House of Commons Commission

HC Deb 02 February 2000 vol 343 cc1152-77

Motion made, and Question proposed, That Sir Peter Lloyd be discharged from the House of Commons Commission and Mr. Eric Forth be appointed a member of the Commission under the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978.—[Mr. Jamieson.]

10.13 pm

Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston)

I should like to remind the House of the words of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), spoken in the Chamber on 20 January this year. During the debate on the Braithwaite report he openly and honestly described his lack of understanding of the House of Commons Commission. He also described his views on how members should be appointed to it. His desires have clearly not been met, because he has been nominated through the usual channels. [Interruption.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael J. Martin)

Order. There is far too much background noise. The House must come to order. I also remind hon. Members that the terms of the motion are very narrow indeed.

Mr. Miller

The right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst expressed concern about the process of appointment and proposed that a different process should be implemented. Clearly, it would be entirely wrong of me to speculate on what that process should be, as that would be outside the terms of the motion. However, if one looks at the duties that are undertaken by the House of Commons Commission as set out in the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978, it is clear that it has some extremely important and rigorous functions. It is quite proper that the House should consider his suitability for the position by way of a formal interview.

It has been alleged in recent debates that the right hon. Gentleman was flying his own kite and acting out of control of his party Whips, but the prima facie evidence before the interview committee tonight is that that is not the case. Clearly, he would not have been nominated through the usual channels had he been acting outside the control of the Whips. So all the stories that we were told during that ridiculous all-nighter last week that the Whips were not in control of the situation must have been untrue.

I return to the functions of the House of Commons Commission. It is responsible for important functions in the House, not only in providing important services to hon. Members and the staff, but in ensuring that we are open and accountable to citizens.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham)

Those of us who know my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) know full well that he is a vigorous defender of the rights of the House. That being so, will the hon. Gentleman tell us why he is not fit to be on the House of Commons Commission?

Mr. Miller

With the greatest of respect, I have not suggested that. I am just reminding the House that we are making an appointment to an extremely important body.

Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst)

indicated assent.

Mr. Miller

The right hon. Gentleman acknowledges that. Yet on 20 January 2000 he said: However splendidly the Commission may work, I am not convinced—because I do not know enough about how it works—that that is in the forefront of its mind when it goes about the strategic planning that may or may not happen."—[Official Report, 20 January 2000; Vol.342, c.1079.] As he acknowledged, he clearly does not understand and has not read the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978.

Lorna Fitzsimons (Rochdale)

Will my hon. Friend also consider that, as there are so few appointments to this august body that adjudicates over so many important issues for us Back Benchers, its members must be representative of a large majority of hon. Members—and that can hardly be said of the individual whom we are discussing this evening?

Mr. Miller

I very much agree with the first point made by my hon. Friend—that the person should be representative of a wide range of Members. However, her second point will be tested by the interview process in which we are engaged. Given that the Commission—[Interruption.]

Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Miller

Of course.

Mr. Bercow

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way, but I am a trifle perplexed by his use of the word "interview". In reference to these proceedings, is it customary, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for someone conducting an interview to do so by making a lengthy and rather tedious speech? [Laughter.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. [Interruption.] I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are not conducting an interview.

Mr. Miller

Clearly, I must have been in order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, or you would have rapidly stopped me. Perhaps the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) has had a word with my Whips, who from time to time accuse me of being long-winded, boring and tedious.

Hon. Members

Never.

Charlotte Atkins (Staffordshire, Moorlands)

In case my hon. Friend was about to become tedious, he might care to reflect on the fact that there are about four times as many Opposition Members in the Chamber for this debate as there were for the previous one.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) has been in good order, but if he responds to that intervention he will be out of order.

Mr. Miller

I take your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As for being long-winded and tedious, I must point out that this is the largest audience to which I have ever spoken in the House.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Miller

I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Ms Ward).

Ms Claire Ward (Watford)

Does my hon. Friend agree that Members of the House who want to represent Back Benchers on such an important Committee should have taken part in a considerable amount of debate, and should have ensured that they knew much about the subjects on which they will represent Back Benchers? That would include ensuring that they knew what the Commission exists to do.

Mr. Miller

That is precisely why I am making my speech. On his own admission, the right hon. Gentleman does not know what the task of the Commission is. There are plenty of Opposition Members who know precisely what it is, because they have read in detail the reports made by the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), who speaks for the Commission. They have participated in debates such as the one that we held on the Braithwaite report on 20 January.

My hon. Friend makes an extremely important point. We are dealing with an important issue—

Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley)

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Miller

I want to finish my point.

