My Lords, I wonder if the Minister could help. I know that these are consequential amendments relating to the third trigger, which was added during the course of the Bill. It seems to me—though I am not a lawyer—to present a considerable anomaly, which is that a particular offence in relation to parliamentary expenses where there is a guilty verdict and a fine in a court results in a by-election, while any other offence—which lots of people might consider to be more serious—results only in a fine. I do not know about the law, but that might include, perhaps, sexual harassment, defrauding the public purse in some respect other than parliamentary expenses, drink-driving or something of that sort. Surely, in the operation of the law—I am looking desperately around, hoping that a lawyer might help me—it is bizarre if there is a more severe penalty for a lesser offence. That seems to be the case with this group of admittedly consequential amendments.
Recall of MPs Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Grocott
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 January 2015.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Recall of MPs Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
758 c795 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-04 15:44:24 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-14/15011450000125
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-14/15011450000125
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-01-14/15011450000125