RECLAMATION AND DISPOSAL OF LAND IN MAPLIN AREA (Hansard, 13 June 1973)

§ Mr. Spearing
I beg to move Amendment No. 2, in page 2, line 11, at end insert: up to a maximum of 5,000 acres". This amendment would reduce the amount of land made available to the British Airports Authority to a maximum of 5,000 acres. In his speech on the new clauses, the Under-Secretary of State, for the first time, told us of the large areas of land which will be reclaimed under the Bill, but what he did not tell us—this has not been made clear either in Committee or in the House today—is why such large areas of land are needed even for a two-runway airport.
Plainly, even if the Government wish to have an airport at Maplin, it is possible to do so on a much smaller area of land than is provided for in the Bill. I move the amendment, therefore, to allow the Government to explain why it is necessary to reclaim about 70 square kilometres of land, or about 17,000 acres, when two runways could be put on a much smaller area, perhaps 2,000 acres or less.

§ Mr. Speaker
The Question is, That the amendment be made. As many as are of that opinion say "Aye". To the contrary—

§ Mr. Eldon Griffiths
rose—

Hon. Members
The Question has been put.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Until the voices have been collected, the hon. Member has a perfect right to rise. The voices had not been collected.

§ Mr. Walter Harrison (Wakefield)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You started to collect the voices, and you had turned to the Government side. I am certain that the voices, if dealt with in the correct manner, would have been collected. We called "Aye", and we should have been having a Division, but there was a delay in the calling of the 1630 "Noes". I feel that there should have been a Division.

§ Mr. Speaker
This is a matter to which I have given careful consideration and on which I have taken guidance, because it has arisen from time to time. I am advised, and I believe the position to be, that until the voices have finally been collected, the Minister or any other hon. Member is entitled to intervene. I so rule, on advice.

§ Mr. Eldon Griffiths
rose—

§ Mr. Edward Short
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Does that mean that even in the course of a Division any hon. Member may be called and make a speech?

§ Mr. Speaker
If I begin to say, "The Question is …" such-and-such, and I am in course of collecting the voices, until I have come to the final point any hon. Member may rise. I have considered this matter very carefully, not in relation to this particular occasion, because it happens from time to time, and I believe that my ruling is correct in accordance with the precedents in the matter.

§ Mr. Short
Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is an important point of order. You called a Division.[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] You have always ruled that even points of order may not be raised in the first stage of a Division.

§ Mr. Speaker
Not in relation to this particular occasion. As I say, I have gone carefully into the question whether an hon. Member may rise in the middle of the calling of a Division, and I am told that the precedent and the rule is as I have stated it. I so rule now. Until I have completed the collecting of the voices, an hon. Member is entitled to rise and be called to speak.

§ Mr. Eldon Griffiths
Far be it from me to deprive the hon. Member for Acton (Mr. Spearing) of his Division. For the convenience of my hon. Friends, perhaps I may say that the amendment, not, apparently, in the name of the official Opposition, is not acceptable to the Government, and I advise my hon. Friends not to support it.