essential knowledge which children should people will also be consulted on how it should be learn. Individual schools should have greater freedom spent. This funding is addition to the cost of making to construct their own programmes of study and good the site which will be borne separately by develop approaches to learning and study which help the MPS. us to catch up with high-performing education nations. One other issue to emerge during the course of the It is important to distinguish between the national consultation was the proposed use of the legislative curriculum and the wider school curriculum. The national reform order temporarily to remove the “burden” of curriculum was originally envisaged as a guide to the criminal offence in Section 34 of the Epping study in key subjects which would give parents and Forest Act. During the consultation it became apparent teachers confidence that students were acquiring the that Section 34 of the 1878 Act has in fact lapsed and knowledge necessary at every level to make appropriate that the criminal offence relating to enclosure of land progress. But as it has developed, the national curriculum on Epping Forest (which needs to be removed on a has come to cover more subjects, prescribe more outcomes temporary basis by the proposed Legislative Reform and take up more school time than originally intended. Order) arises under byelaws made under Section 36 of Reforms to the national curriculum that have been the Epping Forest Act 1878 rather than Section 34 introduced in recent years, such as the inclusion of WS 25 Written Statements[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Statements WS 26 skills development and the promotion of generic teaching, so that teachers are in a stronger position to dispositions, have also distorted the core function of deliver appropriate PSHE education. the national curriculum and diluted the importance of The new national curriculum will represent a standard subject knowledge. International surveys of educational against which all schools can be judged. It will be a achievement show that in the same period our standing national benchmark, to provide parents with an has declined. understanding of what progress they should expect. It The review will therefore revise the national curriculum will inform the content of core qualifications, and it in line with the best international practice so that it will inform the new basis of assessment in primary sets out clearly the essential knowledge that all children schools. Academies will retain the freedom to disapply should be expected to acquire in key subjects during the national curriculum, but it is crucial that we have a the course of their school career. The new national national curriculum against which all schools can curriculum should embody for all children in England measure themselves. their cultural and scientific inheritance, enhance their understanding of the world around them and introduce The new national curriculum will begin to be taught them to the best that has been thought and written. I in maintained schools from September 2013. In order intend to ensure that our national curriculum is informed to allow schools time to manage the transition to the by the best international practice, as well as evidence new curriculum effectively, the new programmes of about the knowledge children need to deepen their study for English, mathematics, science, and physical understanding at each stage of their education. education will be introduced from 2013, with programmes of study for other subjects coming into force the The Government recognise that there are a number following year. The review will also advise on how the of important components of a broad and balanced new curriculum should be phased in for each key education for which it would be inappropriate to prescribe stage. national programmes of study. This applies, for example, in the case of religious education, where what is taught The review will be led by my department, supported needs to reflect local circumstances. Religious education by an Advisory Committee of respected and successful will not, therefore, be considered as part of the review headteachers and employer and higher education of the national curriculum. The Government do not representatives. The review will be informed by an intend to make any changes to the statutory basis for expert panel of academics who will construct an evidence religious education. base and ensure that the new curriculum is based upon Similar considerations apply to PSHE (personal, the best international practice. The review will also be social, health and economic) education. The Government shaped by the views of teachers, subject communities, recognise however that good PSHE education supports academics, employers, higher education institutions, individual young people to make safe and informed parents and other interested parties as it develops its choices but that often schools need more support and proposals. As a first step my department has today help in the way that they cover the important topics launched a call for evidence. I would invite all interested that are dealt within PSHE education, including sex parties to contribute to the review and the development and relationships education. We will therefore conduct of the new national curriculum. a separate internal review to determine how we can I have today placed a copy of the remit for the support schools to improve the quality of all PSHE national curriculum review in the Library of the House.

WA 57 Written Answers[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Answers WA 58

