International Development Strategy

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Monday 6th June 2022

(1 year, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think I began before it started flashing. The number of people over the age of 60 in the developing world is going to increase rapidly over the next few decades and they are particularly dependant on healthcare. Why are older people not mentioned at all in the international development strategy documents?

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Lord Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

I will ask the Minister to respond to that in writing, given that the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, exceeded the time of 10 minutes.

UK–EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement: Foreign Workers

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Wednesday 10th November 2021

(2 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Lord Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

The noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie of Downpatrick, is not present, so I call the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes of Cumnock.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Minister will be aware that there is some confusion arising from statements made by the Home Secretary about our adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights. Earlier, I think she said that the Government were still adhering to it. Will she confirm that there is no intention in any way to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and the Council of Europe?

Black Dog Crisis Management Company

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Monday 11th October 2021

(2 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Lord Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked and we now move to the next Question.

Liaison Committee

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Monday 1st July 2019

(4 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I beg to move the first two Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper. As many noble Lords will be aware, the House operates a rotation rule in respect of most Select Committees, which requires that any Member who has been appointed to a Select Committee for three successive Sessions may not be reappointed in the following two Sessions. The rotation rule is based on the duration of a Session being approximately 12 months. The current Session began on 21 June 2017 and has therefore lasted for 24 months so far.

In 2014 the House approved a report from the Procedure Committee which stated that, in the event of a Session lasting significantly longer than 12 months, the Committee of Selection should be asked to consider whether any ad hoc adjustments should be made to the operation of the rotation rule. Accordingly, at its most recent meeting, the Committee of Selection agreed that the rotation rule should be applied today, 1 July, in order to ensure a degree of turnover in committee membership.

As a result of the exceptional duration of the current Session, many current Select Committee members have sat on their committees for four years, which is significantly longer than the usual term length. We value their service, but it is only right that now, more than two years after the current Session began, we look to refresh the membership and allow other Members of the House the opportunity to contribute to the important work of our committees. I beg to move.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I wonder whether the Senior Deputy Speaker could help me and the House. What would happen to the rotation if there were to be a general election later this year?

--- Later in debate ---
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their various comments. To the question of the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, I have a simple answer: thankfully, that is not within my remit. It is for others to say when a general election will be.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I did not ask the Senior Deputy Speaker to say when the general election will be—heaven forbid. What I asked was: if there is a general election later this year, how does that affect the principle of rotation?

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

If the noble Lord looks at what this document says about members appointed today, on 1 July, he will see that their membership up until the next general election is not included. The rotation rule will kick in after the next general election.

Draft Registration of Overseas Entities Bill Committee

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Monday 25th February 2019

(5 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

That the Commons message of 20 February be considered and that a Committee of six Lords be appointed to join with the Committee appointed by the Commons to consider and report on the draft Registration of Overseas Entities Bill presented to both Houses on 23 July 2018 (Cm 9635) and that the Committee should report on the draft Bill by 10 May 2019;

That, as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the following members be appointed to the Committee:

Barker, B. Faulkner of Worcester, L. Faulks, L. Garnier, L. Haworth, L. St John of Bletso, L.;

That the Committee have power to agree with the Committee appointed by the Commons in the appointment of a Chairman;

That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers and records;

That the Committee have power to appoint specialist advisers;

That the Committee have leave to report from time to time;

That the Committee have power to adjourn from place to place within the United Kingdom;

That the reports of the Committee from time to time shall be printed, regardless of any adjournment of the House;

That the evidence taken by the Committee shall, if the Committee so wishes, be published; and

That the quorum of the Committee shall be two.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I want to ask the Senior Deputy Speaker a couple of questions, of which I have not given him any notice whatever—for which I apologise, but I have only just realised that this was on the Order Paper today.

The first question is this. Was this matter considered by the Liaison Committee, of which I am a member? I should know if it was, and I cannot remember it being considered by that committee. I understood that the setting up of all committees and Joint Committees of this House came through the Liaison Committee. It would be useful to know that.

The second question is rather more important. The Motion states that,

“the Committee should report on the draft Bill by 10 May 2019”.

This is the second year of a Parliament which was extended to two years in order to consider Brexit and its implications. By 10 May, we will have been sitting for two years, and there is no sign or intimation of the Prorogation of Parliament and a date for the next Queen’s Speech. No Motion has been tabled to extend Parliament for another year—which would be unprecedented. I tabled a question about prorogation, which the Leader of the House was unable to answer, last week. I do not blame her—it is beyond her control—but it would be helpful to know.

This Parliament is getting into a mess because of Brexit. We do not know what is happening—we do not even know whether there will be a vote in the other place this week that is meaningful, deliberative and decisive—and this could go on and on. To ask this committee to report by 10 May 2019 begs the question as to whether Parliament will be prorogued, how long this Parliament will last and how long this Brexit debacle will continue. I do not blame the Senior Deputy Speaker for any of the trouble—absolutely not—but, sadly, he is the poor man who has got to answer this. If he cannot answer it I will find another opportunity to raise it.

