I do not want to rehearse again the events of October. When the noble Baroness has had an opportunity to study the report carefully, she will see that it refers to delay. My noble friend Lord Strathclyde recommends Option 3, and in it he sets out his argument about why delay should not feature as part of his recommendation. That will be something which we will no doubt debate further when we have the debate in January, which I have already committed to.
House of Lords: Strathclyde Review
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Stowell of Beeston
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 17 December 2015.
It occurred during Ministerial statement on House of Lords: Strathclyde Review.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
767 c2201 
Session
2015-16
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2020-01-29 14:35:04 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-12-17/15121733000129
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-12-17/15121733000129
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-12-17/15121733000129