New Clause 1 - Interpretation

House of Lords Reform (No. 2) Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:30 am on 15th January 2014.

Alert me about debates like this

‘(1) For the purposes of this Act a person is a member of the House of Lords if the person is entitled to receive writs of summons to attend that House.

(2) In determining whether a person is so entitled, ignore—

(a) section 2 of the Forfeiture Act 1870 (disqualification on conviction of treason);

(b) sections 426A and 427 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (disqualification on insolvency);

(c) regulation 4 of the European Parliament (House of Lords Disqualification) Regulations 2008 (S.I. 2008/1647) (disqualification where MEP).

(3) In this Act “peer” includes a person upon whom a dignity has been conferred by virtue of appointment as a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary.’.—(Dan Byles.)

Brought up, and read the First time.

Photo of Dan Byles Dan Byles Conservative, North Warwickshire

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The new clause is straightforward in that it provides clarity on the definition of “member of the House of Lords” and “peer” for the purposes of the Bill. It makes it clear that peers who are disqualified from attending under other provisions, such as MEPs, retain their membership and that the Bill applies to the Law Lords.

Question put and agreed to.

New clause 1 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill.