My Lords, we have the same release. As I have said, I quoted from it because if it is in the Scotsman it must be true. In the headline of the release he states that Scots vote not to vote on English laws. He then goes on to say that he would like a bigger consideration of the issue—I accept that—but the point I am making is that many Liberal Democrats agree with this policy and many English Liberal Democrat MPs agree with it.
The noble Lord, Lord Elder, raised the question of anomalies. He said that there were many anomalies in our constitutional set up; let us live with anomalies. My Bill addresses an anomaly—the problem of two-tier MPs. There are two-tier MPs now. The Lord Chancellor asked, ““Do we want to have two-tier MPs?”” If he went down to the lower House occasionally he would know that there are two-tier MPs. English MPs can vote on English matters concerning their constituents. Scottish and Welsh MPs cannot vote on matters affecting their constituents. That is a separation of powers. It cannot be gainsaid that there are two classes of MPs. The words mean what they mean, not what Humpty Dumpty wants them to mean. There are two classes of MPs; they exist. It is no good the Chief Whip shrugging. He was an English MP. If he was in opposition and a Conservative government were putting legislation through, he would be absolutely the first to support my Bill.
Then we had the farrago about two-tier Lords. This is another wonderful invention of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor, because he has no answer to the question. He says that basically, this is not a problem. My Lords, it is. Noble Lords may think that this is partisan and I am being enthusiastic, but I beg your Lordships to realise that this problem has to be addressed. In the days when Tam Dalyell called it the West Lothian question, it was a surrogate for opposition to devolution. It is no longer a surrogate. I am a supporter of devolution because I believe that that is the way we hold our country together. It is the only way. As Gladstone said:"““Subject to this governing principle, every grant to portions of the country of enlarged powers for the management of their own affairs is, in my view, not a source of danger but a means of averting it. It is in the nature of a new guarantee for increased cohesion, happiness and strength””."
If the Government decide to do nothing about this, they will be promoting an English backlash. I assure your Lordships that I am not trying to provoke that. I am trying seriously to address this constitutional matter and I very much hope that your Lordships will consider it in that way.
I welcome the support of my noble friend Lord MacGregor and was glad to know that he was the midwife to the West Lothian question. This is not a subject that Tories have come to late in the day. I accept that there has always been a large number of Tories opposed to devolution. There was always a small but eloquent number in favour. That is where the party stands.
When I was Home Secretary, I was the last Secretary of State to establish a royal commission. It was on the criminal justice system and it worked very well, coming up with sensible proposals that have been implemented. But the process takes a very long time. The history of royal commissions on the constitution is not encouraging; they take a very long time, they usually have a vast number of minority reports and, as far as I know, no proposals made by a royal commission on the constitution have ever been implemented. I am not entirely sure that that is the best route, which is why I suspect that the noble and learned Lord did not suggest it.
The noble Lord, Lord Howarth, has had the rather unique distinction of being an English MP for one party and a Welsh MP for another—he has had a bifurcated role. When he was the Member of Parliament for Newport, West—
Parliament (Participation of Members of the House of Commons) Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Baker of Dorking
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Friday, 10 February 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Parliament (Participation of Members of the House of Commons) Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c953-5 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:56:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_300153
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_300153
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_300153