Lord Sassoon: The Financial Services Authority’s Written Answers (FSA) recently published policy statement “PS10/20” (www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Policy/Policy/2010/10 Thursday 20 January 2011 _20.shtml) sets out the application of the FSA’s revised Remuneration Code to firms. In particular, pages 32 to 37 set out the nature of the code’s proportionate Armed Forces: Parachute Operations application, and describes the manner and describes the kinds of firms that will be covered by the rules. Question Asked by Lord Moonie Banking: Bonuses To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the average cost of further training to qualify a soldier Questions to parachute on operations; and what is the annual Asked by Lord Myners cost of maintaining such a qualification. [HL5692] To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 13 December The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry (WA 108–9), what is their assessment of the effect of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): Ministry of Defence on bank solvency of linking the payment of bankers’ accounting systems do not hold financial data in a bonuses to levels of lending. [HL5349] format which would provide the information requested. Expenditure is not captured by activity eg parachute training. The costs of such an activity would fall The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord across a number of different accounting codes and Sassoon): Bank solvency is determined by a wide cannot readily be separated out. range of factors. Incentivising staff in relation to specific business objectives, such as lending level, could be structured in a number of different ways. The risks and returns associated with the objective will also vary Banking considerably. Therefore the impact on solvency of Questions linking payment of bonuses to levels of lending is difficult to assess, and may not be easy to isolate from Asked by Lord Myners other factors affecting solvency. To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much Asked by Lord Myners was raised, according to HM Revenue and Customs, by the bank payroll tax in 2009–10; and whether To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to they forecast to raise more or less through the bank the Statement by Lord Sassoon on 11 January on levy in 2010–11 and 2011–12. [HL5818] banking bonuses (Official Report, col. 1330), whether they intend to instruct UK Financial Investments to press for renegotiation or termination of the The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord “thoroughly inadequate contracts”in place for certain Sassoon): The net yield raised by the bank payroll tax key executives at the Royal Bank of Scotland. is estimated to be £2.3 billion, while gross receipts [HL5817] were £3.45 billion. An explanation of the methodology underlying the estimate of net yield can be found in the previous Written Answer on 24 November 2010 Lord Sassoon: On 26 November 2009 the Government (WA 337). In line with guidance from the Office for and the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) signed a full National Statistics, the yield from the bank payroll tax and legally binding agreement in respect of RBS’s was allocated to the 2010-11 tax year, as this is the participation in the asset protection scheme. point at which the tax was passed into legislation. This agreement, entered into by the previous The bank levy, a permanent tax effective from the Government, cannot be unilaterally amended, save in beginning of this year, ensures that banks make a very limited respects, by this Government, or by UK contribution in respect of the risks they pose to the Financial Investments on behalf of this Government. UK financial system and wider economy. The levy is Asked by Lord Dykes set at a full rate of 0.05 per cent for 2011, and at a full rate of 0.075 per cent thereafter. The levy is forecast to To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they yield £1.3 billion in 2010-11 and £2.3 billion in 2011-12. plan to deal with any public responses made following Once fully effective the levy is estimated to yield publication of details of senior bankers’ bonuses. around £2.5 billion of revenues each year. [HL5729] Asked by Lord Myners Lord Sassoon: The Government have been clear To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to that banks must act responsibly in setting their bonuses the answer by Lord Sassoon on 11 January (Official and continue to take robust action to tackle unacceptable Report, col. 1333), whether they will place in the bonuses. The Government are in discussion with the Library of the House the names of the 2,500 United banks to see whether a new settlement can be reached Kingdom banks covered by the Remuneration Code. whereby smaller bonuses are paid than would be paid [HL5819] otherwise and there is greater transparency in relation WA 59 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 60 to remuneration than hitherto. If the banks cannot Asked by Lord Higgins commit to such a settlement, the Government have made it clear to them that nothing is “off the table”, To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment and the Government will keep the House informed of they have made of the policy of the Remuneration all relevant policy developments. Committee of the Royal Bank of Scotland with regard to bonuses. [HL5874] Asked by Lord Laird To ask Her Majesty’s Government what were the Lord Sassoon: UK Financial Investments (UKFI) terms of the contracts in place for the award of (a) manages the Government’s shareholding in the Royal bonus payments, and (b) incentive plan benefits, in Bank of Scotland (RBS) on an arm’s length and each year of contract for (1) the chief executive commercial basis. UKFI has worked with its investee officer, (2) chairman, (3) directors, (4) senior executives, banks, including RBS, to ensure that incentives are and (5) senior managers of Lloyds, HBOS, RBS, much more strongly linked to long-term value creation. and Northern Rock banking groups in each of the More generally the Government have been clear past three years; and which provisions of those that banks must act responsibly in setting their bonuses. contracts, if any, facilitate tax avoidance. [HL5849] The Government are in discussion with the banks to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are see whether a new settlement can be reached whereby the terms contained in the contracts for the next six smaller bonuses are paid than would otherwise be years for the award of (a) bonus payments, and (b) paid, and there is greater transparency in relation to incentive plan benefits, for (1) the chief executive remuneration than previously. If the banks do not officer, (2) chairman, (3) directors, (4) senior executives, commit to such a settlement, the Government have and (5) senior managers, of Lloyds, HBOS, RBS, made clear to them that “nothing is off the table”. The and Northern Rock banking groups; and which Government will keep the House informed of all provisions of those contracts, if any, facilitate tax relevant policy developments. avoidance. [HL5850] Banking: Levy Question Asked by Lord Myners Lord Sassoon: The terms and provisions of the remuneration contracts in place for individuals who To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the were employed at Lloyds Banking Group, HBOS, the proposed bank levy is to be linked to bank bonus Royal Bank of Scotland and Northern Rock are a policies. [HL5722] matter for the individuals and the banks’ management. Quoted companies are required to produce a directors’ The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord remuneration report containing information on the Sassoon): The bank levy, effective from the beginning remuneration paid to their directors. of this year, ensures that banks make a contribution in Asked by Lord Myners respect of the risks they pose to the UK financial system and wider economy. The levy is a charge based To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether UK upon the total chargeable equity and liabilities as Financial Investments (UKFI) will be discussing reported in the relevant balance sheets of affected bonus proposals with the Remuneration Committees banks, banking and building society groups. of Lloyds Bank Group and the Royal Bank of As announced in the June 2010 Budget, working Scotland before those committees make their with international partners, the Government will explore determinations; and whether UKFI will exercise its the costs and benefits of a financial activities tax on right to vote on remuneration reports. [HL5853] profits and remuneration.

