I can understand why my noble friend says that using this Bill to discuss or legislate for a referendum might not have seemed appropriate. However, if the amendments had not been put down all those months ago by the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, and myself, and if the pressure had not been put on the Government, does my noble friend think that we would have had two consultative documents? Does he think that we would have achieved what we have achieved today? Is there not extra advantage in putting down amendments, even though at the end of the day they may have to be withdrawn? Does it not achieve something in the end, and has something not been achieved in relation to this?
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 March 2012.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
736 c987 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:11:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_820186