Lord Deben (Con)

My concern is merely to say that, whatever your views are, I do not know of a previous occasion when such concerted concerns have been, frankly, not faced up to. The second thing that I find very difficult is for it to be said that this is a robust and safe Bill, when, so far, it has not actually met the concerns of all the royal colleges. I entirely agree with the correction made by my noble friend: some of them are opposed to it for particularities, some want particular changes and one, I believe, is opposed to it in principle. However, the point is that we are seeking to make a fundamental change, and that is this other issue that I find so difficult. I think the phrase used by the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury was societal change. This is not like the other Bills with which it has been compared; this would make a change to something that we have held as a society for hundreds of years. We have never thought it proper for the state to take life, except when we believed that it was all right for capital punishment, and we certainly believe it to be right in the case of a just war. We have to face the fact that this would be a fundamental change. Some of the comments that have been made have been really concerning. When it is said, as it was, that this was about nitpicking changes, you realise that there was no understanding of the fundamental change that we are proposing. There are many who take a different view from me about that fundamental change, but we should all accept that this is not a passing issue that can be discussed easily. When the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, says that we ought to get through it all, I say that we can do that only if we do not do the job properly. The problem here is that much of the job that we have had to do— I say this directly to the noble Baroness, Lady Jay, with whom I have had discussions in the past—ought to have been done before the Bill came to this House. It should have been done by a royal commission. We should have had a proper Bill, which was a government Bill, and we should then have been able to use both our ability to debate and our right to decide at the end of it. I hope that the noble and learned Lord will not bring back this Bill, unamended or even amended with the bits of amendments that he has so far been prepared to do, for which I thank him—I do not mean “bits” in an unpleasant way; I mean the pieces that he has done. I wish he would do something quite different. I very much believe in my cause, and I want this to be properly carried through a proper parliamentary system. I want to uphold what Parliament is about. I want, therefore, to have a proper commission. I want to have a proper Bill, produced by the Government, and then I want people to be able to vote on that as a matter of conscience. If he does that, he will have the respect of all of us.