HC Deb 15 June 1976 vol 913 cc310-2

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, at this day's sitting, Proceedings on the Methodist Church Bill [Lords] and the London Transport Bill set down for consideration at Seven o'clock by direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means shall, instead of being considered at that hour, be considered at half-past Eight o'clock; that the Methodist Church Bill [Lords] and any Motion for an instruction relating to the Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until half-past Eleven o'clock or for three hours after the Bill has been entered upon, whichever is the later; and that the London Transport Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed until any hour.—[The Prime Minister.]

Mr. Lipton

This is an extraordinary and unusual motion which, fortunately, is debatable, even if it is not capable of a rational explanation.

The motion provides that the proceedings on the Energy Bill [Lords] and on the baking tests (cereals) motion, instead of terminating at 7 o'clock, should terminate at 8.30. Presumably the effect will be that for four and a half hours or thereabouts the House will have an opportunity of debating the Second Reading of the Energy Bill [Lords].

The motion also provides that the House will spend up to three hours solving or dealing with some internal problem concerning the Methodist Church Bill [Lords]. That measure may be of importance to Liberal Party Members, but I do not think that it is of sufficient magnitude to justify the House spending three hours on it.

After that, at 11.30 p.m., we are to go on to discuss the London Transport Bill ad infinitum. That means that the House may be sitting until 4 o'clock tomorrow morning, just as it did this morning. It seems an abuse of the procedures of the House to spring a motion like this upon us at the last minute. It shows a complete lack of proportion in assessing the value of the different items that we are called upon to consider this day.

The Lord President of the Council and the Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Michael Foot)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps I might assist my hon. Friend. The length of time for discussion of the Energy Bill [Lords] has been proposed in response to suggestions that were made when I announced the business on Thursday. The time for the Methodist Church Bill [Lords] follows the provisions laid down for private business put down by the Chairman of Ways and Means. We are following the arrangements which are normally followed in that respect.

Mr. Speaker

The Question is the business motion. As many as are of that opinion say "Aye".

Hon. Members

Aye.

Mr. Speaker

To the contrary, "No".

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Speaker

I think the "Ayes" have it. The "Ayes" have it.

Mr. Foot

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have put the Question.

Mr. Beith

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Am I mistaken in thinking that I heard a "No" from the other side of the House? Is a Division to take place or not?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I think that the hon. Gentleman observed what I observed. I repeated "The 'Ayes' have it." If the House wishes a Division, the House can always have one. But it is an old custom that, if it is repeated often enough, there is co-operation. I thought that the "Ayes" had it.

Question agreed to.