§ 4.9 pm
§ Mr. Tony Baldry (Banbury)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Wild Mammals (Hunting with Dogs) Bill had its Second Reading last November and went into Committee in December, and we have been considering it in Committee ever since. So far, as of today, we are on line 2 of clause 1. However, today we adjourned in some disarray because the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, the hon. Member for Knowsley, North and Sefton, East (Mr. Howarth), informed the Committee that, in the Government's view, not only is clause 1 defective, but the Bill is defective in a number of other instances. He undertook to advise the Committee by next week how the Bill could be put into proper order.
Two points of order arise for you, Madam Speaker. First, are the Government, or should they be, neutral on private Members' Bills? If they are neutral, what are Ministers doing giving advice to promoters of such Bills on how to put their Bills in order? If the Government are not neutral, why, given that the Bill has been in Committee since last December, have not the Home Office and Ministers tendered their advice much earlier?
That brings me to my second point for you, Madam Speaker. You will know that time for private Members' Bills on the Floor of the House and in Committee is finite. The longer we are in Committee, the less time there is for other private Members' Bills to go into Committee and complete their stages. There is now every possibility that a number of private Members' Bills, which have had a Second Reading in the House, will not reach the statute book for lack of time, because this Committee is hogging Standing Committee C.
In those circumstances—they are very unusual circumstances, given that all the work we have done to date has been otiose—I understand that you, Madam Speaker, have the power to set up a Special Standing Committee, and you may wish to consider doing that. Otherwise, many hon. Members will feel aggrieved that we have been hogging so much time.
The Bill is a complete shambles. We have been sitting for weeks now, and all the work that we have done to date, we are now told, is otiose. That is a disgrace to the House.
§ Mr. Ian Cawsey (Brigg and Goole)Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. I, too, serve on that Committee, and that was not the advice given by the Minister today. The Minister said that the Bill could be improved, not that all the work that we had done was irrelevant and must be disregarded. The Committee has agreed a new sittings motion allowing it to sit twice a week, so that, further to your comments in the House last week, it can make progress.
§ Madam SpeakerI shall not allow a debate on this, because, as the House knows, I do not get involved in the details of Committee work unless the Chairman of a Committee were to approach me to do so, and the Chairman of this Committee has not done so. However, I take seriously the points of order that have been made.
I understand that, this morning, the Minister suggested that there was a likelihood of some amendments being forthcoming from the Home Office to assist with 1061 clause 1. I was not aware that the Committee ended in uproar. My understanding is that the Committee did not oppose the motion to suspend the sitting until next week, when it wished to sit both morning and afternoon.
I repeat that it is not the role of the Speaker to get involved in Committee work unless asked to do so by the Chairman. However, I want Committees to run smoothly, and I shall make it my business to see what help I can give to move the matter along speedily and with proper procedures.