Quotes About Parliament

Any of us who wants to go to Parliament must have that responsibility to represent the people who voted us in.

I opposed the NMP scheme very, very strongly and I stated my case in Parliament, objected to it and voted against it. That has been my stand.

Diversity is not a politically correct idea. Diversity in a boardroom or in a Parliament means that you just have different minds, different life experience, different ways of thinking about patients or customers or voters so that when you bring that intellect, you look at opportunity and risk, and then you have it in much better balance.

the other part of the parliament consisted of an assembly called the House of Commons, who were all principal gentlemen, freely picked and culled out by the people themselves, for their great abilities and love of their country, to represent the wisdom of the whole nation.

The parliamentary institution attracts people of the badger type, who do not like the open light. No upright man, who is ready to accept personal responsibility for his acts, will be attracted to such an institution.

One consistent thing in an otherwise inconsistent career is that I've always been passionate about parliament.

I'm of the opinion that one of the perks of being in Parliament is not having to do the school run.

I am standing in solidarity with decent Remain voters who respected the rules and accepted the result and are as appalled by Parliament's undemocratic antics as the most ardent Brexiteer.

Decades of anti-migrant rhetoric in parliament and the press has resulted in few voters having realistic ideas of the genuine level of migration, on both a national level and in their local community.

The U.K.'s climate change act was passed by a majority of 463 votes to three. That is really quite extraordinary. The will of parliament has rarely been expressed so strongly and unambiguously.

Unanimous votes are rare in parliament.

I was elected by people voting Labour! The idea that you come to Parliament and the first thing you do is that you're hand in hand with Tories and Liberals - I can't understand it! I came here and I made my mind up that I wasn't going to collaborate with the people I'd fought against in the election. It wasn't a difficult thing.

For many years I have advocated 'redesigning Parliament' in a variety of ways - elect the Senate, do away with the 'confidence convention,' permit freer voting, strengthen the role of back benchers and committees, do away with ineffectual 'take note' debates, restructure question period, and so on.

From the time I was elected to parliament, I was not voting for the government. I was sure it did not have a chance to survive. From the beginning, I was one of the organizers of the Maidan.

Whether we make it a condition or just through persuasion or just through popular support, whatever it takes, we really do need to shift through a system of voting where the way the Canadian public votes is the way the Canadian Parliament is formed after the election.

If Parliament is voting overwhelmingly against leaving the European Union without a deal but is voting in favour of a softer Brexit, then I don't think it's sustainable to ignore Parliament's position and therefore leave without a deal.

I didn't know when Parliament started to pay my wages.

You might want a certain type of Brexit deal, but you can't get it if the numbers aren't there.

Parliament of the country is the repository of the sovereign will of the people, and its successful functioning is a joint responsibility of both the government and the Opposition.

As I told the House of Commons, God, if we believe in such a thing, does not need protection from criticism.

There is a real risk of a parliament dominated completely by elected PAP MPs. Is that a good outcome for Singapore? I would suggest it's not.

No law is permanent or steady. The law is not made of steel. The law is made by Parliament. It goes to the people, to the ground. A lot many suggestions come once it is implemented. So many laws have been amended after receiving people's suggestions.

Pitt and Burke were two of the most eloquent and respected members of Parliament, and taken together, by early 1775, they were warning the British ministry that it was headed toward a war that was unwise, unnecessary, and probably unwinnable.

During part of her childhood, Elizabeth was illegitimate. In 1534, Parliament ruled that it was treason to believe her illegitimate. In 1536, it was treason to believe her legitimate. Signals were changed again in 1543, and again in 1553. After that you could believe anything.