Banking: Royal Bank of Scotland Questions Lord Sassoon: The banks in which the Government are a shareholder are managed on an arm’s length Asked by Lord Myners commercial basis by UK Financial Investments (UKFI). Part of UKFI’s role is to work with the investee banks To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to to ensure that incentives are much more strongly linked the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 10 January to long-term value creation. UKFI will engage in (WA 367), whether the Financial Services Authority discussions with Lloyds Banking Group (LBG) and (FSA) has now received the necessary permissions the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) over their approach from the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and others to remuneration. for the FSA to publish a report on the collapse of UKFI will vote all the Government’s shares wherever RBS. [HL5854] they are eligible to do so. UKFI will inform the relevant bank in advance of their intentions and rationale, The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord and they will disclose on their website how they have Sassoon): The Government welcome the proposal by voted on each resolution for LBG and RBS. the Financial Services Authority (FSA) to produce a WA 61 Written Answers[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Answers WA 62 publishable report on the events that led to the failure Benefits of the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). Questions The FSA is aiming to deliver a publishable report to the Government and the Treasury Select Committee Asked by Lord Willis of Knaresborough by the end of March. In order to publish such a report, the FSA considers that it would need permission To ask Her Majesty’s Government what savings from RBS and perhaps other individuals to use are forecast from the restriction of child benefit for confidential information provided by them in the course 16-19 year-olds in (a) the United Kingdom and, of the supervisory investigations now concluded, as (b) England, to lower rate taxpayers in 2013-14 and well as those to whom the information relates. The 2014-15. [HL5370] FSA is conducting the discussions with RBS and To ask Her Majesty’s Government what forecast other parties about whether they will provide the they have made of the savings to be made by HM necessary permissions. Treasury by restricting child benefit for 16 to 19-year Asked by Lord Higgins olds to lower rate taxpayers in 2013-14 and 2014-15. [HL5714] To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many voting shares they hold directly and indirectly in The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord the Royal Bank of Scotland; and what this number Sassoon): No forecast has been made of what savings is as a percentage of the total number of shares. would be made by HM Treasury if child benefit for 16 [HL5873] to 19 year-olds were to be restricted to lower rate taxpayers in 2013-14 and 2014-15. Lord Sassoon: The previous administration acquired The Chancellor stated at the time of the Spending 39.6 billion of ordinary shares and 51.0 billion of Review that no further changes to child benefit would B shares in the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). The be required, beyond those already announced. Government currently hold 67.8 per cent of RBS’s ordinary shares and has 82.8 per cent economic ownership. British Overseas Territories Question Banks: Lending Asked by Lord Ashcroft Question To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many Asked by Lord Myners citizens of each British Overseas Territory serve in each arm of the Armed Services. [HL5408] To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 10 January The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry (WA 368), whether HM Treasury or the Department of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): The information is for Business, Innovation and Skills has made proposals not held in the format requested. However, there are to, or entered into discussions with, Lloyds Bank currently 340 members of the Armed Forces who have Group and the Royal Bank of Scotland in respect recorded their nationality on their electronic service of lending after existing lending commitments expire record as a British Overseas Territory citizen. Countries in March 2010. [HL5855] of origin for this specific group are not recorded centrally and could only be obtained through a manual The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord search of records on many sites. Sassoon): The lending commitments agreed between The following table provides a break down of citizens the Government and Lloyds Banking Group and Royal of a British Overseas Territory and to which service Bank of Scotland are in place until March 2011. they currently belong, as at 1 November 2010: The Government recognise that access to finance is essential if businesses are to invest, grow and make an Naval Service Army Royal Air Force important contribution to supporting the economic British Overseas 15 315 10 recovery. Territory Citizen In November 2010, the Government set out a Note: comprehensive package of measures to support access All figures have been rounded to nearest five. to finance for small businesses. These measures include: additional support for the enterprise finance guarantee scheme over the next four years to enable over Criminal Records Bureau £2 billion of lending to viable small businesses that Questions lack collateral or track record; and Asked by Lord Moonie increased equity finance, through £200 million of additional funding for the Enterprise Capital Funds To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans Programme. they have to make changes to the Criminal Records More information about these measures and the Bureau checking procedures to encourage greater Green Paper is available at www.bis.gov.uk/businessfinance. levels of volunteering. [HL5694] WA 63 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 64

