HC Deb 22 March 1900 vol 81 cc46-7
MR. KIMBER (Wandsworth)

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, having regard to the clauses in the Companies Bill which give unsecured creditors preferential right of payment over creditors secured by debentures and debenture stock, whether he will give the House a week's notice of bringing on the Second Reading instead of inserting it in the Orders every day.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

I beg to draw your attention, Sir, to this question. Is it not disorderly, as it embodies the opinion of the hon. Member as to the construction of an Act of Parliament? It is in precisely the same words as a motion which the hon. Member has put down.

MR. SPEAKER

The question is whether the right hon. Gentleman will give the House a week's notice before taking the Second Reading of a certain Bill. That is not a matter of opinion.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

With great respect, Sir, the sentence beginning "having regard" embodies a matter of opinion.

MR. SPEAKER

It does not follow because words which introduce the question suggest an opinion that the question becomes one as to a matter of opinion.

MR. RITCHIE

My right hon. friend the Leader of the House said the other day that to undertake to give a week's notice of the taking of a Bill would seriously inconvenience business, and I therefore cannot undertake to give it in this case. As much notice as possible will be given.

MR. BRYCE: (Aberdeen, S.)

May I take it that there is no intention of taking the Bill before Easter?

MR. RITCHIE

I do not think the right hon. Gentleman can assume that.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL

Did not the First Lord promise at least three days notice?

MR. RITCHIE

I think he said something about that.