Lord Trefgarne Portrait Lord Trefgarne (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I want to raise a small technical point. I do not oppose this Motion but I notice that a quorum for this committee is only two. Is it considered that just two noble Lords, or one noble Lord and one honourable or right honourable Member of another place, is sufficient for the committee to function?

Occupational and Personal Pension Schemes (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2018

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Tuesday 15th January 2019

(5 years, 2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

The Question is that the two Motions in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe—

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thought she had moved only one Motion.

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

If the noble Lord wishes to object, he can come in when the Speaker calls the voices.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Lord is a long-standing friend but my understanding is that things have changed. It was originally planned that the two would be taken together but the Minister has moved only one. This was before the noble Lord was in the Chair.

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

To save any problems, the Minister’s Motion to move these Motions en bloc has been objected to, so the Minister should now move the first Motion on its own.

Privileges and Conduct Committee

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Monday 17th December 2018

(5 years, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

There are two issues here. There is a point about future procedure and shall deal with that. Separately, there is the Motion to approve the P&C report today, which I hope people will agree to. Those two issues are very separate.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Can the noble Lord confirm that it will be a comprehensive review and reassure the noble Lord, Lord McNally, that it will not just be a tweaking?

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Absolutely, it will be a comprehensive review. By the way, I give a general invitation to every Member here to write to us with their views on that. I look forward to an avalanche of comments in the next month or so. Looking at this issue, it will most definitely be a comprehensive review.

International Relations

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Tuesday 12th June 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I should like to fill noble Lords in on my part in this and on the reason for the Motion. The noble Lord, Lord Balfe, mentioned figures. The figures that were circulated came from the committee secretariat. The appointment Motions before the House today are all casual vacancies. In the majority of cases they follow agreement by the Committee of Selection that, in light of the longer Session length, attendance statistics for all the House’s committees, including domestic, should be circulated to the usual channels midway through the Session, and that this should inform their consideration of any changes they might want to propose to committee membership at that point. Such statistics are routinely circulated to the usual channels at the end of a Session, but, in light of the longer length of the Session, the committee considered that this would be a sensible course of action part way through the current Session. It also agreed that, where possible, the changes should be co-ordinated in order not to inconvenience the House.

I do not think it would be helpful or appropriate for me to comment on the consideration by the Whips of their committees’ membership, except to underline that, in proposing these changes, they are acting in accordance with the approach agreed by the Committee of Selection. It is of course open to all noble Lords to discuss these matters with their Whip, which I believe has been done in this case, and ultimately, if they so wish, to test the opinion of the House. The noble Lord will also know that committee membership, including the process by which members are appointed and removed from committees, is something that has come up in the review of committees that the Liaison Committee which I chair is currently undertaking.

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, both for his letter of 4 May this year and for the meeting we had last week to discuss this issue, as well as wider issues regarding the review of committees. As I mentioned to the noble Lord at that meeting, I am prepared to take that away and include it in the review of committee consultations. When we met again last week at one of the weekly drop-in sessions I hold between 12.30 pm and 1.30 pm every Tuesday, I said I would take the issue further. Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, in his appearance before the committee last week with the noble Lord, Lord Norton, made this very point, and the committee is very aware of it. With that information, I am quite happy to take this to the committee if Members feel that that is appropriate. I see someone getting up with alacrity.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am not clear, although I normally understand exactly what the noble Lord, Lord McFall, says. Is he saying he is going to take this Motion back and reconsider this appointment to the International Relations Committee? Is that going back to the committee?

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

No, I hope I have been very clear. I am taking the issue that Members have brought up into the review of committees, not this particular Motion. This has resulted from the usual channels putting this forward to me, and in those circumstances I beg to move.

Procedure

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Thursday 7th June 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the report proposes three changes to the House procedures that are designed to assist Members and the House. The first proposal introduces a procedure to allow Members to add explanatory statements to amendments to assist the House in consideration of a Bill. Explanatory statements would be allowed in Committee, on Report and at Third Reading, and should be drafted within the limit of 50 words. Further details on how explanatory statements would work are set out in the report. If agreed, this would be introduced for a trial period for selected Bills. After the trial, the committee would evaluate the result of the pilot and make a recommendation to the House on whether explanatory statements on amendments should be extended to all Bills.

Next, we make two proposals relating to arrangements for oath taking in response to concerns raised by Members. The first proposal would move oath taking on the opening day of debate on the Queen’s Speech in a new Parliament—that is, on the afternoon of the day of the Speech itself—so that it takes place at the end of business rather than at the start. This would avoid the delay to the start of business due to oath taking, which in June 2017 took 15 minutes. The proposal relates only to the day of the Queen’s Speech, and on subsequent sitting days the current arrangements would continue as usual.