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry Jones): The Government have commissioned a review of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): Illegal trapping of of the criminal records regime which is expected to songbirds occurs elsewhere in Cyprus and is not confined report shortly. HMG will carefully consider and respond to the sovereign base areas (SBAs). Combating it is to the outcomes and recommendations of the review. one of the key priorities for the SBA police who have a The Government remain committed to reducing the dedicated team specifically tasked with policing this barriers to volunteering. activity.They conduct daily patrols through the recognised season targeting both known offenders and concentrating Asked by Lord Moonie on known areas for this activity. Their objective is to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what safeguards prevent this criminal activity by both arresting the exist to ensure the accuracy and currency of data perpetrators and disrupting their operations by seizing held by the Criminal Records Bureau; and what and removing their equipment. They work in partnership redress exists for individuals who consider such with the Game Fund of the Republic of Cyprus information to be incorrect. [HL5695] (RoC), the Republic of Cyprus police and non-government organisations, such as Birdlife Cyprus. Baroness Neville-Jones: The Criminal Records Bureau With a view to longer term prevention, the SBA (CRB) operates a quality framework which is designed police, in association with the RoC Game Fund and to evaluate and assure the accuracy of CRB checks Birdlife Cyprus, also invest significant time on wider using performance measures and quality indicators. educational programmes designed to change attitudes The CRB Police National Computer (PNC) matching so as to reduce demand for songbirds in restaurants process is certificated to comply with ISO 9001:2008 and educate communities about the effects of illegal standard. bird trapping and wildlife trapping in general. The police deliver lectures to local schools and interest groups The CRB has achieved consistently high performance and distribute thousands of leaflets and banners to levels on its checks with 99.996 per cent of checks local communities, hunting clubs, schools and community issued accurately. A very small number of people do councils to reduce the commercial attractiveness and unfortunately receive details of criminal convictions social acceptance of this criminal activity. attributed to them which are found subsequently not to apply to them. There is a disputes process through which challenges may be made. Gulf War Illnesses Where mistakes have been made, the CRB will put Question things right as quickly as possible and the CRB operates a scheme in line with HM Treasury guidelines through Asked by Lord Morris of Manchester which customers may seek financial redress where there is evidence that the CRB did not follow its To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to procedures correctly. the Written Answer by Lord Astor of Hever on 20 December (WA 251), whether, to assist those Asked by Lord Moonie without internet access, they will provide the information about how much the Government of To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the the United States has spent on research into Gulf time limit of information held by the Criminal War illnesses in the Official Report. [HL5505] Records Bureau. [HL5696] The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry Baroness Neville-Jones: The Criminal Records Bureau of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): The Final 2010 (CRB) has access to police records and those belonging Report of the US Department of Veterans Affairs Gulf to its other data sources for the purposes of processing War Illnesses Task Force to the Secretary of Veterans CRB checks. The CRB is not responsible for the Affairs publishes a figure of $402,172,122 for the total retention of those records because the CRB does not spent on research through US Federal funding on own them; information held on the CRB’s processing Gulf veterans’ illnesses. system shows only applicant data included on a CRB certificate at the date of issue. The CRB has a data retention policy which applies Health: Cancer to corporate data held in both electronic and paper Question form. The data retention policy has been developed in accordance with data protection principles. Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick To ask Her Majesty’s Government what effect Cyprus: Sovereign Bases abolishing primary care trusts will have on cancer care. [HL5864] Question Asked by Baroness Thomas of Winchester The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): The White Paper To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS describes they are taking to prevent illegal trapping of songbirds the Government’s vision to create a more autonomous within the sovereign base area of Dhekelia, Cyprus. and accountable National Health Service. Within this [HL5728] new commissioning architecture, responsibility for most WA 65 Written Answers[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Answers WA 66 commissioning is devolved to local general practitioner The department’s National Institute for Health (GP) commissioning consortia, supported and held to Research (NIHR) welcomes applications for support account by an independent NHS Commissioning Board. into any aspect of human health. These applications Improving Outcomes: A Strategy for Cancer, published are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, on 12 January and a copy of which has already been with awards being made on the basis of the scientific placed in the Library, states that commissioning for quality of the proposals made. In all disease areas, the cancer is particularly complex, and discusses how amount of NIHR funding depends on the volume and cancer services may be commissioned in the reformed quality of scientific activity. NHS. Where the diagnosis and treatment of cancers are rare, they require specialised commissioning, which is not appropriate for GP consortia. Commissioning Health: GPs Emoluments for these cancers will be the responsibility of the NHS Questions Commissioning Board. A significant amount of cancer care is best Asked by Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe commissioned for populations covering one and a half To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they to two million. Where population size requirements will make public the details of emoluments paid to mean that a single GP consortium is too small to general practitioners for the services they provide commission a particular service, then GP consortia for the National Health Service. [HL5760] will wish to work collaboratively. GP consortia will be able to decide whether they wish to identify a lead consortium for commissioning more specialised cancer The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, services or to do so through commissioning support Department of Health (Earl Howe): Details of individual organisations. general practitioners (GPs) emoluments for the National In addition, health and wellbeing boards in every Health Service are not collected centrally. upper-tier local authority will provide a mechanism However, details on a representative sample of GPs for bringing together local NHS, public health and earnings and expenses are available within the GP social care commissioners. This could provide a forum Earnings and Expenses 2008-09 Final Report. The latest for the development of cross-cutting commissioning information was published by the Health and Social approaches to improve cancer services. Care Information Centre on 12 January 2011. The publication has been placed in the Library. Health: Diabetes Asked by Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe Question To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many general practitioners are paid emoluments in excess Asked by Lord Morris of Aberavon of the Prime Minister’s salary for the NHS services To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to they provide. [HL5761] the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 21 December (WA 291), whether they will increase expenditure Earl Howe: Details of individual general practitioners on all types of diabetes in real terms; how much (GPs) emoluments are not collected centrally. they spent in each of the past five years; and how Details of the numbers of GPs earning in excess of much they will spend in each of the next five the Prime Minister’s salary are however, available years. [HL5605] within the latest GP Earnings and Expenses 2008-09 Final Report that was published by the Health and The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Social Care Information Centre on 12 January 2011. Department of Health (Earl Howe): Departmental spend The publication has been placed in the Library. on all types of diabetes research over the past five years is contained in the following table. Health: Orthopaedics Year Spend Question 2005-06 £20.4 million 2006-07 £24.5 million Asked by Lord Black of Brentwood 2007-08 £29.3 million To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they 2008-09 Information not held centrally plan to develop the quality standard for fractures, 2009-10 Information not held centrally excluding those which occur at the head and Notes: hip. [HL5680] In previous years, information on research spend on specific areas was detailed in collated form in NHS Trust annual reports. From 2008-09 this is no longer provided. In addition, the various The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, funding stream picture is now considerably more complex. Department of Health (Earl Howe): Additional work to assess the feasibility and scope for a quality standard Regarding future spend; the Government’s recent for fractures, excluding those which occur at the head spending review confirmed that the department will and the hip, is required before it can be referred to the increase spending on health research in real terms. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence WA 67 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 68

