§ 61. Mr. Harry GreenwayTo ask the Lord President of the Council how many private Members' Bills presented (a) as a result of a Member being in the first 20 in the ballot for private Members' Bills and (b) behind the Chair have been enacted in each of the past five Sessions; what were the figures for 1979–80 and 1969–70; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Wakeham)As the full answer is in the form of a table and contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, arrange for it to be published in the Official Report. I would add, however, that in each of the Sessions mentioned in the question the number of private Members' ballot Bills enacted has exceeded the number enacted following introduction under Standing Order No. 58.
§ Mr. GreenwayHas not the time come to devolve more power to the Back Benchers of this House, bearing in mind that there are about 4,000 laws on the statute book, almost exclusively contributed—if that is the right word—by the Government? In particular, could the private Members' Bill procedure be more open, and would my right hon. Friend support the requirement that those right hon. and hon. Members who object to private Members' Bills stand in their place and say "I object" loud and clear?
§ Mr. WakehamProcedural changes such as my hon. Friend suggests are for the Select Committee on Procedure to examine and it is not for me to make off-the-cuff suggestions at the Dispatch Box. Objection at 2.30 pm on Friday, which is contentious, is objection to a Bill being given a Second Reading without debate. That point is significant and should be borne in mind.
§ Mr. BurnsDoes my right hon. Friend agree that more private Members' Bills would stand a chance of progressing on to the statute book if non-contentious, non-party-political Bills having all-party support—such as the Control of Litter (Fines) Bill—were not objected to on Second Reading by the hon. Member for Stockton, North (Mr. Cook), who is a member of a political party that says it cares about the environment?
§ Mr. WakehamYes. I appreciate my hon. Friend's disappointment, but the procedures are well known to right hon. and hon. Members, many of whom accept that no one should object if a Bill dealing with a contentious matter is opposed at 2.30 pm on a Friday, when its principles have not been debated. However, I feel sure that right hon. and hon. Members in all parts of the House 17 would be supportive of any measures to tackle the problems of litter—as are the Government, subject of course to consideration of their practicalities.
§ Mr. DobsonWill the Leader of the House confirm that the bulk of Bills to which objection is made from a sedentary position every Friday are objected to by a Government Whip who is deployed to do that—usually the hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with his hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Greenway) that it would be better if right hon. and hon. Members were required to rise and declare their identity when objecting to a Bill?
§ Mr. WakehamThe hon. Gentleman seeks to squeeze in a party point where there is no party point to be made.
§ Mr. DobsonThe hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) did so.
§ Mr. WakehamThat is right, but I expect the behaviour of right hon. and hon. Members on the Opposition Front Bench to be different from that of right hon. and hon. Members who are disappointed that their own Bills will not pass. I can confirm to the hon. Gentleman that the procedure for objecting to Bills under the present Government is exactly the same as it was under the Labour Government.
§ The information is as follows:
Ballot Bills | Bills presented under SO 58' | |
1969–70 | 5 | 4 |
1979–80 | 5 | 3 |
1983–84 | 10 | 1 |
1984–85 | 11 | 4 |
1985–86 | 11 | 7 |
1986–87 | 6 | 5 |
1987–88 | 9 | 2 |
1 Not including Lords Bills taken charge of under SO 58(3) |