Debates between Lord Tyler and Earl Howe during the 2019 Parliament

Referendums

Debate between Lord Tyler and Earl Howe
Wednesday 12th February 2020

(4 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I look to debating my noble friend’s Bill when it comes before us for Second Reading. I think it would be premature for me to set out the Government’s position on the Bill today. We will do so, as we do with all Private Members’ Bills, at the Second Reading, but I can assure my noble friend that we shall approach it with an open mind.

Lord Tyler Portrait Lord Tyler (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, do the Government accept that the worst failures with the 2016 referendum were concerned with transparency and funding? We still do not know who paid how much and for what and whether some significant sums were from illegal foreign sources. Strong recommendations have been made by a number of official bodies that the Government need to act on this, yet we have had no response. The long-awaited ISC report on Russian influence may be very relevant here. When will the Prime Minister authorise its publication?

Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the first duty of government is to safeguard the nation, and we treat the security and integrity of our democratic processes extremely seriously. We have no evidence to show that there was any successful interference in the EU referendum. However, as I said, we take any allegations of interference in our democratic processes extremely seriously. My understanding is that the report referred to by the noble Lord has been released by the Prime Minister.

House of Lords: Appointments

Debate between Lord Tyler and Earl Howe
Thursday 30th January 2020

(4 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Tyler Portrait Lord Tyler
- Hansard - -

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to review the criteria for appointments to the House of Lords.

Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the House of Lords Appointments Commission is an independent, advisory, non-departmental public body. It plays an important function in vetting appointments for life Peers to ensure the highest standards of propriety.

Lord Tyler Portrait Lord Tyler (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, could the Minister tell your Lordships whether the criteria for appointment of political nominees to your Lordships’ House are exactly the same as those for independent Cross-Bench Peers? If not, why not?

Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as the noble Lord knows, there are various established criteria for appointments to your Lordships’ House, whether distinguished service in a particular field or the potential contribution that the individual can make to the work of your Lordships’ House—or, indeed, both those things—subject to vetting for propriety. I come back to that point because it is central to the issue he has raised. All nominations are subject to independent vetting for propriety by the House of Lords Appointments Commission before appointment. That must underpin any future consideration of this matter.

Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission

Debate between Lord Tyler and Earl Howe
Wednesday 29th January 2020

(4 years, 2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My noble friend makes a very good point. Constitutional reform is a term that could encompass many subject areas. One reason why the Government are taking a bit of time over deciding the commission’s remit is that, if the remit is too wide, the task becomes too unwieldy and lengthy; too narrow, and it risks creating policy that is not properly joined up. The scope needs to be substantial but sensible.

Lord Tyler Portrait Lord Tyler (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, following the point that the Minister has just made, do the Government accept that there are some priority steps required to, and I quote from the Conservative manifesto,

“protect the integrity of our democracy”

that are probably so urgent that they cannot wait for the proposed commission? Has the Minister seen, and does he note, the recommendations of the APPG report, Defending our Democracy in the Digital Age, which follows the work of Select Committees in both Houses, and the recommendations of the Information Commissioner and the Electoral Commission? Do the Government recognise that there is a dangerous connection between digital campaigning and potentially illegal funding—the huge sums of money from foreign sources, from Miami to Moscow, seeking to influence both elections and referendums?

Earl Howe Portrait Earl Howe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I fully recognise the concern expressed by the noble Lord. Indeed, we have debated these matters in the past, albeit cursorily. These are matters that the Government are determined to grip. Whether the commission will be doing that is something that unfortunately I cannot be specific on at the moment.