Results 141–160 of 7081 for speaker:Jacob Rees-Mogg

Food Labelling Regulations (Amendment): Clause 18 — Status of EU law dependent on continuing statutory basis (11 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I believe that what Lord Hope is saying is that this House could pass an Act that was not, in itself, lawful. What amendment 41 would achieve is a reassertion of the fact that this House could not do anything of the kind and that any act of this House is superior to any judgment of any court. If these arrangements are based on the rule of law, rather than the supremacy of Parliament, the...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: May I begin by thanking the Minister for the enormous courtesy, good manners and good temper with which he has responded to the many criticisms of the Bill? I, among others, do not think it the best Bill ever to have come before Parliament, but he has invariably answered questions kindly. I also thank the Clerks for warning me that I was, in their terminology, to "open the batting" in this...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: That is a very helpful intervention, and I thank the hon. Gentleman for it. I think the House of Lords would almost certainly follow the Salisbury convention in that respect, and it would be wrong of it to go against the clearly expressed will, in a manifesto, of the lower House. The point of this measure is as a protection and a safeguard, not as a die-in-the-ditch stalling method to prevent...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The hon. Gentleman is right to raise that issue. I did hear what the Deputy Prime Minister said about the upper House. Most unusually-because in the spirit of coalition I usually find that I hang on every word of the Deputy Prime Minister in almost entire agreement with it-I had to divert from him on that occasion. I have always thought that Governments make a mistake when they think that...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The reform of the other place will be a matter of great interest, although it is worth bearing in mind that the 1911 Act specifically states that it is to be in place only until the other place is reformed. When that time comes, this House will no doubt want to bear in mind how that Act can be reformed in response to the reform, depending on what is done to the other House. Some hon. and...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I think that I am defending just as much the interests of the socialists of Great Grimsby and other places, because it is not in the interest of the voters of Great Grimsby to have Governments who come in and play fast and loose with the constitution; that is a really bad idea. The hon. Gentleman has been a most distinguished advocate of less European intrusion in our affairs. [Hon. Members:...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I am enormously grateful to my hon. Friend for putting pithily in one intervention what it has taken me, I fear, 20 minutes to say. He is absolutely right that Her Majesty's Government cannot have it both ways. Either the Bill is serious and important, in which case it should be exempt from the Parliament Act 1911, or it is simply the contract for a marriage of convenience and so should fall...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Will my hon. Friend's new clause ensure that after the next election, the Prime Minister, instead of going through the fiction of having a vote of no confidence in himself, could simply ask for a Dissolution by a vote of the House? If the new clause were accepted, would it not provide a much more straightforward way of getting an early Dissolution?

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I absolutely understand the hon. Gentleman's point that a Government elected on a manifesto for four years would not want to be obstructed by the House of Lords, and I doubt whether the Lords would obstruct them in those circumstances. Does he have any sympathy with the view that constitutional issues ought to have greater protection than ordinary Bills, particularly as judges have decided...

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 3 — Application of Parliament Act 1911 to section 1 (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the clause. Clause, by leave, withdrawn .

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 4 — Prorogation of Parliament (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Would that not be crucial? A new Prime Minister from another party would want all the Bills of the old party's Prime Minister to fall. Prorogation would be beneficial.

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 4 — Prorogation of Parliament (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: The Bill still seems to allow the Executive to do that, because they can force a vote of no confidence in themselves. Therefore, what we are achieving is simply changing the rules by which an early election can be called, not making any fundamental change to the constitution.

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 4 — Prorogation of Parliament (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: May I remind my hon. Friend that the reduction from seven to five years took place because the House of Lords was no longer able to block legislation, and it was therefore thought right that things should be referred to the electorate within a reasonable time? In 1911 Members thought that that period was five years, and what they thought in 1911 is a jolly good thing to think in 2011.

Succession to the Crown: New Clause 4 — Prorogation of Parliament (18 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: It may interest the House to know that in the 1830s King William IV was going to come in person to prorogue Parliament, because that would bring all business to a stop and the Government did not like the business that was going on. I believe that, in the end, that turned out not to be necessary.

Backbench Business — [16th Allotted Day]: Horse Racing Levy (20 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: There is just one question that I would raise, and that is about the speed of change. We have seen some scandals in betting, notably in cricket, but in horse racing there have been remarkably few. It has been very honest, which may be because of the close relationship between the betting industry and the horse racing fraternity, brought together by the levy. It would be worrying if that was...

Backbench Business — [16th Allotted Day]: Horse Racing Levy (20 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I just want to claim a share of Bath racecourse, which I believe is in North East Somerset.

Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Bill (21 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: If the strict Baptist did not want the money to go to his children, because he thought that "the wages of sin is death", would he be able to take the inheritance and give it away, which would have the same effect as disclaiming, and therefore not lose his right to make that choice?

Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Bill (21 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: I am loth to disagree with the hon. Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown), who always makes fine points, but on this occasion may I encourage my hon. Friend to give us a full explanation so that we can thoroughly understand why the Bill is necessary? Legislation is a big and weighty matter and should be brought in only for major issues where there is real concern. We need to understand that, and I...

Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Bill (21 Jan 2011)

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Would my hon. Friend explain a little more about the circumstances under which a testator could leave provision that would not be affected by the Bill? I have been unable to work out how a person who is murdered could have expected and anticipated that in their will. Would he elaborate on that point?


<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>

Create an alert

Advanced search

Find this exact word or phrase

You can also do this from the main search box by putting exact words in quotes: like "cycling" or "hutton report"

By default, we show words related to your search term, like “cycle” and “cycles” in a search for cycling. Putting the word in quotes, like "cycling", will stop this.

Excluding these words

You can also do this from the main search box by putting a minus sign before words you don’t want: like hunting -fox

We also support a bunch of boolean search modifiers, like AND and NEAR, for precise searching.

Date range

to

You can give a start date, an end date, or both to restrict results to a particular date range. A missing end date implies the current date, and a missing start date implies the oldest date we have in the system. Dates can be entered in any format you wish, e.g. 3rd March 2007 or 17/10/1989

Person

Enter a name here to restrict results to contributions only by that person.

Section

Restrict results to a particular parliament or assembly that we cover (e.g. the Scottish Parliament), or a particular type of data within an institution, such as Commons Written Answers.

Column

If you know the actual Hansard column number of the information you are interested in (perhaps you’re looking up a paper reference), you can restrict results to that; you can also use column:123 in the main search box.