Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
Lord Kilclooney Excerpts(2 years, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Kilclooney (CB)
My Lords, I am delighted to join in these tributes to Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
I am afraid that my recollections will age me. Shortly after the Second World War, I served in a guard of honour for a visit by the then Princess Elizabeth to Armagh in old Ireland. I then recall the death of King George VI and Her Majesty’s immediate return from Kenya to the United Kingdom. I then recall the wonderful Coronation service in Westminster Abbey, when I saw television for the first time in my life, albeit in black and white.
At the beginning of this century, I had lunch with Her Majesty after the Maundy Thursday service in St Patrick’s Cathedral, Armagh. As one living near the border between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, I am keen to develop respect within the island of Ireland and, especially, to encourage co-operation between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s 2011 visit to Dublin has been mentioned. It was very much a healing event in the island of Ireland, but the subject does not end there. I was especially impressed by the way she spoke some words in Irish—perhaps using more words than many members of the IRA can use. Likewise, as has been mentioned, I was impressed by her visiting the cemetery in which there are the bodies of some dead republican terrorists. One year later, I recall Her Majesty’s visit to shake hands with a former leader of the IRA in Northern Ireland, then acting as Deputy First Minister at Stormont. When she met Martin McGuinness, he said, “Your Majesty, how are you?”, to which she replied, “I am still alive.”
I must remind your Lordships that there remains unfinished work on the island of Ireland. There is still some extremism in both communities on that island. On Thursday evening, when the death of Her Majesty was announced, there was a football match on in Dublin. The crowd there celebrated her death and then sang an evil song, “Lizzie’s in a box”. That is the reality of life for some people on the island of Ireland. We must not get carried away. However, in contrast, I am glad to say that the Government of the Republic of Ireland have decided to fly the Irish flag at half-mast on all public buildings, so there has been progress on the island.
We all respect the service of Her Majesty to all parts of the United Kingdom and her strong Christian faith, but we now dedicate our loyalty to King Charles III. We trust that he will serve for many years the people of the United Kingdom—in Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland—and of the Commonwealth. God save the King.
Baroness Seccombe (Con)
My Lords, in wartime, life was grim, with sadness all around. There was no TV, but a radio, which I was told to sit and listen to for the main evening news. I know many parents tussled with whether they should send their children abroad, but many followed the example of the King and Queen and kept the family together here at home in England. I think that this devotion of the King inspired his daughter to understand the suffering of others by being among them.
As this cruel war churned on, I found great enjoyment from watching the two princesses’ activities. I joined the school Sea Rangers, although you could not live further away from the sea then I did. We learned to march, and I love marching. My earliest sight of the Queen was when she stood in an upper window as Princess Elizabeth with her sister beside her as we marched in wonder in front of Buckingham Palace. I watched the Queen as she grew into this lovely young woman we came to know and love.
The declaration that she made on her 21st birthday moved me enormously, as she dedicated her life to us and all the people of the Empire. It was made with such devotion and humility. I have often thought that she must, like any other, have had an off day, but that sense of duty always came through. She carried on and nobody was aware of how she felt.
Many years later, as I followed her ups and downs of family life, I marvelled at her strength. She and other women blazed the trail for women to hold the most senior roles in society in addition to family responsibilities.
In 2004, it was a huge honour for me to be appointed an extra Baroness-in-Waiting—a pinch-my-skin moment as I drove into Buckingham Palace. Having an audience with Her Majesty was such a privilege. She immediately put me at ease as we chatted and, to my amazement, I suddenly said, “Ma’am, may I share a secret with you?”. “Oh, yes please”, she said, “I love secrets.” And there it will remain between us. As the time came to an end, she wished me well and said that she hoped I would not spend too much time waiting for planes to arrive and depart.
I loved every trip I made to airports to welcome and see departing Heads of State on her behalf, and I shall always be grateful for the opportunity I had. Without fail, the visitors said that the time they were to spend or had spent with the Queen would be or had been the highlight of their visit.
These final months without the support of her dear husband, His Royal Highness Prince Philip, must have been more onerous and lonelier as she continued her busy schedule, having recovered from Covid. She has, throughout my life, been there with her dazzling smile, so much loved and respected throughout the world. She prepared us for her eldest son to become Charles III, and I am sure she would approve of us giving him a hearty welcome. God save the King!
