My Lords, it is extremely helpful of the Leader of the House to set out the position so clearly, and it is what I have always understood it to be. May I make one practical point? The amendment comes back from the other place, privilege having been claimed. The convention is that one does not send back an amendment which is likely to invite the same response. The trouble is that the simple point which is made when they claim privilege is ““We can’t afford it””, and one might send back an amendment which costs somewhat less. We do not know whether they ““can’t afford it”” to the extent that such an amendment would be acceptable. Therefore, it may be quite reasonable for this House, if it gets back an amendment that has been rejected on grounds of financial privilege, which effectively says that we cannot afford it, to send an amendment back that would cost less than the one that was originally proposed.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Higgins
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 February 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
735 c689-90 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:40:47 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_809662
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_809662
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_809662