I entirely agree with my hon. Friend's comments. One problem sometimes cited in relation to a democratic system such as ours is the tendency for Governments to take the short-term approach to fixing problems. If five years became the norm, that would help to create slightly more stable government, because Governments could look to the longer term when considering some of the difficult decisions that they might have to make, and not always be worried that they were only a few years from a general election.
It seems that five-year Parliaments are not a problem for Labour Members when it is their party that is clinging to power in the dying days of a Government, as was the case in 2009 and 2010. True to form, their principles changed the moment they found themselves in opposition. Now, sadly, they stand as obstacles to reform.
May I conclude the point about whether the term should be four years or five, and move on with my speech?
Fixed-term Parliaments Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Daniel Byles
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 18 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Fixed-term Parliaments Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
521 c758 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:27:56 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_701953