(12 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberI have some sympathy for the Deputy Prime Minister, because in our parliamentary history there are constitutional moments, but this is not one of them. I do believe, though, that the Liberal Democrats will be able to get House of Lords reform through when they go into the Lobby with the majority Labour Government after the next election. In the meantime, is it really a good use of public money—taxpayers’ money—to keep this extraordinary boundary change operation going? He has a duty of care to the taxpayer. He should finish it now.
I find it almost touching that the right hon. Gentleman thinks that his party has any credibility whatsoever left on political reform. Labour did not introduce democracy in the House of Lords during 13 years. An opportunity was delivered to the Labour party on a silver platter—[Interruption.] I am perfectly calm, but I am seeking to make myself heard, because I am not sure whether the right hon. Gentleman is listening. Given that the Labour party did not reform the bastion of privilege and patronage at the other end of the corridor—that it did nothing in 13 years to introduce democracy into the House of Lords—why on earth does he think that anyone believes that it will do so in the future?
(14 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberWill the Deputy Prime Minister clarify one technical point? Do the Government propose a compulsory alternative vote as in Australia where electors have to give a vote for every candidate, or a liberal one whereby they can vote for just one candidate?
In the Bill, as the right hon. Gentleman will see, we propose an optional preferential alternative vote system: the one used in New South Wales for state elections, not the one used at federal level in Australia.