§ 2.56 p.m.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, may I make a short business statement? Last Thursday I indicated that it might be necessary to sit late on some days next week for the Committee stage of the Land Commission Bill. On that occasion, noble Lords opposite asked me whether I would reconsider the suggestion. Following upon the good progress made yesterday, and after discussions with the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Cumnor, I am pleased to inform the House that on Monday, December 5, and Tuesday, December 6, it is intended to take the Land Commission Bill to approximately 7.30 p.m. I understand that it ought to be possible then to complete the Committee stage of the Bill on Thursday, the 8th.
In regard to to-day's business, it is hoped that we shall adjourn the Committee stage of the Local Government (Scotland) Bill between 6 p.m. and 6.15 p.m. and proceed to the Report stage of the Local Government Bill; then to adjourn at about 7.30 p.m. and to recommence at 8.30 p.m. to conclude the Committee stage of the Local Government (Scotland) Bill.
THE EARL OF MANSFIELDMy Lords, arising out of the noble Lord's remarks, would he explain the reason for the rather messy procedure that has been adopted yesterday and to-day? Yesterday the Committee stage of the Land Commission Bill was interrupted by the Committee stage of the Armed Forces Bill. Today, the Local Government (Scotland) Bill Committee stage is to be interrupted by the corresponding stage of the English Bill. Why should it not be possible to take the whole of the Committee stage of one Bill right through and then proceed to the other?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, this method has been adopted over a good number of years, more perhaps for the 621 convenience of the Opposition, than for the Government. It makes it possible for those who lead for the Opposition on a long Committee stage to have a break. It was certainly my experience in Opposition that it was generally welcomed.