the Earl of Onslow: Can the noble and learned Lord give me any precedent where a specific motion of no confidence in the Government has been passed, followed two, three or four days by another motion saying, "Actually, we made a boo-boo and we do have confidence in the Government"? I cannot think of one in the 19th century, or, probably, in the 18th century; and certainly not in this century. Or am I being...
the Earl of Onslow: Has not the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, actually made a speech suggesting that we should use some of the remaining powers left to us under the Parliament Act to sling this rotten Bill right out hook, line and sinker?
the Earl of Onslow: I may be tempted to tempt.
the Earl of Onslow: I was never Speaker but I am descended from three Speakers. I have never heard of a more awful choice having to be made. If the courts are allowed to interfere, that will have a catastrophic effect on the role of the Speaker. If they are not allowed to interfere, it will have a catastrophic role on the role of the Speaker. I cannot think of anything worse than that. I do not know whether to...
the Earl of Onslow: I said that it was doolally.
the Earl of Onslow: The Prime Minister has said, perfectly reasonably, that he thinks his Government will go on until 15 May 2015. He has made a perfectly legitimate choice to the House of Commons, but binding his successors is a different matter altogether.
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, I crave your Lordships' indulgence and apologise for not being able to speak at Second Reading. There was a slight horlicks done by our Whips' Office, for which I apologise. This Government, who I support extraordinarily strongly, have the opportunity to produce some of the greatest social reforms and improvements for the benefit of this country since 1911. If Iain Duncan Smith gets...
the Earl of Onslow: May I interrupt? Actually, it is a fundamental change. As the Bill is not subject to the 1911 Act, we can veto this Bill because it seeks to extend the life of Parliament. That is a fundamental constitutional change, which in my view should be resisted at all possible costs.
the Earl of Onslow: As the leader of the Labour Party has been discouraging the Deputy Prime Minister from taking any part in the AV campaign, it will be interesting to see the outcome.
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, is there not something totally glorious and hypocritical about the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, saying please may his peerage be guaranteed but those promises to elected successors of mine, which could be in the fairly near future, should be taken away?
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, about 10 and a half years ago, two rather interesting things happened to me. First, I was elected a Member of this House. Secondly, on the same day, I went on "Have I Got News for You". The first question that Angus Deayton asked me was, "Oh, Lord Onslow, are you in favour of the legalisation of drugs?". I said, "Yes I am and I will answer this question seriously and not...
the Earl of Onslow: The Minister has already gone quite far. He said that he will draw attention to it. Do we need what is basically a Boundary Commission argument on these little things? This is nothing other than wasting your Lordships' time, and it is a disgrace for the Opposition to go on behaving like this.
the Earl of Onslow: If this is not an example of a filibuster, I do not know what is. Dillon and the people who objected to the Irish filibuster in the House of Commons have nothing to do with this amendment. The noble Lord is bringing this House into major disrepute. He is quite good at changing sides so there is nothing new in that.
the Earl of Onslow: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answers by Lord McNally on 21 July (Official Report, 21/7/10; cols 972-3), on how many occasions in the last three years officers in secure training centres have (a) struck an inmate in the face with an elbow, (b) driven knuckles into an inmate's ribcage, (c) raked a shoe down an inmate's shins onto their instep, (d) driven fingers into an...
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, I was on the Joint Committee on Human Rights when these allegations were made. We were advised by our clerks that this was a clear breach of privilege. The effect of the lobbying-which there undoubtedly was-was obviously going to be minimal, because the three people whom others attempted to nobble were grown-up and intelligent enough to maintain the views that they had maintained...
the Earl of Onslow: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether their decision to renew the power to detain terrorist suspects without charge for 28 days took account of that power not being used for three years.
the Earl of Onslow: To ask Her Majesty's Government what reasons the police and the Director of Public Prosecutions gave for stating the power to detain terrorist suspects without charge for 28 days remains necessary.
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, the Minister said "published". The guidelines were not published; it took three years of freedom of information action to try to get them out. Is he really saying that, "Application of severe pain to the thumb", and, "Staff raking their shoe down a child's shin onto their instep", is the behaviour of a civilised society? I was deeply shocked by this and I continue to be so. I...
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords, the noble Baroness has spoken for nine minutes. I thought, and it has been my experience in 30 or 40-odd years in this House, that you are supposed to ask questions concisely, not to make a 10-minute speech-because I see that she has some more pages to read.
the Earl of Onslow: My Lords-
