Passage of the Lords
The House of Lords (Amendment) Bill had a nearly uneventful passage through its Third Reading in the Lords. There were the normal amendments relating to cross-referencing - the clauses always reference absolute points in the text, and the Lords have to vote through the substitution of 'the Part' with 'clause n'1. There were a couple of actual changes - the clause I mentioned previously2 relating to armed forces was also extended to the diplomatic service, as it was noted that3
why I am anxious that service both in the Armed Forces and in the Diplomatic Service should be exempt from the provisions on compulsory leave of absence? In both services, service overseas is part of the conditions of service. If you are in the Army and you are told to go to Afghanistan, you go. If you are in the Diplomatic Service and you are told to serve in Afghanistan, off you go, or you will lose your job. You have no choice. In other public service appointments, that is not necessarily the case. Therefore, these two services should be specially provided for.
This amendment (number 2) was made in conjunction with amendment 3, which gave grounds for a general waiver for those in public service. Both of these were passed quickly. The point, however, was a good one — and there is a neat, in inherently unpleasant symmetry in the two groups it affects.
The next clause of consequence was the seventh in the running order, which dealt with the issue of Lords who were sentenced elsewhere in the world, and how this would affect their standing in the House. It's points like this which is why these things move so slowly through the House — not because any member thought that allowing any foreign sentence to be accepted in a world where people can be jailed for their sexuality — but because it took someone this long to notice that it was an issue
The final debated was on the addition of a clause relating to the addition of powers for Lords to kick out their own (past acts absolved) due to misconduct, and other such things. It would bring in a set of standing orders, but with the power to appeal — but no one is quite sure to whom. The feeling of the few members there (it's hard to tell from the videos how many are actually there)
I wrote most of this before seeing the recording4, so it took a couple of readings of the Hansard section to understand what and went to a division...but there were no tellers appointed for either the contents or the not contents, and thus the motion was not passed.
Now, that sentence probably means a little to those without some knowledge of Lords procedure. When a motion occurs, the vote is first done vocally, with Lords asked first if they are Content, and then if they are Not Content. If there is the slightest doubt, then a division is called for, and all the Lords move away from the exits. Two 'Tellers' for each side of the division are appointed - like in the phrase 'Automated Teller Machines' they are counters - who count the Lords as they voting.
There are some little Civil Service details - for example, although the tellers are trusted to count, assistants to the Lord Speaker also tick off the names of the Lords as they vote. There are some other small issues; the appointment of Tellers has to have taken place within three minutes of the division being called. Voting itself is carried out by the Lords walking out of the House into the Lobby either via the Bar or via the Throne, which are the names of the exits. Votes can also be given to the Clerks in the house itself. The doors themselves are barred after 8 minutes. At that point, even I begin to lose track of what the standing orders are saying - the physical layout the lobbies starts playing a major part, and I don't have a map. For your amusement, the standing orders for the Tellers.
The concluding remarks, to my great surprise, parroted a comment I also made in the last post about the financial implications of people taking leave of the House, with much the same conclusion — the Government is not yet sure.
- 1 ↑ I'd like to look at how the Lords actually puts together it's paperwork - it'd likely be a fascinating hodge podge of systems, probably some custom software. I'd personally do it all in LaTeX, but I'm a bit of a fan; however, you could abstract out most of the stuff. I actually did something similar for a minutes generation program that I will post about sometime the future. I did, however, draw some ideas from the Lords documents when designing it.
- 2 ↑ Lords Refo…er…Amendments
- 3 ↑ http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201212/ldhansrd/text/120301-0003.htm#12030146000630
- 4 ↑ http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_lords/newsid_9701000/9701072.stm