Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill (Money) (No. 3)

If it were a cynical ploy, which it is not—[Interruption.] I could understand that argument if we were seeking to introduce this change without any referendum of the British people. The hon. Gentleman is a leading proponent of referendums, and I have sat in this House time and again listening to him. On any basis, how we elect our Members of Parliament is a rather more important matter—or, in his view, an even more important matter—than whether we are subject to the Lisbon treaty. What we are proposing—this is all that we are proposing—is to provide for the money so that there can be a referendum over the next 20 months, so that not this House, nor any so-called deal, but the British people, in the secrecy of the ballot booth, determine what system, between first past the post and the alternative vote, will apply. I cannot for the life of me see why the Conservatives do not have the courage of their convictions to be ready to argue in favour of first past the post—as many Labour Members may well do—before the British people in a properly established and regulated referendum. Question put. The House divided: Ayes 357, Noes 180.