§ Question put, That the Clause stand part of the Bill:—
§ The Committee proceeded to a Division, and The CHAIRMAN stated that he thought that the Ayes had it; and, on 1662 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, nine Members only who challenged his decision having stood up.
§ Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ The ChairmanOrder. I would like the Committee to bear with me for a moment, if hon. Members will be so kind as to do so. There is nothing in the world that I would not do to support the rights of all hon. Members, however small minorities are. But I have a duty not only to the Committee but to Parliament as a whole, and that is to do my best to see that nothing is done to this House which may bring disrepute to it in the country as a whole. I beg hon. Members on my left to believe that I do not say that with a view to thwarting their perfect rights to go through the procedure which we are now going through. But I do beg them to note that when all this comes to be seen by the world in general on a consolidation Bill it will not look well.
§ The ChairmanOrder. I repeat what I said before. There is nothing I can do, and indeed there is nothing I would do, to stop them exercising their rights under the Standing Orders, but I felt it my duty to point this out to them in the interests of Parliament as a whole.
§ Mr. WellbelovedOn a point of order. This might assist your aim of trying to maintain the dignity of the House, Sir Robert. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] We are in this difficult position: the situation is thrust upon us because of the Government's understandable desire to get the maximum amount of business through at this sitting. In view of all the circumstances we will be more than happy to facilitate the passage of this Bill if the Government would be prepared to consider taking the Second Reading of the Hydrocarbon Oil (Customs and Excise) Bill [Lords], on which there would be only a minimum number of speeches from this side, and then not 1663 proceed to the consideration stage of that Bill. I think that that is a perfectly reasonable proposition. If the Government are prepared to accept that sort of reasonable suggestion—
§ Mr. WellbelovedHaving gone to this stage we on this side have a responsibility to show the country as a whole that we are not prepared to accept a situation in which the Government of the day can steamroller over the rights of hon. Members.
§ The ChairmanOrder. The hon. Gentleman is quite entitled to raise that point of order. In view of the facts as we see them, and as this is a consolidation Bill, I could not possibly agree with his sentiments. That is not to say that he is not right to do what he believes to be best. But the responsibility for any damage to our Parliament and our institution must lie on his side of the House in this case.
§ Mr. Tom Boardman (Leicester, South-West)On a point of order. As the hon. Gentleman has indicated that there is no objection to the individual Clauses, might not we consider voting upon them in groups? That might facilitate the procedure.
§ The ChairmanI am well aware that that would be a solution to our difficulties. Perhaps I could ask hon. Members if they would consent to my grouping the Clauses in the groups they see on the front of the Bill to save time, so that they would have some possibility of Divisions, at any rate, and we might make some real progress.
§ Mr. WellbelovedFurther to that point of order. At this stage I do not think that that would be helpful. It may well be that with the passage of time a more reasonable solution will be suggested.
§ The ChairmanI think that it will serve the best interests of the Committee if we get on, unless hon. Members wish to raise serious points.