What I do recognise is that in my lifetime the entitlement to vote has changed considerably. There was, for example, a multiple vote. My father cast two votes for parliamentary elections in different constituencies and that was perfectly legal. I am conscious that that change in the law did not come about as a result of a high-powered discussion led by a judge. We know the opinion of judges. We have heard from former judges in this debate. The noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, gave us his view. What is there to suggest that a judge sitting on a committee comprising partisan people drawn from both Chambers will come up with any different view from that of the elected House of Commons, backed or not backed by this Chamber? It is a chimerical view that we could have a consensus on this set of propositions. It is a method of delaying decision, and constitutional reform requires decision.
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Maclennan of Rogart
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 January 2011.
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 c1212-3 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 19:37:49 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_698327
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_698327
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_698327