All 5 Debates between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns

European Union (Referendum) Bill

Debate between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns
Friday 24th January 2014

(10 years, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The apology should be from those who leaked the information. I am saying that I am deeply sorry that I saw the information online and that somebody has leaked it. I am deeply grateful that the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, has made it clear to the House that it was not he.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Did the noble Baroness, the Chief Whip, apologise to my noble friend Lord Bassam for repeating something that she believed to be true which my noble friend has denied?

Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I have made it clear that there would be an apology from me if I had uttered an untruth. I have not uttered an untruth. What I have said is that I am deeply disappointed that anybody should have leaked that letter. The noble Lord, Lord Bassam, has been able to make it clear that it was not he. I am grateful for that because our relationship has been a proper one in the usual channels and will continue to be so.

Arrangement of Business

Debate between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns
Thursday 22nd March 2012

(12 years, 2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, publication of the report is a matter for the Joint Committee and I would not ever seek to interfere with the Select Committees of this House.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I thank the government Chief Whip for the information she has given to the House on the financial implications of the changes being proposed this morning. May I seek a total assurance that when we deliberate these issues on Tuesday afternoon, all the financial implications in detail on any possible changes in procedure will be available in advance to Members of the House?

Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am sure that those taking part in the debate will read what the noble Baroness has said.

Public Disorder

Debate between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns
Thursday 11th August 2011

(12 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, perhaps we might have as the last Back-Bench speaker the noble Baroness, Lady Farrington of Ribbleton, and then my noble friend will respond.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the most reverend Primate raised the important issue of what happens in society. I suggest trying to get young people themselves to monitor what is happening in communities. My deep concern is that, nowadays, in most families, both parents work. Churches, community groups and activist groups are struggling like mad to keep going because people do not have the time. There is an urgent need for youth and community workers to be employed to help local groups—be it a church group, a youth group or a sports group—through those patches when it is hard to continue.

If the Government say that they are determined to press ahead, I must warn them that from my observation, listening to the general public, they are saying, “Why weren’t there more police officers?”. The Government are spending £130 million on their pet project—I disagree with it very strongly, but that is irrelevant. The public out there want more trained police officers. Members of your Lordships' House say, “Police officers stood there, looked at a situation and did not move in”. Often it was one police officer facing a group of 20 or 30. We need the right number of officers with the right approach.

Arrangement of Business

Debate between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns
Thursday 16th June 2011

(12 years, 11 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Well, my Lords, as my dear old Aunt Rose would say, the noble Lord has a bit of a brass neck. However, I will of course address each of those points. Perhaps noble Lords should not read everything on politicshome.com before they bring information to the House. For example, the noble Lord referred to my having apparently announced the dates of the February half-term. The noble Lord will know that I never have. I know that politicshome.com has said so and that it has been tweeted, but it has never been the case in this House. I do not refer to any Recess dates after we return in January; I never have. Like the noble Lord, I do not refer to the date of the end of the Session. That is not something that happens; it is up to noble Lords to make their own calculations. When we know the progress of business, we will make a Statement, as the noble Lord did when the Labour Party was in government.

This is a self-regulating House, with the implication that scrutiny of legislation cannot be curtailed except by the House itself. That is only right; it is one of the aspects of our work of which we have every reason to be proud. The corollary is that when the House chooses to dwell on a particular Bill, as it did on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill—on which we spent 17 days in Committee, which is more than double the usual maximum for the largest Bills—more time must then be found elsewhere if the scrutiny of the other Bills in a Government’s legislative programme is not to suffer as a consequence.

I should also make it clear that we have been used, over the past decade, to agreements by the usual channels to take a good number of the Committee stages of Bills in Grand Committee, off the Floor of the House. That kind of agreement has not been achievable this Session. This Session will have the lowest percentage of Bills in Grand Committee for nearly 10 years—since the Session of 2001-02. I know that because I was on the other side taking part in it all. As a result, pressure for time on the Floor of the House is acute and something has to give.

The Opposition Chief Whip will recall that the Opposition refused to put into Grand Committee a Bill that was eminently suitable for that place. I refer to the Postal Services Bill on which the Opposition spokesperson performed a very valuable role. The noble Lord, Lord Young of Norwood Green, steered the Opposition through that Bill with great skill and Labour Party Back-Benchers also acted with great skill and scrutinised it carefully. But it was not an appropriate Bill for the Floor of the House. The Opposition insisted that it should take time on the Floor away from other Bills.

There was consultation about business. Over the past five weeks, there has been consultation with the Opposition Chief Whip to seek certainty about how the Government could deliver their business without extending the sitting period and taking away a week from the summer Session. It is not normal process in this House to consult formally more widely, but I made sure that soundings were taken around the House. It was made very clear to me that, while noble Lords would not wish to extend the period beyond July, for some reason that I find quite difficult to understand, noble Lords on all sides of the House felt that it was quite appropriate for this place to be sitting during the Conservative Party conference, when my colleagues might wish to be elsewhere. That is indeed the final decision that was taken. The decision is not taken lightly. It is one to deal with ordinary business in an ordinary way. Scrutiny in this House, when it is done well, is a model for the world to follow.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
- Hansard - -

Before the noble Baroness sits down—

Lord Tebbit Portrait Lord Tebbit
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, while my noble friend must have taken a great deal of effort to avoid using the words pot, kettle and black, during the noble Lord’s remarks, she should take it on board that it is a great pity that this Administration appear to be following the example of the previous Government by introducing too much legislation that has not been adequately thought through. It is a bad habit that was formed over the previous 10 years or so and we should be resisting it, not continuing it.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, it might be appropriate for me to be permitted to answer the questions as they are put. That might be helpful. I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Farrington, will of course have the opportunity to ask a question.

My noble friend has long experience in government. He will know that all Governments have to listen and learn and I will certainly do that.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
- Hansard - -

My Lords, will the Government Chief Whip say what advice both she and the Leader of the House have given to the Government on the suitability of legislation for pre-legislative scrutiny? The Government have failed to use that procedure to the full. The Government are, as the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, said, trying to achieve too much too quickly, often with proposals that are later withdrawn because they are unworkable.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Government have made it clear that they are very much in favour of extending pre-legislative scrutiny. That will happen. The Opposition will also be aware that in the first year of a new Government, as when I was sitting on the other side in 1997, it is not necessarily possible for a new Government to go through pre-legislative scrutiny without having a long hiatus. But it is the better model to follow and it is one that will be put within Government plans. I know that that will be welcomed by the House.

Business

Debate between Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton and Baroness Anelay of St Johns
Tuesday 20th July 2010

(13 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Portrait Baroness Anelay of St Johns
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as there is no speakers list for this afternoon's debate, it may be helpful if I say a few words about the expected running order. There are three Motions on the Order Paper today: two resolutions in the name of my noble friend the Leader of the House and a Motion in the name of the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees, to which two amendments have been tabled. My noble friend Lord Strathclyde will open the debate by moving the first resolution. It may then be for the convenience of the House to hear from the noble Baroness, Lady Royall of Blaisdon, the noble Baroness, Lady D'Souza, and then the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, before other noble Lords rise to speak. At the end of the debate, it is expected that the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon of Tara, will respond to the issues raised that fall within the remit of the House Committee, after which my noble friend Lord Strathclyde will reply to the debate.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Portrait Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
- Hansard - -

My Lords, will the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, please explain why the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, is included in the original list? He is a supporter and member of the government parties.