(NICE) for quality standard development. NICE has consultation process. A copy of the consultation report been commissioned to do this work and will report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses of later in the year. Parliament. The consultation report presents a summary of the feedback submitted to the Choice for Womenconsultation. The department was conscious to take an even handed Maternal Mortality approach to ensure that the quotes included in the Questions report related to a range of key issues and captured the views expressed by both the majority and the Asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool minority. With so many responses it would not have been possible to include all the views expressed in the To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they summary report. will place in the Library of the House a copy of the The department is currently obtaining permission full submissions which were submitted to the from the individuals or organisations which made Department for International Development for all submissions to the consultation and, if obtained, will those quoted by their publication “Consultation place copies of the submissions in the Libraries of report for DfID’s Framework for Results for both Houses as soon as possible. Reproductive, Maternal and Newborn Health″. [HL5702] To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many copies of “Consultation report for DfID’s Framework NHS: Prescription Charges for Results for Reproductive, Maternal and Newborn Question Health” were (a) published and (b) distributed; to whom copies were distributed; on what basis those Asked by Baroness Thornton who submitted comments were selected for publication in the report; and what steps they are taking to To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to ensure an even-handed approach in (1) selecting the remarks by Earl Howe on 26 October (Official and (2) publishing comments submitted to them in Report, col. 1126), what timescale they have set to explore options for creating a fairer system of future reports. [HL5703] prescription charges and exemptions. [HL5604] To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will place in the Library of the House the sources of each quotation used in the “Consultation report for The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, DfID’s Framework for Results for Reproductive, Department of Health (Earl Howe): We are continuing Maternal and Newborn Health”; and whether they to explore options for reforming the current prescription will place in the Library of the House a copy of this charging arrangements, taking into account the financial consultation report. [HL5706] context. In particular, we are examining the implications To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many of the introduction of universal credit in relation to copies of Choices for Women: Planned Pregnancies, those current benefits that entitle the recipient of that Safe Births and Healthy Newborns were (a) published, benefit to free prescriptions. We are also looking at the and (b) distributed; to whom copies were distributed; implications of state pension age changes. We will and whether they will place in the Library of the make announcements about how these changes will be House a copy of the report and the distribution list, implemented in due course. indicating in each case whether copies were (1) requested, or (2) sent unsolicited by the department which produced the report. [HL5848] NHS: Surplus Land Question Baroness Verma: In line with the Government’s Asked by Baroness Thomas of Winchester intention to reduce unnecessary costs, no copies of Choices for Women: Planned Pregnancies, Safe Births To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps and Healthy Newborns: the UK’s Framework for Results they are taking to ensure that surplus or underused for improving reproductive, maternal and newborn NHS land and buildings can be used to increase the health in the developing world″ have been printed or supply of housing. [HL5727] distributed, apart from electronic copies that have been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Both the Choices for Women document and the Department of Health (Earl Howe): National Health consultation report have been made available via the Service trusts are responsible for the management and department’s website. Emails, with links to the reports disposal of land and buildings in their ownership. on the department’s website, were sent to around Guidance for NHS organisations on all land and 21,000 stakeholders, made up largely of subscribers to property transactions, including the disposal of surplus DfID’s e-bulletin (a regular e-mail update of DfID’s land and buildings, is contained in Health Building development activities), as well as to those who signed Note 00-08: Estatecode, which has already been placed up to receive updates through the Choice for Women in the Library. WA 69 Written Answers[20 JANUARY 2011] Written Answers WA 70

It will be for a purchaser and the local planning to reverse their decision not to fund travelling or authority to determine, through the town planning accommodation expenses to volunteers from outside system, the use for property that is no longer required London; and what alternative or additional steps by NHS trusts. they will take to ensure that the 70,000 volunteers reflect the make-up of the United Kingdom in North Korea terms of geography, income, gender and ethnicity. Question [HL5800] Asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their Baroness Garden of Frognal: The London Organising assessment of the level of malnutrition in North Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Korea and of winter food shortages. [HL5871] Games (LOCOG) has always been clear that it could not provide central funding for accommodation and Baroness Verma: The UK Government have not transport expenses for the up to 70,000 Games Maker conducted an independent assessment of the level of volunteers that will help to stage the Games. malnutrition and winter food shortages in North Korea. Over a quarter of a million people from communities In November a joint assessment by the World Food right across the UK have applied to LOCOG to be Programme (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Games Makers on the clear understanding that they Organization of the United Nations found that North are required to provide their own accommodation and Korea needs to import around 867,000 tonnes of transport to the Games. These applicants are now cereals between November 2010 and October 2011 to going through the recruitment process and centres feed its population adequately. The Government of across the UK will be interviewing applicants from North Korea plan to import about 325,000 tonnes, 1 February. LOCOG will provide successful Games leaving a deficit of 542,000 tonnes. Makers with refreshments during their shifts, a uniform WFP is providing foods enriched with vitamins and and—for those volunteering within London—a zone 1-6 other micronutrients to 2.5 million people in North travel card. LOCOG’s Diversity and Inclusion Strategy Korea until June 2012, 80 per cent of which are young ensures that Games Makers and its broader workforce children and pregnant and nursing women. reflect the diversity of London and the UK across six Northern Ireland: Human Rights strands, including gender and ethnicity. Commission Question Olympic Games 2012: Ministerial Asked by Lord Laird Representatives To ask Her Majesty’s Government what costs Question were incurred by the Northern Ireland Human Asked by Viscount Waverley Rights Commission in support of application no. 28326/09 against the United Kingdom by P. F. and To ask Her Majesty’s Government what provision E. F. on the Holy Cross dispute which was declared is being made for Secretaries of State and other inadmissible at the European Court of Human Ministers to be available in London during the 2012 Rights on 23 November 2010, and in earlier court Olympic Games to meet incoming foreign government hearings in the United Kingdom; and what guidance representatives. [HL5831] they provide to the commission to ensure that it is rigorous in its choice of legal cases to support. [HL5743] Baroness Garden of Frognal: Foreign government representatives attending the London 2012 Games Lord Shutt of Greetland: As set out under Sections 69 come at the invitation of their National Olympic and and 70 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, the Northern Paralympic Committees, and so will not be here Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) may on official visits. The Department for Culture, Media provide assistance to individuals and bring proceedings and Sport is working closely with the Foreign and involving law or practice relating to the protection of Commonwealth Office on arrangements and we will human rights. The commission is independent of consider any specific proposals for bilateral meetings Government and is entitled to determine what level of as part of this work. assistance it may grant in respect of legal proceedings, consistent with its statutory functions. The noble Lord may wish to write to the commission directly should he wish to pursue this matter further. Overseas Aid Question Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: Volunteers Asked by Lord Marlesford Question To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the gross public expenditure on aid to each foreign Asked by Lord Beecham country in 2009–10, in descending order of magnitude; To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they and, in each case, what was the percentage of the will make representations to the London Organising total United Kingdom aid budget expended. Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games [HL5840] WA 71 Written Answers[LORDS] Written Answers WA 72

