The House sat yesterday to discuss developments in Gaza. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the debate had been postponed from an earlier date because of the large number of peers who have signed up to speak. A Friday sitting was arranged in order to enable a full debate to take place.
There were thirty-four speakers, many clearly well qualified to contribute, and the debate can be read here. In response to my earlier post, Joy Wolfe has commented that it ‘featured rational and balanced debate’. There were certainly a range of views expressed, obviously sincere and with points often well made. The debate was opened and replied to by the Foreign Office minister, Lord Malloch-Brown.
Walter Bagehot identified various functions of the House of Commons; many apply also to the Lords. They include teaching and educative functions. The House in debating issues can probe the Government’s position, ensure it justifies its policies and, as necessary, hear suggestions for change. It can also go further in informing and sometimes influencing a wider audience. Much, of course, depends on who is listening. I thought this was a good debate for enabling listeners to gain a clearer appreciation of the situation and what, if anything, that can be done.
Talking of military matters…
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2486155.0.0.php
When will the report on the investigation into these issues be published ? I am a little bit concerned that it may be put in the file marked ‘kick into the long grass’..
Can we have Baroness Harris of Richmond letter from lord Adonis published on lords of the blog, following on from her question on the east coast mainline in the chamber today it was the first question. If the letter cannot be put up, can we have a summary because many of us agree with what she said about the poor condition of the east coast mainline train system post GNER.
As it’s a credit crunch I’ll give two comments for the price of one.
Gaza: It reminds me of when I used to listen to debates between two dons over some metaphysical matter of ancient Greek philosophy. It was certainly interesting but at the end of the event the world was the same and most people only had a vague recollection a few weeks later. UK government policy over Gaza was never going to be altered no matter what was said or however heartfelt the contributions. Even presuming UK policy has any influence whatsoever over the matter in the first place.
As to the investigation, I’m not aware any time frame was put for completion.
Bedd Gelert: I believe that the sub-committee investigating the complaints hopes to complete its work by the end of the month.
Tory Boy: I am not sure to which letter you are referring. There was no reference to it in yesterday’s Question on the performance of the East Coast mainline system. I rather agreed with the critical points made about the performance post-GNER. The Question can be found at:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldhansrd/text/90209-0001.htm#0902091000405
I apologise I thought I heard Lord Adonis the minister say that he would write to Baroness Harris on the specific questions she raised. Perhaps that was wishful thinking for me and Lady Harris!
Tory Boy: It is not uncommon to think you have heard something said but then discover, on reading the exchanges, that it was actually something different. That is why you will often hear a peer, responding to a minister’s comments on an amendment, say ‘I will read carefully what the minister has said…’. That is to ensure that the member has fully grasped the points made by the minister. Sometimes, on first hearing, a point is not that clear or may be misunderstood.