Second Chamber (Reform) (Hansard, 30 January 1984)

§ 33. Mr. Rathbone
asked the Lord Privy Seal if the Government are planning any study of possible areas of reform of the Second Chamber.

§ Mr. Biffen
The Government have no present proposals to do so.

§ Mr. Rathbone
While in no way impugning the role or function of the other place, may I ask my right hon. Friend to reconsider what steps are necessary to protect the future of the other place so that it may maintain its function and role in the future as it has in the past? Will he consider setting up a Royal Commission or some such body to ascertain what steps are necessary?

§ Mr. Biffen
I should have thought that the best way to protect the future of the other place was to do as little as possible about it.

§ Mr. Maclennan
To what aspects of the proposals for the reform of the Upper House put forward by Lord Home of the Hirsel do the Government object?

§ Mr. Biffen
The Government's position was made clear at the general election. We reject the fundamental changes that Lord Home of the Hirsel had in mind. May I say, on the point that I made previously—not a jocular point—that the best way of preserving the other place is to maintain it roughly in its present form?

Sir John Biggs-Davision
While agreeing with my right hon. Friend's position, may I ask him whether he is satisfied that there is sufficient Northern Ireland representation in the other place, and may fresh consideration be given to ending the exclusion of peers of Ireland?

§ Mr. Biffen
That raises considerably wider issues, but I will certainly draw the attention of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the point that my hon. Friend makes.