I hope that that is now clear. There is a lot of money to be made by lawyers one way or another in challenging this. Certainly, it looks strange to me.
I have a couple of things to say in relation to the debate on the amendment in the few minutes that we have left. The noble Lord, Lord Hamilton, made a powerful point when he said that an extensive debate on the referendum was needed. Someone said in a previous debate that this great debate needed its own space, unsullied by local and Scottish elections. My noble friend Lord Lipsey spoke as usual with eloquence and grace, although I disagreed with much of what he said. One thing that I did agree with was his questioning of the idea that this was a simple Bill. It is not a simple Bill. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, described it as aiming for fair votes and fair boundaries. The noble Lords, Lord Strathclyde and Lord McNally, and now the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, have clearly been given a remit from Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron to get this Bill through at all costs. They have been told, ““Put your heads down and don’t worry about the arguments. If points are made by the other side, don’t worry too much about answering them. Just get it through””. That is what they are trying to do. As I said in a previous debate, this is the Clegg project and it must be got through.
The noble Baroness, Lady Royall, asked an important Question at Question Time today about holding the Executive to account. This Chamber of Parliament should have some respect for holding the Executive to account, and the Executive should have some respect for debates and votes that take place in this Chamber. The questions that have been raised have been ignored. They are sincere and important questions, which are not being answered from the Dispatch Box. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace, did a much better job of answering the questions today than he has done previously. I understand that the questions concern the technicalities of the poll. However, when I moved my amendment, I, too, dealt with the technicalities of the poll and said that there would be great confusion because of the two franchises taking place. Because of the technical argument of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace, and because of his plea to me to withdraw the amendment, I will do so, on the basis that it would be much better for all of us if we struck out Clause 4.
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 December 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
723 c511-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:00:57 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693551
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693551
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693551