HC Deb 21 November 1985 vol 87 cc430-2

4.5 pm

Mr. Robin Maxwell-Hyslop (Tiverton)

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise with you, Mr. Speaker, a point of order of which I have given you notice. Will you consider, and make a statement upon, any action which you deem it necessary to take to enable Members already in a Division Lobby with the intention of voting on a closure motion to become aware that the Division has been called off and the main Question is to be put? The problem arises because hon. Members who are already in a Division Lobby cannot hear what is happening in the Chamber and will tend to interpret the initial ringing of the Division Bell on the main Question as being the second ringing of the Division Bell on the original closure motion when it is called off.

There is a simple way of overcoming that problem. Coloured lights could be installed in the Division Lobbies where they can be seen by all hon. Members. They should be illuminated for two minutes after a Division is called off. That is the course that I judge to be most convenient for hon. Members and the efficient conduct of the business of the House.

I believe that my memory serves me right that when it was thought convenient to install two digital clocks in the Chamber there was no investigation by the Select Committee on Procedure. It was an obvious and convenient step, and I believe that this is a step that you could properly take, Mr. Speaker, within your own authority since it involves a change not in procedure, but merely in mechanical facilities, and that there is no need to refer it to the Select Committee.

Mr. Speaker

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving notice of his point of order. The confusion that occurred last night which led me to put the Question again is not unprecedented, but it is rare and I should like to consider carefully, in that context, what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. It would be dramatic to have the psychedelic effects that the hon. Gentleman suggests but would not a simpler solution be to put monitors the Division Lobbies?

Mr. Speaker

That is exactly what I should like to consider.

Sir Hugh Rossi (Hornsey and Wood Green)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As you are aware, several hon. Members attended the magnificent performance of Monteverdi's vespers last night in aid of your fund for the restoration of St. Margaret's Church. By arrangement, we left St. Margaret's at 9.50 pm to record our vote in the important Division. I went through the Aye Lobby at the correct time, not on the procedural motion when the Division was called off, but on the main Question. On looking at Hansard this morning, I find that my name is not recorded as having voted.

I therefore ask for two things: first, that the record be put right; and, secondly, that, in view of the confusion and the possibility of other names having been omitted—some names that I expected to see are not in the list—there be a recount.

Mr. Speaker

If what the hon. Gentleman says is right—I am sure it is—I shall ensure that his name is recorded as having voted among the Ayes. On the second point, I have taken account of what the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) has said, that the figures may show a discrepancy of one in the names and the count. I cannot accede to the second request.

Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. It might be helpful to know what caused the problem last night. It arose from the fact that it was not whipped business. With great respect to those hon. Members who acted as tellers and then were not found for the closure motion but were in place for the main Question, they were not professional Whips and they had no control, so to speak. When things alter in the Chamber during Government business or whipped business, the Whips get into position to inform people in the Lobbies and the procedure goes through smoothly. Last night we had good amateur Whips, who caused confusion because of their lack of experience.

Mr. Speaker

I am sure that the usual channels will be heartened by the hon. Gentleman's support of them.

Mr. Peter Shore (Bethnal Green and Stepney)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday there was a double confusion. There were hon. Members in the Aye Lobby who genuinely thought that they were voting on the procedural motion, but also hon. Members who thought that they were voting on the substantive motion, who voted, like the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Sir H. Rossi), and then immediately repaired to whatever task they were performing outside the House. If you are going to correct the voting register to take account of the hon. Gentleman's vote and his subsequent absence, surely I am right to assume that other hon. Members may have been similarly affected. If so, does it not put the validity of the vote in considerable difficulty?

Mr. Speaker

I cannot agree with the right hon. Gentleman. There may have been a discrepancy of one, and, as the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Sir H. Rossi) has mentioned that he passed through the Lobby, that might be how it was caused. On the right hon. Gentleman's second point, he will know perfectly well because he was present that, because of the confusion, I caused the Division on the main motion to take place again. We cannot have yet a further Division.

Mr. John McWilliam (Blaydon)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I apologise to you and my colleagues if I caused any confusion last night? When the hon. Member for Plymouth, Drake (Miss Fookes) sat down three minutes before the hour of interruption and I rose, I should have made it plain that I intended to resume my seat on the hour of interruption, so that we would have a clean Division. I did not do so, and I apologise if I caused any confusion as a result. The hon. Lady chose to move the closure a minute after that, and that is how the difficulty arose. If it was in any way my fault, I apologise to the House.

Mr. Robert Parry (Liverpool, Riverside)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Today two Liberal Members raised the critical position of Liverpool. Is that not hypocritical, as many of Liverpool's problems arose when the Liberal party was in control with the Conservatives—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The point of order must be one that I can answer.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Further to the earlier point of order, Mr. Speaker. On big occasions such as last night, you can be placed in some difficulty. Several related incidents caused the problem, one of which towards the end concerned the Prime Minister. Many Tory Members—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I am always grateful for the hon. Gentleman's support, but I am not responsible for the Prime Minister or for how she casts her vote. The point of order must be one on which I can rule.

Mr. Skinner

The point that I am coming to is that I do not want you to be placed in that predicament again, Mr. Speaker. If we have to have a recount, which may be a possibility if all those hon. Members did not vote when they should have done, it would be helpful if the Prime Minister could tell us beforehand how she will vote because last night Tory Members were chasing from one Lobby to another asking, "Which Lobby has she gone in? Let me follow her."