This Bill has now been published, and is available here. It is a very short bill, whose purpose is to remove the vote of the Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man from both the Legislative Council and Tynwald, while leaving the Lord Bishop with a seat in both bodies.
The key provision is clause 3, which provides (in full): “3 Bishop not to vote in Tynwald or the Council. (1) The Bishop shall cease to have the right to vote either in Tynwald or in the Council, but shall continue to be a member of both bodies with the same right to speak in both bodies as before this Act.(2) The presence of the Bishop at a sitting of Tynwald or of the Council shall not reckon towards the constitution of a quorum of either body”.
Against this admirable conciseness, there are two issues which it might be useful to consider in the Bill.
Firstly, the Bill mentions the “same right to speak”, but does not expressly address the right to bring motions and otherwise contribute to the work of the Council and Tynwald. The Bill is, no doubt consciously, based on the 1971 measure which removed the vote of the Attorney General while allowing them to remain in the Council and in Tynwald. That legislation uses the same term, albeit within a more cumbersome sentence: “the same rights to speak therein as heretofore” (s.1(1)). The Standing Orders of the Legislative Council, (but not of Tynwald), refer to the absence of the Attorney General’s vote, but do not indicate any restriction on their ability to bring motions, including bringing Bills in the Legislative Council. As a matter of practice, we can find the Attorney General moving legislation after 1971, for instance the third reading of the Jury Bill. So, if interpreted this Bill as the 1971 Act removing the Attorney General’s vote has been interpreted, the Bill seems set to allow the Lord Bishop not only to participate in, but initiate, discussions in both the Council and Tynwald Court, and to nominate witnesses before the Council. It may be useful to refer explicitly to this.
Secondly, the Bill does not consider the possibility of a Lord Bishop without a vote being elected by the Keys as a voting MLC. There does not appear to be an internal rule of the Church of England prohibiting the Lord Bishop from taking up such a public office; and Anglican clergy have run for, and taken up, elected office; for instance the Reverend Alan Billings, who is currently the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner. So it may be worth explicitly considering this scenario. Not doing so could face the President with some difficult issues to resolve, for instance how to apply the legislative prayer section of Standing Orders when a Lord Bishop could be sitting in a different capacity and – although I anticipate this being resolved quickly – whether the Lord Bishop could move a motion, and then the elected MLC who is the same person could then second it.
One possibility is that a Lord Bishop who is also a voting MLC sits only as a voting MLC – that is, the seat set aside for the Lord Bishop is temporarily in abeyance. Another is that the Lord Bishop continues to sit as Lord Bishop, but with a vote, a change to the role which exists only so long as the Lord Bishop’s term as a voting MLC runs. There is little practical difference between these two options. A third possibility would allow an alternative ecclesiastical officer to take the seat of the Lord Bishop. The arguments for retaining the Bishop’s voice do not seem to apply with such strength to adding to a Council which already has the Lord Bishop speaking and voting in it. A final possibility would be to avoid the problem by barring the Lord Bishop from consideration as an elected MLC – a move counter to the general removal of ecclesiastical disabilities for those seeking to join a national legislature.
From these four, the first appears to me the most attractive. It would, however, require some consideration at the level of Standing Orders as to whether the Lord Bishops new role is a continuation of their ex officio one, for instance in relation to membership of Committees of the Council.
edgelawblog.wordpress.com 