We are discussing an important body, which deals not only with services to Members and with members of the House's staff, but with the public outside. People outside the House look on the quaint ways in which it works with some disdain. Indeed, it has sometimes been suggested that the practices engaged in by the right hon. Gentleman lead the public to have a certain disregard for the House.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Miller

I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Chorley (Mr. Hoyle).

Mr. Hoyle

I assure my hon. Friend that it is not just the Whips who think that he is tiresome and boring. Will he take up a relevant point and tell us what benefits the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) could bring to that most august body, the Commission? That is most important. Hon. Members seem eager to condemn the right hon. Gentleman, but I am sure that my hon. Friend will be able to explain the benefits as he continues his speech.

Mr. Miller

I can think of a number of benefits that the right hon. Gentleman would bring—his wit, his humour and his snappy dressing, including his choice of ties. Whether they would benefit the House is another matter.

Mr. Tom Levitt (High Peak)

The question of how representative the right hon. Gentleman might be has been raised. His title shows that he is a member of the Privy Council, so he is therefore among the minority in the Chamber. Does my hon. Friend consider that the right hon. Gentleman's membership of the Privy Council is the closest that he has ever got to being "PC" in his life?

Mr. Miller

I see you move forward, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I know that I would be straying dangerously from the terms of the motion if I considered my hon. Friend's point. I shall resist the temptation to consider it now. I shall speak to him outside the Chamber.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. If we have so many interventions immediately after one another, there will be no flow to the hon. Gentleman's speech.

Mr. Miller

I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Judy Mallaber).

Judy Mallaber (Amber Valley)

Does my hon. Friend agree that, as the Commission has important functions in respect of the employment of staff, it would be incredibly helpful if, before the end of the debate, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) let us know what experience he has of staff employment practices? Would he be prepared to undertake equal opportunities training in terms of selection and recruitment and what is his attitude to an important issue that concerns many Members: child care facilities for Members and the staff employed by the House?

Mr. Miller

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that point. I would not want to pursue the right hon. Gentleman too far along that line, because the public record shows that his views are extremely clear.

The functions of the Commission need to be considered with much care. As I said earlier, issues such as communication with the outside world are important. However, when we discussed the Braithwaite report on 20 January, there were interesting exchanges in which the right hon. Gentleman acknowledged that he was out of his depth. Perhaps, in a year's time, after he has mugged up and read line by line the reports of the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire—the right hon. Gentleman laughs but he has to read them—and developed a fuller understanding of the role of the Commission, the House should take a different view.

Innovations are important to the House. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley that child care is important as are the development of broadcasting, the development of Hansard on the web and the improvement of facilities for members of the public. I hope that I am not using an unparliamentary expression, but the signs are that the right hon. Gentleman is something of a luddite on such matters.

Mr. Brian White (Milton Keynes, North-East)

Those of us who were present for the Braithwaite report debate heard the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) argue passionately for elections to bodies such as the Commission. Given those comments, is it not strange that he should allow his name to go forward in this way?

Mr. Miller

As I said earlier, I might stray out of the terms of the motion if I responded in too much detail to the alternative methods that could be pursued. However, it is on the public record that the right hon. Gentleman believes that the process of appointment on the nod—we are certainly not doing that tonight—is not an ideal mechanism. Appointments should be subject to detailed scrutiny.

Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that a Member of independent mind is needed? Does he further agree that my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) is not only of independent mind but, unlike those on the green swathes opposite, he is not one of the Whips' apparatchiks? He will stand up for the rights of Parliament, and more importantly, he will stand up for nursing women employees of the House. [Interruption.]

Mr. Miller

I see that the right hon. Gentleman has appointed the hon. Gentleman his campaign manager—and a powerful speech he made too. The hon. Gentleman is wrong, of course, because he said that his right hon. Friend would stand up for Back Benchers. The right hon. Gentleman might stand up for the totally independent Members who have views that are out of touch with those of the majority in the House.

Mr. Fabricant

The Whips.

Mr. Miller

I do not know about the Whips. I have not seen any sign from them that I should shut up or do anything else, and I am not looking their way in case I get the wrong guidance.

The Commission should represent minority views, including those of minority parties. It is particularly important that the House take into account all the parties represented here.

Mr. Fabricant

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. With the cheering, the hon. Gentleman may have misheard me. I referred not to minority views of the House, but to independent views.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst)

I see that the hon. Gentleman has not lost his touch.

Mr. Miller

I shall make my point to the hon. Member for Lichfield (Mr. Fabricant) a little clearer. Minority parties must be properly represented by the Commission, and someone who is so independent-minded that he does not take into account the consensus that must be achieved to make the Commission work is inappropriate for this post.

It is possible that I am entirely wrong about the right hon. Gentleman, because the Opposition Whip, the hon. Member for West Derbyshire (Mr. McLoughlin), may over time have given him advice and guidance. Perhaps what we perceive as the actions of a man of independent mind are in fact those of the independent mind of the hon. Member for West Derbyshire. That puts paid to the observations of the hon. Member for Lichfield.

