Mr Bowen Wells: Indeed. That is why I support the amendment. We are talking about quality, respect and credibility, and about the ability of the House of Lords to constitute a second Chamber of some merit. If the temporary Chamber is not of some merit, it will fall into disrepute, will soon be thought useless, and will therefore disappear. The last temporary arrangements for the House of Lords have lasted...
Mr Bowen Wells: I was hoping that, during my remarks, you would not feel impelled, Mr. Martin, to rebuke me for not keeping the debate closely related to the amendment. If I may demonstrate, it is important to consider what the temporary Chamber with the hereditary peers in it is likely to be like and how long it is likely to last.
Mr Bowen Wells: If I am not mistaken, the amendment talks about including Members of the House of Lords without the capacity to vote, but with the capacity to speak in the Chamber that the Bill sets up. Therefore, we need to talk about the totality of its make-up and whether it will work as a temporary Chamber, for however long "temporary" may be. It has been undefined in the Bill. It remains undefined by...
Mr Bowen Wells: I am sure that you would agree, Mr. Martin, that the Salisbury convention was so named because it was proposed and advocated by a hereditary peer.
Mr Bowen Wells: Let me bring myself directly to order. We want hereditary Members of the House of Lords to remain to speak—not to vote, but to speak; that is what the amendment is about. It is that body of peers, the hereditary peers, that will respect the Salisbury convention. I will leave the matter by making the following point if you do not wish me to go on and develop that point still further, Mr....
Mr Bowen Wells: Filibustering is a time-honoured convention of this House. I know that those who fill the Chair do not agree with that time-honoured convention and seek to prevent any such thing from taking place, but it is a useful democratic tool in a debating Chamber such as this—an elected one—as it is in the House of Lords. Therefore, hereditary peers would assist the process of delay. As you will...
Mr Bowen Wells: As you will expect, Mr. Martin, I am anxious to stay in order so that you will not have to make a ruling. I want to ensure that you agree that we are discussing an amendment that will permit hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords until such time as the temporary Chamber is abolished and a new Chamber is introduced. I trust that discussion of the way in which the Chamber will work will...
Mr Bowen Wells: I must ask my hon. Friend about the difference between noblesse oblige and droit de seigneur: I understand that there is a difference. In any event, hereditary peers have given long service to the House of Lords, as have their parents before them, and that service is still important. I suggest that their background is irrelevant. It does not matter whether they are descended from the lady who...
Mr Bowen Wells: I should love to.
Mr Bowen Wells: If the hon. Gentleman takes 11 from 99, he will find that it is 88. In 1911, the House of Lords, in its present form, was thought to be a temporary measure.
Mr Bowen Wells: Is not another feature of hereditary peers that they have not been selected by the political party to which they belong? Indeed, they may not belong to any political party. Therefore, they give a view that is not whipped, corralled or bullied, and what they say in Committees, such as the European Communities Committee, has greater credibility and acceptability to many of the readers of the...
Mr Bowen Wells: The hon. Gentleman's constituents decided that.
Mr Bowen Wells: Is not the hon. Gentleman overlooking a very important point? The amendment is an attempt to improve the interim House which may, like many things in British life, be far from temporary or interim. It may be almost permanent and last 50, 60 or 70 years. Therefore, it is important to have the quality in the interim House to carry us through, if needs be.
Mr Bowen Wells: I, too, sincerely congratulate the hon. Member for Keighley (Mrs. Cryer) on bringing before the House all the important issues affecting women that have been raised today, in particular the question of forced arranged marriages and their consequences on social life in Britain. I, too, have heard allegations of female genital mutilation being carried out in Britain, and the Select Committee...
Mr Bowen Wells: That is an excellent suggestion. I was about to say that this should be the concern of not only women, but men and women. Evidence given to the International Development Committee suggests that the law is not necessarily the way in which to stop such practices. A law against such practices is in place in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, all of which have signed up to the Peking action...
Mr Bowen Wells: I thank the Secretary of State for the reception that she has given the International Development Committee's report on the future of the EC development budget. What are the chances of having a single EU Commissioner in charge of overseas development, and of making the aid more efficient and delivering it to where it should go—the poorest of the poor in the third world?
Mr Bowen Wells: I am sorry that the hon. and learned Gentleman thought that my adherence to unicameralism was not as full-hearted as his clearly is. The difference between us is simply that I do not believe—as I said yesterday—that any proposal that comes from the Committee, which he so accurately described, meaning that power is transferred from this Chamber to whatever ersatz assembly we establish,...
Mr Bowen Wells: As the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) said, the problem that we face is the overweening power of the Executive. It is to the reform of both Houses that we should address ourselves, and not merely to a minor reform of the House of Lords. The power of the Executive that the House has to endure is far too great—Labour Members are enduring it now, as Members on the Conservative...
Mr Bowen Wells: I cannot speak for my party—I am not the spokesman on these issues—but I shall give the hon. Gentleman a direct answer. I agree with the statement in clause 1. I do not believe that membership of the upper House should be based on hereditary principles. In all his questions, the hon. Gentleman has failed to distinguish the difference between supporting the hereditary principle and...
Mr Bowen Wells: No, I want to keep to Mr. Deputy Speaker's time limit, so I cannot take the hon. Lady's intervention. If we abolished the second Chamber completely, we would have the simplest solution of all; but it would require major reform of our proceedings in the House of Commons. Indeed, part of this process will involve reform of the House of Commons in any event. I shall be referring to some of the...
