Skip to main content

1-20 of 21 results for subject:Elections

Legislation X
Scottish Parliament (Candidates) Bill (HL) 2005-06
Subject X
Electoral systems

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

More
Scottish Parliament (Candidates) Bill (HL) 2005-06 (21)

Subject

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

My Lords, I shall be brief in reply because I know that the noble Lord, Lord Laird, has a very important Bill in relation to Northern Ireland, which needs proper consideration. I also thank my noble friend Lord Evans for his usual unfailing courtesy, to me personally, in discussions in the run-up to the debate...

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c504-5
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I commend the alacrity and enthusiasm of my noble friend Lord Foulkes of Cumnock in his determination to debate matters arising from the Arbuthnott commission report. This is the second time I have paid him that compliment in a very short period. This is the fifth parliamentary occasion so far since...

Member
Lord Evans of Temple Guiting (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c501-4
House
House of Lords

My Lords, as usual, my noble friend has made an extremely good point, which no doubt the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, will wish to take up when he replies. It also flies against what the Minister told us in 1998—that there would be no fundamental difference between list MSPs and those directly...

Member
Lord Strathclyde (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c500-1
House
House of Lords

My Lords, it is Friday afternoon, so we must be dealing with a Scottish Bill. I must say to the Government that it would be better if we timetabled some of these debates at peak viewing times; we would get far greater interest. These are good debates, which I am enjoying—so far....

Member
Lord Strathclyde (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c498-500
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I was inevitably reminded of the atmosphere that used to be engendered in the Scottish Grand Committee, rather than that of your Lordships’ House, by the naked partisanship of the approach that the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, took when he rose to his feet. It was interesting to hear what...

Member
Lord Maclennan of Rogart (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c496-8
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for assisting me in my defence of the United Kingdom Government. The noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, now seeks to choose the bits of the devolution Act that he likes. From my perspective, the whole impetus behind the devolution project was to enshrine a...

Member
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c495-6
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I apologise for interrupting my noble friend, but did he notice that the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, described the list members as party representatives, not as Members who are elected to serve the people who voted for them? If they are party representatives, surely the taxpayer should not be providing...

Member
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c500
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. Perhaps I may say as a preamble that I speak as a committed devolutionist unlike some of those on the Conservative Benches but like my noble friend Lord Maclennan of Rogart. I speak as a campaigner for the Scottish Parliament...

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c487-90
House
House of Lords

My Lords, with the phrase ““got in by the back door”” is the noble Lord arguing that there are two classes of MSPs? I thought that the late Donald Dewar argued that they both had equal status. It is a highly pejorative way of describing people who have been elected under the...

Member
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c490
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am just coming to that. I said that the rules were decided by my party; I conceded that point. That is no reason why we should not look at changing them. I will come on to the fact that, as Donald Dewar said in the quotation, constituency MSPs and list MSPs...

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c490
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am sorry to interrupt the noble Lord, but this is an important point. He said that the problem is list Members opening up constituency offices. The way I read the Bill, if it were passed that would still be totally possible. I do not understand how the Bill solves the...

Member
Lord Strathclyde (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c490
House
House of Lords

Yes, my Lords, but not in the same way as we have under the first-past-the-post system. Why is nearly everyone now in favour of PR? Let us take Scotland’s general election results in 2001. Labour polled 43.9 per cent of the votes but won 55 of the 72 seats. Surely even the noble Lord, who is...

Member
Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c492-3
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am sorry to intervene. Surely, in a single transferable vote system, although three members may be elected equally—I agree that they are of equal status—to represent three seats, under that system there will be candidates who will not get elected. They will be the losers.

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c491-2
House
House of Lords

My Lords, as a Welshman I venture into very dangerous territory. In doing so, we know that the Government of Wales Bill will be before us before long. The noble Lord, in proposing his Bill today, said that part of the Government’s recommendation is the end of dual candidatures. I am delighted...

Member
Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c491
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I would argue that it would be less likely. Let me explain. I know that the noble Lord used to be a constituent of mine. I have great respect for him. I suspect that he did not vote for me. But he will know that what is happening is that Phil Gallie and...

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c490-1
House
House of Lords

: My Lords, I shall long remember this debate, if for no other reason than hearing the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, describe the Scotland Act as a ““chancers’ charter””—I opposed the Scotland Act but not even I would use such extreme language—and the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, trying to blame the United Kingdom...

Member
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c495
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I too am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes of Cumnock, for laying before the House this admirably brief Bill and, in so doing, allowing us to debate some of the possible remedies to the apparent difficulties of the additional member system as legislated for in the Scottish Parliament....

Member
Earl of Mar and Kellie (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c493-5
House
House of Lords

My Lords, my point was that the Scottish Parliament project was commissioned by the United Kingdom Government before the Scottish Parliament sat.

Member
Earl of Mar and Kellie (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c495
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I was describing the aspect of the Scotland Act that I am seeking to change as a chancers’ charter, not the whole Act.

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c495
House
House of Lords

Scottish Parliament (Candidates) Bill (HL). Lords second reading debate. Agreed to on question and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Lead member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Answering member
Lord Evans of Temple Guiting
Department
Scotland Office
Type
Debates on bills
Date
3 March 2006
Reference
679 c487-505
House
House of Lords