Ms Joan Ryan (Enfield, North)

Does my hon. Friend agree that whether or not the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) is of independent mind, it is extremely important that someone who seeks to sit on a Commission with such an important role in employment in the House make a full and firm commitment to legislation on employment terms and conditions, in particular the national minimum wage?

Mr. Miller

I honestly do not know, off the top of my head, what is the right hon. Gentleman's view on the national minimum wage, other than that he traipsed through the Lobby to vote against it. However, I would stray slightly from the motion if I developed that point.

My hon. Friend makes an important point about the issues that members of staff face from time to time when the day's programme of business is so severely disrupted that it causes them domestic disruption, particularly if they are low paid or have a family. That point needs to be considered carefully.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Miller

I shall give way in a moment.

If the man of independent mind is independently causing that disruption, that is not a good reason for appointing him to the Commission.

Spurious debates that are dragged out for the hell of it by the right hon. Gentleman are costing the taxpayer a ridiculous sum of money. I have been probing the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire on the matter, although I must say that I have yet to get a satisfactory answer from him. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that that was precisely his point at column 1079 on 20 January. So, we have a man who acknowledges that he does not understand the Commission's role and believes that taxpayers' interests should be taken into account, but who seems to be acting independently—or perhaps with the guidance of the hon. Member for West Derbyshire, the Opposition Whip—in dragging out proceedings, which costs the House a lot of money.

Mr. Andrew Dismore (Hendon)

The right hon. Gentleman has very clear views on the issues of Europe. Bearing in mind that much of our employment legislation, such as that on the limit on working hours and parental leave, emanates from European directives, what assurances does my hon. Friend think the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) would be able to give the House on his willingness and ability to act within the spirit as well as the letter of that legislation?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I do not know whether the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) needs my help in recognising that that is a red herring.

Mr. Miller

I almost beat you to it, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I was about to say that I believed that my hon. Friend's intervention was outside the terms of the motion, although it was interesting speculation.

Mr. Martin Salter (Reading, West)

There has been much talk of independence of mind. It is a tribute to the independence of mind of Labour Members that they are prepared to defy their Whip's order.

How does my hon. Friend square the House of Commons Commission's responsibility for the staff of the House and the fact that a number of our staff are from the Irish Republic with the description by the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), a few days ago, of people from the Republic of Ireland as aliens … from a … foreign country"?—[Official Report, 19 January 2000; Vol. 342, c. 899.] Is that an appropriate view?

Mr. Miller

On my hon. Friend's first point, I perhaps ought to seek your protection, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because I will not be threatened by anyone in the House over this debate—apart from your good self. I have not had a discussion on the matter with anyone currently sitting on the Treasury Bench.

My hon. Friend's second point is important to my observations about the need for the Commission to be representative of all interest groups in the House. Of course, there are people who take somewhat eccentric views by comparison with their party's norm, and their views must be accommodated. Some hon. Members represent very small minority interests. One of my near constituency neighbours, the hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Bell), is his own Chief Whip and party leader. His views must be accommodated, too. However, I am not sure, given the kind of behaviour to which my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, West (Mr. Salter) referred, that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst is properly equipped to do the job.

Mr. Michael J. Foster (Worcester)

I feel that I must spring to the defence of the right hon. Gentleman, given my previous experience of him representing me. In judging whether he might be a suitable candidate for the Commission, the House might find the following information useful. Between 1985 and 1992, I lived in Redditch, where the right hon. Gentleman was my elected Member of Parliament. In many ways, he was an ideal representative of the Conservative party: we never saw him; we never had a leaflet or letter from him.

Mr. Miller

I fear that I shall have to pursue that point outside the Chamber, lest I suffer the wrath of the Deputy Speaker.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Miller

I give way to—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. May I repeat the advice given earlier? This is not Question Time. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be allowed to make some progress.

Mr. Miller

Were it Question Time and were I a Front Bencher, I would be considerably better prepared than I am now.

Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe)

I, too, should like to defend the reputation of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth). We know that he believes strongly that the House passes business far too quickly, without adequate debate and sometimes late at night. I suggest that the motion should be allowed to pass only when the Government have agreed to a full day's debate on the subject.

Mr. Miller

I do not think that I could keep the debate going for a full day. However, there is a serious underlying point: the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst has himself raised the issue of the process of appointments, arguing that it is unsatisfactory. We are now trying to deal with his appointment, albeit in a muddled way—[HON. MEMBERS: "Yes."] I accept that. Hon. Members from both sides are asking probing questions, yet there has been no formal interview, selection process or hustings for an extremely important function.

Mr. