HC Deb 01 July 1996 vol 280 c553

As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

Mr. John Maxton (Glasgow, Cathcart)

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I know that it is unusual to query the selection of amendments and new clauses—or perhaps not so unusual. Am I right in saying that the criterion for selection is whether an amendment is in order and within the terms of the long title of a Bill? If an amendment or new clause satisfies that, there is no reason why it should not be selected. Is that right?

Madam Speaker

That is certainly one criterion for selection, but there are a number of important other criteria, such as whether an issue has already been discussed in Committee. I take them all into consideration.

Mr. Maxton

In that case I wonder whether you would like to compare new clause 1 with new clause 12. New clause 1 has not been selected; new clause 12 has. While not exactly the same, the contents of at least the first paragraph of each new clause are exactly the same. I should hate to think that one has been selected and the other has not because the latter was tabled by Back Benchers and the former by Opposition Front Benchers.

Madam Speaker

The hon. Gentleman is trying to tempt me to give reasons for my selection or non-selection. I spent a great deal of time this morning considering both new clauses—indeed, I practically know them by heart. I think that the hon. Gentleman will find that the best debate possible can be held on the new clause that I have selected.

Ordered, That the Broadcasting Bill [Lords], as amended, he considered in the following order, namely, New Clauses, New Schedules, amendments relating to Clauses 1 to 33, Schedule 1, Clauses 34 to 69, Schedule 2, Clauses 70 to 100, Schedule 3, Clauses 101 to 122, Schedule 4, Clauses 123 to 125, Schedule 5, Clauses 126 to 128, Schedule 6, Clauses 129 to 134, Schedules 7 and 8 and Clauses 135 and 136.—[Mr. Wood.]

Forward to