Baroness Verma: Details of the UK’s gross public normally required to undertake a criminal records expenditure on development (GPEX) to each foreign check conducted by the Criminal Records Bureau. It country are published annually in “Statistics on is normally a matter for employers, or organisations International Development”, which is available in the using volunteers, to decide when to obtain such checks. Library of the House and on DfID’s website. Details A police force organising youth activities would be for 2009-10 are available in tables 14.1 to 14.5 of the entitled to obtain checks on volunteers working in this 2010 edition. area. Police: Cumbria Spending Review 2010 Questions Question Asked by Lord Brett Asked by Baroness Gould of Potternewton To ask Her Majesty’s Government what were the annual costs of the Cumbria Police Authority for To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to 2008, 2009 and 2010. [HL5560] the answer by Baroness Verma on 16 December (Official Report, col. 721), why the Women’s Budget To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the Group report on the impact of Spending Review forecast cost of the Cumbria Police Authority for 2010 does not accurately reflect what the Government 2011. [HL5561] is doing in respect of the impact of Spending The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- Review 2010 on women. [HL5881] Jones): The information requested is not held centrally Baroness Verma: The methodology used in the report and should be sought from the individual police authority allocates all of public spending, which we do not in question. Although the main source of funding to believe it is appropriate to do. Any analysis of this police authorities is from central government, they kind will not present the full picture because the also receive funding from other sources such as council analysis of public service spending has significant tax precept. It is up to the police authority and the analytical limitations. It values services at input costs chief constable how this funding is spent. and does not consider the value the end user places on Asked by Lord Brett the service, or how effective those services are. It To ask Her Majesty’s Government what they cannot account for efficiencies and reforms that allow forecast the cost of the police and crime commissioner the same service to be delivered for less money. It for Cumbria to be in the first year of operation. presents a static picture of spend and cannot factor [HL5562] in changes to people’s circumstances over time. And it captures which services and income groups receive Baroness Neville-Jones: As the Government set out money, but not the long term impact of those services in the impact assessment for the Police Reform and on people’s lives. Social Responsibility Bill, we forecast the running and It therefore does not fully reflect Spending Review operational costs of police and crime commissioners measures that shift the focus of support away from to be no more than that of current police authorities. welfare and towards supporting greater social mobility. Cumbria Police Authority cost £1.1 million in 2009-10 Indeed, the Women’s Budget Group itself welcomes according to their annual report. the emphasis that the coalition Government have given Asked by Lord Brett in the Spending Review to fairness and social mobility. To ask Her Majesty’s Government what they forecast the cost to be of the election of a police Sudan and crime commissioner for Cumbria in 2012. Question [HL5563] Asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark Baroness Neville-Jones: As the Government set out To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the event in the impact assessment for the Police Reform and that the Sudanese referendum on 9 January results Social Responsibility Bill, we forecast the cost of police in the formation of North and South Sudan as two and crime commissioners elections to around £50 million separate countries, what assessment they have made in 2012 across England and Wales. Estimates have of the funding commitments required to support been done on a national basis and figures are not both countries. [HL5876] available for each force area. Baroness Verma: The Department for International Police: Youth Groups Development (DfID) currently provides £140 million of bilateral support a year across north and south Question Sudan. Our future support will be determined by the Asked by Lord Fearn bilateral aid review which is currently underway.Whatever To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria the outcome of the referendum, there will continue to are applied by the police when deciding whether to be significant humanitarian and development needs in approve leaders and helpers for youth groups. both North and South Sudan during 2011-12. [HL5765] You may be interested to read the Hansard record of the oral question answered by my right honourable The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Neville- friend the Secretary of State for International Jones): Persons working regularly with children and Development on Sudan on 12 January 2011 (Official young people in either a paid or volunteer capacity are Report, col. 269). Thursday 20 January 2011

ALPHABETICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN STATEMENTS

Col. No. Col. No. Armed Forces: Allowances ...... 17 EU: Parliamentary Scrutiny...... 20 Intelligence Services Commissioner ...... 22 Benefits: Sure Start Maternity Grant...... 19 Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: Wanstead Flats ..... 22 Crime: Statistics...... 19 Schools: National Curriculum ...... 24

Thursday 20 January 2011

ALPHABETICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN ANSWERS

Col. No. Col. No. Armed Forces: Parachute Operations ...... 57 Health: GPs Emoluments ...... 66

Banking ...... 57 Health: Orthopaedics...... 66

Banking: Bonuses ...... 58 Maternal Mortality...... 67

Banking: Levy ...... 60 NHS: Prescription Charges...... 68

Banking: Royal Bank of Scotland...... 60 NHS: Surplus Land ...... 68 North Korea ...... 69 Banks: Lending...... 61 Northern Ireland: Human Rights Commission ...... 69 Benefits...... 62 Olympic and Paralympic Games 2012: Volunteers...... 69 British Overseas Territories...... 62 Olympic Games 2012: Ministerial Representatives ...... 70 Criminal Records Bureau ...... 62 Overseas Aid...... 70

Cyprus: Sovereign Bases ...... 63 Police: Cumbria ...... 71

Gulf War Illnesses ...... 64 Police: Youth Groups...... 71 Health: Cancer ...... 64 Spending Review 2010 ...... 72 Health: Diabetes ...... 65 Sudan ...... 72 NUMERICAL INDEX TO WRITTEN ANSWERS

Col. No. Col. No. [HL5349] ...... 58 [HL5605] ...... 65

[HL5370] ...... 62 [HL5680] ...... 66

[HL5408] ...... 62 [HL5692] ...... 57

[HL5505] ...... 64 [HL5694] ...... 62

[HL5560] ...... 71 [HL5695] ...... 63

[HL5561] ...... 71 [HL5696] ...... 63

[HL5562] ...... 71 [HL5702] ...... 67

[HL5563] ...... 71 [HL5703] ...... 67

[HL5604] ...... 68 [HL5706] ...... 67 Col. No. Col. No. [HL5714] ...... 62 [HL5831] ...... 70

[HL5722] ...... 60 [HL5840] ...... 70

[HL5727] ...... 68 [HL5848] ...... 67

[HL5728] ...... 63 [HL5849] ...... 59 [HL5850] ...... 59 [HL5729] ...... 58 [HL5853] ...... 59 [HL5743] ...... 69 [HL5854] ...... 60 [HL5760] ...... 66 [HL5855] ...... 61 [HL5761] ...... 66 [HL5864] ...... 64 [HL5765] ...... 71 [HL5871] ...... 69 [HL5800] ...... 70 [HL5873] ...... 61

[HL5817] ...... 58 [HL5874] ...... 60

[HL5818] ...... 57 [HL5876] ...... 72 [HL5819] ...... 57 [HL5881] ...... 72 Volume 724 Thursday No. 97 20 January 2011

CONTENTS

Thursday 20 January 2011

(Continuation of Proceedings) Wednesday, 19 January 2011 (continued) Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Committee (11th Day)(continued)...... 487

Thursday, 20 January 2011 Introductions: Lord Fink, Lord Stoneham of Droxford, Baroness Berridge ...... 527 Questions Gaza ...... 527 Disabled People: Transport...... 530 St Lucia: Hurricane Tomas...... 532 Health: Influenza Vaccination ...... 534 Business of the House Timing of Debates ...... 537 Coalition Government Debate ...... 537 Counterterrorism Statement...... 560 Coalition Government Debate (Continued)...... 565 Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2011 Motion to Approve ...... 603 Written Statements...... WS 17 Written Answers...... WA 5 7