Before we conclude this interesting debate, I thought I might add a few words. The first thing that occurs to me is that we are introducing an entirely new principle which will deprive an existing Member of your Lordships’ House of the right that he or she has acquired by Writ of Summons and under the Royal Prerogative to attend this House of Parliament. That seems to me to be a very serious departure within our own jurisdiction. I agree with the noble Lord opposite that the position of Members of the European Parliament is quite different for European constitutional reasons.
Secondly, it might be useful if I draw for a moment on my own experience as independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. I was appointed to that post when already a Member of your Lordships' House and carried on doing that job for nine-and-a-half years while a Member of your Lordships' House. I issued a self-denying ordinance that although I occasionally spoke on counterterrorism matters I never voted on them, because that seemed to me the right approach to take. But I can tell the Committee that it was of great benefit to me to be here in order to be able, sometimes rather painfully, to learn from your Lordships what they thought of my performance of my duties and of the nature of the role that I undertook—some of whom, I hasten to add, have changed their views as a result of the last general election.
I have been accused of being a busy lawyer and I am happy to plead guilty to that. There are many of us in this House who come here knowing that it is not a full-time job. I have been a Member of both Houses of Parliament. There is a huge difference between the two Houses. One of the great advantages of this House is that there are people who come here perhaps not very often but make contributions of the most inestimable value to this House’s understanding of issues under discussion. It has never been a full-time job—Heaven forfend that it should ever be. There are those who may wish to treat it as a full-time job, but that is a matter of their choice.
Clause 73 agreed.
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Carlile of Berriew
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 June 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c125-6 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:19:50 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_746331
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_746331
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_746331