Secondly, we propose that, after officeholders and Front-Bench Members have taken the oath, precedence is given to Members with a disability or impaired mobility. There would also be an expectation that, if there is a long queue, other Members will make way.

Finally, the report proposes new guidance on the criteria for assessing topicality for the topical Oral Questions ballot, and amends the criteria for Topical Questions for Short Debate so the two are aligned. The proposed new guidance is set out in the report. I hope noble Lords will support these proposed changes. I beg to move.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I support the Motion and think this is a very good report. I was at the meeting that took place and supported all the recommendations. I also commend the Senior Deputy Speaker for the way in which he conducted the meeting and for his sympathetic consideration of all the points raised.

None Portrait A noble Lord
- Hansard -

He’ll go far.

Middle Level Bill

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Wednesday 25th October 2017

(6 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

That this House do agree with the order made by the Commons set out in their message of 17 October.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I hope we can have a few moments to discuss this. I had thought that perhaps the Senior Deputy Speaker might have introduced this Motion to explain the basis of our consideration. As the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham, pointed our earlier, very often things go through on the nod—as they did in 2010 in relation to hereditary Peers—without Members realising fully what is happening. We ought to know what is happening with this Motion.

And we have plenty of time. As I understand it, the House will again rise before tea-time, for the third day running this week, because the Government are so ossified and petrified by Brexit that they are unable to do anything else. I thought that would wake some people up on the other side. There are a number of questions that I hope that the Senior Deputy Speaker will deal with.

First, this consideration today is the revival of a Bill that was considered at Second Reading on 29 March 2017 in the Commons. It was lost because of the general election. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker indicate whether this will create a precedent? I am sure that many Members of this House, including my noble friend Lord Grocott, would welcome the opportunity to revive Bills that have been lost one way or another. Revival of Bills is an unusual procedure that I had not heard of before. Are we creating a precedent?

Secondly, this was dealt with in the House of Commons under Standing Order 188B, which deals with the revival of Bills. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker explain which Standing Order we are dealing with it under? I presume that it is not the same Standing Order; it will be one for the House of Lords. No doubt the Clerk of the Parliaments will be able to advise him if I talk a little longer—

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Indeed, I could even take interventions to enable the Senior Deputy Speaker to say which Standing Order we are dealing with this under.

Thirdly and finally, I understand that in the House of Commons the Bill will be considered further under the procedure of an Opposed Bill Committee. How will we deal with it further? Will it come back to us after it has been dealt with by that committee? Will we deal with it separately or in some other way? We need to know.

With respect to this House, we ought to get explanations on Motions before this House more often from everyone—the Minister or the Senior Deputy Speaker, or whoever is proposing it. This House needs to know exactly what it is doing. We are here to carry out a purpose. We are here as working Peers and, unless we get explanations of exactly what the implications of what we are considering are, we may do as we have done before—as my noble friend Lord Grocott found out earlier—and do things without fully realising what we have done.

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

I thank the noble Lord for his questions. The noble Lord knows that my door is always open. Indeed, he has pressed that door on many occasions. I would have liked the opportunity to have discussed this with the noble Lord before.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock Portrait Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I would have liked that opportunity as well, but I got notice of this being discussed today only this morning, as we all did. I had the opportunity to read Commons Hansard for 17 October only earlier today to find out the implications. If the noble Lord is really serious about his door being open, I have a whole list—he is going to be kept very busy.

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

The noble Lord is not kidding the House, is he? He has been at my door before and we have engaged positively, and I will continue to do that.

The noble Lord asked about precedent. This is no precedent because it is a commonly used procedure.

The noble Lord asked about the Standing Order under which we would consider this, and it is Standing Order 150B of Private Standing Orders. In terms of the Opposed Bill, it will go back to the Commons and will be dealt with in the Commons as a result of that.

Given the noble Lord’s real interest, maybe I should elaborate a little on this. This Motion is a Business Motion to enable this Private Bill currently in the House of Commons to resume its progress through that House. The revival process started in the House of Commons, as the Bill has not yet reached the House of Lords. The Commons Revival Motion was moved on 5 September, in the same timeframe as those for other Private Bills being revived. Unfortunately, it was objected to by an MP who wished to debate the Motion and has been blocked ever since, pending time available for a debate. The promoters were able to obtain a slot on 17 October, 10 days or so ago, to debate the Motion and the revival Bill was then agreed to.

The noble Lord is interested in what happens next. If the House agrees this Motion, a message will be sent to the Commons, the Bill will then be reintroduced in the Commons in exactly the same form as it was at the end of the last Parliament. If the Motion is not agreed to, the Bill would not be revived and the promoters would need to deposit a new Bill in November and start from scratch if they wish to continue.

I hope that that answers the noble Lord’s questions.

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 Committee

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Wednesday 18th October 2017

(6 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I beg to move the two Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper en bloc.

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait The Senior Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I beg to move the first Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.