Downing Street Says » Lords Reform

Put that Patricia Hewitt had said this morning that she had favoured a fully elected House of Lords, and did the Prime Minister agree with that view, the PMOS said that as people knew, there were different views within all parties, as well as between parties. Therefore, people should not be surprised that there was a discussion going on. The important thing was that that discussion did happen, and no doubt the Prime Minister would express his view at what he regarded as an appropriate time.

Asked that if there was a fully elected second chamber, what would happen to the current Life Peers, the PMOS said that the question was at least three or four steps down the line from where we were at the moment. We needed to see what Lord Falconer came up with in terms of what his view was on the way forward.

Put that the PMOS had said that there were differences within parties about certain subjects, but they were not always expressed publicly, therefore, had the Prime Minister lost control of certain members of the Cabinet, the PMOS replied that if people went back and looked at the cuttings on this, the House of Lords was one of those subjects on which people had always expressed their own views. Therefore, the premise of the question was wrong.

Put that the PMOS had said that the Prime Minister would express his view on Lords reform when he regarded it as the appropriate time, but as he had already expressed a view on Lords reform, did that mean the view was changing, the PMOS replied that again, the journalist was trying to pre-empt in precisely the fashion the PMOS had warned against. This was an evolving debate, so people should wait and see where it got to.

Asked if there was any timetable for looking at Lords reform separately, as the review of funding would not look at it, the PMOS said that the review of funding was entirely different. In terms of Lords reform, the Lord Chancellor was looking at this matter, and it was better to see what he came up with.

Asked when an announcement on the independent figure who would judge Ministerial conflicts of interest might be, and were there any other discussions about that happening before a decision was made with other parties or members of the Cabinet, the PMOS replied that it would be entirely a matter of finding the appropriate person who had the confidence of Ministers and the wider public. An announcement would be made whenever the appropriate person was found, but we were not going to rush it.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Friday, March 17, 2006

Lords Reform

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries