Debates between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Cormack during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Conduct

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Cormack
Tuesday 6th July 2021

(3 years, 4 months ago)

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

The question is that this Motion be agreed to. I will call the following to speak: noble Lords, Lord Cormack, Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale and Lord Foulkes of Cumnock. I first call the noble Lord, Lord Cormack.

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

My Lords, this debate is technically open-ended, but I have no intention of trespassing on your Lordships’ House. It says on the Order Paper that it is expected to be brief, and I do not wish to delay it unduly.

Many of the things within this report effectively stem from the Bill, now an Act of Parliament, introduced by the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, some few years ago. It was a Bill promoted by the campaign for an effective second Chamber, of which I have the honour to be chairman, but I am disappointed that this opportunity to amend the code of conduct did not extend to the compulsory classes on behaviour. We have debated these things a number of times recently, not least the very unhappy outcome when the noble Baroness, Lady Boothroyd, and the noble Lord, Lord Heseltine, and others were, I believe, very unfairly castigated. That statement met with widespread approval throughout your Lordships’ House. It is a pity that they remain compulsory. They are not compulsory in the other place. Will the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mance, say whether he has undertaken this course and whether his experience was as disappointing as mine and many others?

Procedure and Privileges Committee

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Cormack
Monday 15th March 2021

(3 years, 8 months ago)

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

My Lords, I beg to move that the seventh report from the Procedure and Privileges Committee be agreed to. The report concerns two issues which the committee agreed to put to the House following its meeting on 2 March. The first is Private Members’ Bills ballots at the beginning of a Session, where we suggest a more streamlined approach which focuses resources better on the preparation of the Bills which are most likely to be considered in the House. The second is to extend what are currently Oral Questions for Secretaries of State sitting in the Lords to include departmental Ministers sitting in the Lords who are full members of the Cabinet. This extension would enable the House to question regularly the noble Lord, Lord Frost, on his ministerial portfolio, following his appointment as a full member of the Cabinet at the beginning of this month. Should the House agree to the Motion before it, it is envisaged that the first such Question Time would take place on Thursday 25 March, and a ballot for questions to be taken that day has been opened today in the Table Office. I beg to move.

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

My Lords, I have just one question. I must declare an interest: I have a Private Member’s Bill, the referendums Bill, which is first in the queue for consideration dating from the last ballot. Of course, we have not been able to have debates on any of those Bills because of the striking of Covid a year ago. Can the Senior Deputy Speaker tell the House whether the intention is to roll over the ballot that has not been fulfilled from last year or whether there is going to be a new ballot at the beginning of the next parliamentary Session?

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

I thank the noble Lord for the question. My information at present is that there will be no rollover; there will be a new ballot, but I will confirm that to the noble Lord in writing.

House of Lords: Size

Debate between Lord McFall of Alcluith and Lord Cormack
Thursday 28th January 2021

(3 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait Lord McFall of Alcluith [V]
- Hansard - -

Under the Life Peerages Act, Her Majesty has the power to confer a peerage for life, and that peerage entitles the holder

“to receive writs of summons to attend the House of Lords and sit and vote therein accordingly”.

The committee of the House does not have any say over that issue. So, in terms of the hereditary Peers’ by-elections, the Procedure Committee met earlier this week and we have deferred the by-elections for a further period. Information on that will be forthcoming soon for the entire House.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con) [V]
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Senior Deputy Speaker will know that the House has given its wholehearted approval to the Burns committee’s recommendations. Does he not believe that, following the creation of a large number of new Peers, all of whom either have been or will be welcomed to your Lordships’ House, it would be appropriate for the noble Lord, Lord Burns, and his committee to be asked to consider further what non-legislative steps could be taken to address the size of the House?

Lord McFall of Alcluith Portrait Lord McFall of Alcluith [V]
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that question. Again, this is a matter for the Government, and I know that the Leader of the House and the Chief Whip will be listening to this. I will certainly arrange for that to be noted and brought to the attention of the Procedure Committee—it is a very positive suggestion.