Desmond Swayne debates involving the Cabinet Office during the 2024 Parliament

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Desmond Swayne Excerpts
Shaun Davies Portrait Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a delight to speak in this debate. I first wish to praise one of my predecessors, Lord Bruce Grocott. Since the 1999 compromise, he has tried his best to achieve the step-by-step constitutional change that the shadow Minister mentioned, by abolishing the by-election for the hereditary peers. That was the first step Lord Grocott suggested.

Desmond Swayne Portrait Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
- Hansard - -

At least those peers were elected by someone, unlike all the other placemen.

Shaun Davies Portrait Shaun Davies
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

If the right hon. Gentleman is patient, I will come on to the farce of the by-elections that have taken place for the hereditary peers.

For me, Lord Grocott epitomises what is great about the House of Lords—somebody with experience, a contribution to make to our national life, and who was appointed by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to the other place. As we have heard from the Opposition, hereditary peers do make valuable contributions in the House of Lords, and nothing would stop those people being selected by the Leader of the Opposition or the Prime Minister to go back to the House of Lords, should that be their wish.

--- Later in debate ---
Ellie Reeves Portrait Ellie Reeves
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

There is lots of talk of reform from Opposition Members. They had 14 years, but chose not to do it.

Desmond Swayne Portrait Sir Desmond Swayne
- Hansard - -

The Conservative Government introduced a comprehensive Bill involving the election of peers. I was the Prime Minister’s Parliamentary Private Secretary at the time. It failed—notwithstanding the fact that I thought it was awful—because Labour withdrew its support for the timetable motion, which meant, as a constitutional Bill, it would have taken the Government’s entire timetable. For that reason, the Government withdrew the measure.

Ellie Reeves Portrait Ellie Reeves
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That was four Governments ago. It failed due to the timetabling motion and the fact that the Conservatives could not get agreement even within their own party.

There have been, and are, hereditary peers who have made real and lasting contributions to public life. However, this is a matter of principle. It is not right that anyone should be able to take up a seat in our legislature and vote on our laws purely by virtue of the family that they were born into. Instead, this Government are committed to a smaller second Chamber that better reflects the country it serves. This Bill brings us a step closer to achieving that aim.

NATO and European Political Community Meetings

Desmond Swayne Excerpts
Monday 22nd July 2024

(3 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Keir Starmer Portrait The Prime Minister
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Let me start by joining in that, and making it clear that this work, done in so many communities, is really important, in terms of the support given and the welcome shown to refugees.

The point about “NATO first” is important. As I say, we are proud to have been among the founding members of NATO, and the review that we have put in place has framework principles, one of which is “NATO first”. That will inform the way in which we conduct the strategic review.

Desmond Swayne Portrait Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Why do we continue to limit Ukraine’s ability to take the fight to Russia?

Keir Starmer Portrait The Prime Minister
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The approach to capability taken by the UK remains the same as it was three weeks ago— no different decisions have been taken—and is based on the principle of recognising Ukraine’s right to self-defence and the parameters of international law. I think that is right, and that is why no new decisions have been taken.