Tag Archives: Fixed Term Parliaments Bill

Mark Pack

House of Lords waters down fixed-term Parliaments legislation

By Mark Pack | Thu 12th May 2011 - 12:57 pm

In a vote this week the House of Lords decided to make it significantly easier for future Parliaments to change the rules for fixed-term Parliaments.

The legislation going through Parliament to remove the power of the Prime Minister to fix election dates to their own convenience cannot make them fixed in perpetuity as no Parliament can bind future Parliaments in that way. So the question is how difficult is it for a future Parliament to change the rules – and hence how rigidly fixed the terms of Parliaments really are.

The government’s proposals would have required future Parliaments to pass primary legislation …

Continue reading »
Posted in Election law | Also tagged | 9 Comments
Mark Pack

Weekend voting: not ruled in, not ruled out

By Mark Pack | Sat 19th March 2011 - 10:27 am

As part of Parliament’s deliberations over the Fixed-term Parliaments Bill, this week the House of Lords debated the possibility of moving to weekend voting.

In The two electoral tests the Coalition should run, I made the point that,

Weekend voting has been once briefly trialled (in Watford a decade ago). It was not a success then, but there are good reasons to try again given the details of how the trial was conducted – especially holding the weekend elections just after the usual national round of local elections, with the result that residents in Watford were seeing in all the national

…

Continue reading »
Posted in Election law | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment
Mark Pack

Fixed-term Parliaments: better by standing orders?

By Mark Pack | Tue 14th September 2010 - 10:26 am

Last week Malcolm Jack, the Clerk of the House of Commons, got a little flurry of media coverage for his evidence before a Parliamentary committee considering the proposed legislation for fixed-term Parliaments. “Parts of the government’s plans to bring in fixed-term parliaments are vulnerable to legal challenge” was how the BBC reported it.

It is understandable why that got the headlines, but lurking in the detail are important questions about how Parliament operates and whether its administration is competent. Jack’s evidence, and concerns about the legislation, really fall into three parts.

First, as might be expected from an official whose …

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds and Parliament | Also tagged , , and | 11 Comments
Helen Duffett

Revealed: the AV referendum question

By Helen Duffett | Mon 26th July 2010 - 1:35 pm

The wording of the question that voters will be asked in next May’s AV referendum has been published:

Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the ‘alternative vote’ system instead of the current ‘first past the post’ system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?

The wording of the question is contained in the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill, published last week. (The question will also be made available in Welsh.) The Electoral Commission is statutorily required to consider the intelligibility of the question, before reporting back to Parliament, who will consider the comments and have …

Continue reading »
Posted in Election law | Also tagged , , and | 1 Comment
Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Raw
    Watched P.M.Q.'s today. Thought Sir Keir Starmer handled it well with great dignity - which is more than I can say for Ms Badenoch who was shrill and cheap in h...
  • Jana
    @Chris Cory “ any result it throws up is fine and shows our democracy is in good shape” No, any result is not ‘fine’ - it may be very unpalatable - ...
  • Peter Black
    @Simon McGrath nobody on the doorstep thought that our budget deal was'keeping Labour in power'. It did not come up at all. Remember that, unlike Wimbledon, Wal...
  • Nigel Quinton
    @Paul why do you say this will be a return to two party politics? Even if Reform diminish, surely Labour and Tory are now shadows of their former selves? LibDem...
  • Chris Cory
    @Jana. It would seem that all you require of a democracy is a vote every 5 years and that any result it throws up is fine and shows our democracy is in good ...