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
Lord Kilclooney Excerpts(13 years, 10 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Kilclooney
My Lords, I express my support for this amendment. The three nations within the union that will be most severely hit by this legislation are Wales in particular, Northern Ireland secondly and Scotland. I fully understand the sentiments expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Kinnock. They reflect my own feelings in Northern Ireland. The voices of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are already overwhelmingly outnumbered in the other place, but they will be even more overwhelmingly outnumbered if this legislation goes through, which will cause considerable resentment and misunderstanding. I am sorry to say that I fear that it is a decision that, if taken by the majority who come from England, will damage the United Kingdom.
When we were involved in the discussions on the future of Northern Ireland, we were always told that the majority should be magnanimous to the minority. Here is an occasion where the Conservative and Liberal Democrat majority should be magnanimous to the minorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Lord Wallace of Tankerness
My Lords, it has been evident from the good debate that we have had that this group of amendments looks at the allocation of seats to nations. Indeed, the amendment moved by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, could apply to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, although until the previous contribution from the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, we focused, understandably, on Wales. From the outset, I should say that I recognise the passion with which these arguments have been put. Amendment 25ZB seeks to ensure that the allocation of seats to any part of the United Kingdom will be within 10 per cent of the current allocation. It provides for an additional allocation of seats, if the Sainte-Lague process set out in rule 9 results in an allocation that reduces the number of seats by more than 10 per cent of the current allocation.
In spite of its name, the process nevertheless recognises the fairest way to allocate seats. The British Academy report explicitly refers to it as such. It is the method that the Electoral Commission uses to allocate seats to European parliamentary regions, and the Government believe that it is the right method to use in allocating seats to parts of the United Kingdom. For those reasons, we have written it into rule 9, so that it will apply in this case.
The proposed amendment would undermine this fairness by putting an artificial floor on the process. The proposed top-up of seats would tamper with the balance struck by the Sainte-Lague method of allocating seats between the constituent parts of the United Kingdom. We do not believe that it can be right to change the result derived from a system recognised, as the British Academy report described it, as,
“the fairest way of making such allocations”.
In practical terms, the amendment would create a reduction in stages for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. When the secretaries of the Boundary Commissions were giving evidence to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, their clear advice was that there were advantages in making the reduction in one go. The Government consider that one reducing review would be less disruptive to constituents and Members in the other place than the continuing reductions that this amendment would introduce. I think that I have calculated properly that, under the amendment, in 2015, Wales would move from 30 to 36 and, in 2020, from 36 to 32. Only in 2025 would it would reach the level that would put it on an equal basis with other parts of the United Kingdom.
I reassure noble Lords that we are not proposing less representation for Wales than for other parts of the United Kingdom. This Bill provides that the value of a vote in Wales will be the same as the value of a vote in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, within a 10 per cent range of tolerance. I do not see how that can be doubted. It is not like putting the Welsh team on to the field at Murrayfield next Saturday with three men less, as the noble Lord, Lord Morgan, suggests. It would be putting them on the field with three men more, if the amendment was agreed. The provisions are fair to the voters in the constituent parts of the union. Of course, there will be a reduction in the number of constituencies in Wales, as in the rest of the UK, but overall the proportion of Welsh seats in Westminster will go from 6 per cent to 5 per cent.
The Government believe that the system proposed in the Bill, whereby seats are allocated to constituent nations in a well recognised and fair process, giving electors equal value across the United Kingdom, is the best way of bringing about fairness in all parts of the United Kingdom.
Amendment 30, introduced by the noble Lord, Lord Touhig, and spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Swansea, would make any boundary change in Wales contingent on the National Assembly for Wales gaining enhanced legislative powers in the referendum held on 3 March. The amendment leaves open the possibility that a key objective of this Bill would not be achieved. Every elector's vote in elections to the other place would not have the same value if this amendment was agreed. As I said about the amendment from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, we are not proposing less representation for Wales. The value of a vote in Wales will be the same as the value of a vote in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, within a 10 per cent range of tolerance. I cannot see where the unfairness is to electors in Wales.