Committee of Selection

Lord McFall of Alcluith Excerpts

Thursday 13th May 2021 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)]

I shall call the following Members to speak: first, the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, and then the noble Lords, Lord Cormack and Lord Forsyth of Drumlean.

[Lord Balfe (Con)]

This is a great exercise in lack of transparency. We are appointing committees that will run virtually every aspect of the House’s policy-making functions. I am told that we do have some transparency and that an email was sent out in March. To me, that is not a very transparent way of doing things. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker make his name in this House by being a reforming Senior Deputy Speaker? I in no way criticise his predecessor, who I know put a lot of effort into trying to get things moving.

The appointment of chairs of sub-committees is quite different here from in another place. The other place for once seems to have got a bit more democracy into it. This is not an arcane point, because it means that the chairs of the sub-committees have to relate to the Members; they have to be to a level accountable. I would like to see, as in the other place, the chairs allocated to the party groups and then some elections, so that people had to demonstrate not only that they knew what they were talking about but that they could reach across the aisle—as they say in the United States—and one did not look at things and say, “Oh, well, that’s a Labour chair; we’re not going to get anywhere there”, and so that the persons standing for chair, of whom I hope there would be more than one from any group, had to make the case as to why they should be the chair.

The only committee excepted from this is the Committee of Selection itself. Perhaps the Senior Deputy Speaker could start a reform package by ensuring that at least a part of the Committee of Selection is elected and that there are some Back-Bench voices on it. At the moment, that committee is basically a committee of the leaders; it is like the chiefs’ pow-wow of the House of Lords—everybody gets together with their pipe of peace and they agree with everybody on how they are going to divide things up. I do not think that is acceptable.

I have one final point. Some noble Lords will recall that I was one of the two people who divided the House on the case of the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis, and his suspension from this House. It was a suspension that was decided in private, that was never debated in public, where he had no opportunity to put his case to his Peers and where it was decided by a committee that contains four people who are not even Members of the Lords and five people who are, at least one of whom has a senior role on a completely different committee. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker look at the way in which this committee works? The punishments—that is the only word for it—that it dishes out are far more stringent than anything found in the House of Commons.

I examined carefully all the evidence that was published about the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis. I would certainly have suspended him for a week. His behaviour was “sub-optimal”—which I think is the word we are searching for—but he did not deserve to be sacked completely for ever from his job, which is the effect of a five-year suspension on a person of 82 years of age who, whatever else one says, had had a distinguished political career. I was never in his party in Ireland; I do not agree with him, but the punishment was far harsher than the crime. The crime, basically, was a curmudgeonly old man losing his temper at the door on the way in; it was nothing more serious than that. I ask the Senior Deputy Speaker also to look at ways in which the Conduct Committee can be democratised so that when it comes to conclusions Members are able to comment on them and have some influence on the way things operate. In the case of the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis, a massive injustice was perpetrated by this House without any opportunity for debate, discussion or understanding.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, I do not wish to detain the House by repeating the arguments that my noble friend Lord Cormack has made and with which I agree completely. I certainly do not want to make any difficulty for my noble friend Lord Gardiner on his first day out, but I repeat one thing, to pay tribute to his predecessor, now our Lord Speaker, for the way in which he has worked to help the committees—and I know that from being a member of the committee of chairs which, as Deputy Lord Speaker, the present Lord Speaker initiated and which has been very helpful. I know that making a change in this place, as my noble friend is about to find out, is quite a fight against quite a formidable bureaucracy—and I think that great progress has been made.

However, I have a question for my noble friend. I find it quite difficult to understand, given that we are being asked to appoint a Committee of Selection and that those members have not actually been appointed, how they were able to make these recommendations and how they were able to meet. Are we going to adjourn while they meet and then bring forward these recommendations? I know that my noble friend will no doubt say that it is because of the changeover being changed to the beginning of the year, and everyone knew they were going to be reappointed, but I do not really think that that is good enough.

I agree with my noble friend Lord Cormack about the Conduct Committee. I certainly worry about its composition, because any committee that decided that Valuing Everyone—which I have done, so I have no interest to declare—should be made compulsory, when it was not made compulsory in the House of Commons, is quite extraordinary. How, when it deliberated, did that committee come to a conclusion that it would make it compulsory without considering what it would do in the event that people were unable to comply with that? My noble friend Lord Gardiner may very well say that the House approved that. I shall not detain your Lordships by explaining how little time we were given to approve and debate it; in fact, we were given little opportunity, in part because of the circumstances that we find ourselves in.

It is very worrying to me that the institution of the hybrid House is being used to ram things through without proper discussion. It is perfectly clear that there is something wrong with the composition of the Conduct Committee when they can make such ill-judged recommendations to this House, which have brought us into complete ridicule—not least in respect of the pursuit, which I believe is still continuing, of the noble Baroness, Lady Boothroyd. The commissioner was quoted in the newspapers—I assume misquoted—as saying that she would pursue this and that anyone who spoke to the newspapers would be in contempt of Parliament. That says to me that the stage is now laughing at the audience, and the country is laughing at us as a result. I regret the fact that we do not have an opportunity to consider the composition of that committee, because that committee has let the place down.

[The Lord Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith)]

I believe that the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, would like to speak.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

I note my thanks to the Lord Speaker for the part that he played in his previous role and the support that he gave to chairs and members of committees. I welcome my noble friend to his new role, which I am sure he will perform with aplomb.

It is a privilege to serve in any capacity on a committee, and I recognise the fact that there are insufficient places. Could my noble friend consider a proposal that we look at increasing the size of committees or allow alternates to all committees rather than just some? There has been an imbalance in recent years, with some who for no fault of anyone’s were able to serve for four years on a committee and others who could serve only one and a half years. In addition to transparency and possible elections to those committees and those who serve as Back-Benchers on committees, we are all here as working Peers and we want to serve in whatever capacity we are called to, but it is important to have a sense of fairness and balance in appointments.