HC Deb 23 July 1907 vol 178 cc1371-2
MR. MOONEY (Newry)

drew the attention of the Speaker to the fact that an Amendment to the Evicted Tenants Bill moved in Committee the night before by the Member for North Dublin, and carried, did not appear in the Votes; and Proceedings circulated that morning, although other Amendments were noticed. He: asked whether the Votes and Proceedings were an official record of the proceedings of the House, or whether any other record was kept, and, if so, whether there was any way in which an ordinary Member could ascertain the actual proceedings of the House.


said the Votes and Proceedings were only a brief abstract and chronicle of what took place. A fuller account would be found in the Journal. The real authority, however, as to the Amendments was the Bill itself. If the hon. Member would look at the Bill itself, which was amended by the Chairman of Committee as the Committee stage progressed, he would find the Amendments made by him in the Bill itself, which always lay on the Table.

MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)

asked what was the use of issuing the Votes and Proceedings if they were not a trustworthy account of what took place. It was not a summarised account; it was a defective record calculated to deceive Members of the House. Could not some change be made in this matter which would enable hon. Members to find out what had taken place without examining the Bill on the Table?


said the Votes and Proceedings recorded cases in which the closure was moved or refused, and in which a division took place on an Amendment, but they did not, record all the Amendments proposed or the fate of those Amendments. The present practice was of very old standing, and he was not prepared to say at a moment's notice that it ought to be changed; but he would consider the suggestion of the hon. Member for Waterford.

MR. CLANCY (Dublin County, N.)

asked if it were not the fact that all the Amendments dealt with on the previous night were mentioned except this particular one. Was that omitted by design or by accident?


said it was omitted by design, because the Amendment was accepted.


But the following Amendment, which was also agreed to, appears.


Yes, because a colleague of the hon. Member moved the closure on it and it became necessary to record that abortive proceeding, and in order to show what happened to the Amendment it had to be put in the Votes. It could not to be left in the air as it were.