HC Deb 02 March 1971 vol 812 cc1657-61

Question proposed, That the Clause stand part of the Bill.

Committee of both Houses, which reported in the manner I have indicated. The Bill was considered in another place and approved in a very brief time.

But for the proposal of the hon. Gentleman to divide against this Clause, and whatever else he may choose to do here-after, there would be no need for debate of any length to stand between the benificent provisions of this consolidating Measure and the people of this country who are entitled to it.

Question put:—

The Committee divided: Ayes 96, Noes 5.

Mr. Wellbeloved

I rise merely to point out—

Mr. Raymond Gower (Barry)

On a point of order. You will be aware, Sir Robert, that this is a consolidation Measure and that, as a result, the number of Clauses and the nature of them are predetermined by the nature of the existing legislation. To that extent, therefore, there is not the same need for the procedure which obtains for Bills which are not of the consolidation variety.

I suggest that with a Bill like this the procedure should be adapted so as merely to refer the matter to the Committee, as it were, because it is unusual for us to have to devote a great deal of time voting on each individual Clause. I put it to you that it is the intention of hon. Members on both sides that a consolidation Measure like this should be dealt with in the manner of a consolidation Bill.

Mr. Wellbeloved

Further to that point of order—

Mr. Cower

I had not completed my submission.

I suggest that the consequences of adopting a new procedure at this time must amount to almost a disregard of the rights of those who serve the House of Commons. For example, we must consider the kitchen staff. They are recruited and serve us in somewhat difficult circumstances.

Mr. Wellbeloved

Further to that point of order. I entirely share the hon. Gentleman's sentiments about the staff of Parliament—[Interruption.]— and the officers and staff in all the departments, including the police, have undoubtedly been put under considerable strain. But this has occurred because of the procedure which the Government have adopted for their business. You will recall, Sir Robert, that since ten o'clock we have dealt with the Atomic Energy Authority Bill, the Welfare Food (Extension of Definition) Order, 1971, the Agricultural and—

The Chairman

Order. I am well aware of what has been before us during the night. The hon. Gentleman need not waste his time telling me. What is his point of order?

Mr. Wellbeloved

In urging you to exercise your duty to protect hon. Mem-Members—

Hon. Members

Oh.

The Chairman

That is a reflection on the Chair. I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows that nobody stands more for the freedom of hon. Members than I do. He can, therefore, safely leave that line.

Mr. Wellbeloved

I accept that—[HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw".]—and I have every confidence in your desire and ability to discharge that responsibility, and I was about to say that. [Interruption.] I am sure that you will strenuously resist any attempt by hon. Gentlemen opposite to shout me down.

Because of the amount of business put down by the Government and the need to discuss it, while I share the expression of sympathy of the hon. Member for Barry (Mr. Gower) towards the staff of the House of Commons, I do not accept any responsibility for the fact that my hon. Friends and I have been diligently performing our responsibility to see that matters before Parliament are not rubber stamped but are properly considered.

The Chairman

The Question which I put was that Clause 2 stand part of the Bill.

Mr. Wellbeloved

This Clause has been slightly amended. Subsection (4)(c) is being brought into conformity with current practice in respect of decimal currency. It is regrettable that neither the Law Commission nor the Committee took the opportunity presented by this Measure to improve on the period under which the licence can be altered, which has just been consolidated to the two periods of 12 and four months.

Question put:—

The Committee proceeded to a Division—

Mr. R. Chichester-Clark (Londonderry) (seated and covered)

On a point of order, Sir Robert. I wonder whether it is proper to raise the whole question of the cost to public funds of keeping the staff here at this time of night, also whether it is possible to ask you how many members of the staff have been kept here as a result of this exercise, and whether anything can be done from the Chair towards bringing them some sort of comfort for the kind of activities which have been going on tonight, when they have been kept out of their beds quite ridiculously into the early hours of the morning.

The CHAIRMAN stated that he thought that the Ayes had it: and, on his decision being challenged, it appeared to him that the Division was unnecessarily claimed, and he accordingly called upon the Members who supported and who challenged his decision successively to rise in their places, and he declared that the Ayes had it, four Members only who challenged his decision having stood up.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Back to
Forward to