Business of the House (Hansard, 22 November 1989)

§ Sir Peter Emery (Honiton)
You will recall, Mr. Speaker, and the House knows that, for many moons, there has been pressure on the Government to consider and deal with Select Committee on Procedure reports. From the dates and figures in the motion, it may not be obvious that this is a favourable reaction to the Procedure Committee's second report on private Members' time, which was produced in April of this year. I hope that hon. Members will frequently see such speed of action with other reports.
It is of particular importance that the Government have gone further in meeting the wishes of the Procedure Committee by further safeguarding the time of private Members than the Select Committee recommended. I am certain that hon. Members realise that, last year, we had 12 days of private Members' motions, when an hon. Member could move any motion he wanted, and 12 days for private 118 Members' legislation—six days for Second Readings and six days for remaining stages and Report. With this motion, much to the pleasure of the Select Committee, the Government are giving an extra day for Second Reading. Instead of six Members of Parliament being assured that their Bill will be debated on Second Reading, seven hon. Members' names will be at the top of the ballot.
However, the difficulty, as pointed out by the Procedure Committee, is that there is a backlog and a problem in dealing with Report and remaining stages. The Government may have to look at that again. There would normally be some amendments to this resolution, because the Government have not dealt with the interference with private Members' time by petitions or speeches on writs, on one of which the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) made a particularly delightful speech last Session. I have an assurance that the Government intend to move resolutions to deal with this matter before we consider legislation in January. That assurance is most welcome.
The Government's speed of action may be considered revolutionary, although I do not believe that anybody could consider the Lord President a revolutionary figure, but I hope that this may portend the fact that, when the Procedure Committee's report on European legislation is before the House next week, we will see an equally rapid reaction.

§ Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is a short point.

§ Mr. Speaker
I should like to put the Question first, please, if it is not to do with this matter.

§ Mr. Speaker
Now I will take the point of order.

§ Mr. Powell
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order is shorter than the last. It concerns yesterday's Hansard. Now that we are on television, we should get the Official Report correct, because the media might have the pictures wrong. In his speech on the Loyal Address yesterday, my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, East (Mr. Hughes) referred to a hospital in East Glamorgan. In an intervention, I asked him to name the hospital because of the situation now arising there and the fact that doctors are going to resign. However, at column 49 of the Official Report, I am also named as the hon. Member who made an intervention about the fact that the Queen's Speech made no mention of Wales. I point out that the hon. Member who made that second admirable intervention was Geraint Howells, not myself, Ray Powell. I cannot see the hon. Gentleman in his place, but the record should be put right so that, if the media catch my face and not Geraint's, they may identify us correctly.

§ Mr. Speaker
I thank the hon. Gentleman for putting that right, but perhaps in future he will refer to another hon. Member by his constituency.