My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their responses. I note what they have said and understand why they see the amendment as provocative. That, however, does not mean that there are a lot of anachronisms. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts—and, I believe, the Minister—said that it excludes both Houses of Parliament. Well, shock horror; but it is possible for an unelected House—that is, this one—to block the legislation of an elected House in Wales and to say that that is sovereign. I leave the public to decide on the justice of that argument. The noble Lord asked for an illustration; I think that that is quite a good one.
Some of the issues raised by the Minister reminded me of the problems of dominion status in times past in some countries, where sovereignty still lay in the UK but the parliaments did not have that power as the legislation was still sovereign. It is interesting to look at the New Zealand Parliament, where the second Chamber has been abolished. There is just a big void in its place and a unicameral system. The amendment probes these issues and I well understand the objections of both the government Front Bench and the Official Opposition.
Government of Wales Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Livsey of Talgarth
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 13 July 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Government of Wales Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c847-8 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:33:46 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337669
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337669
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337669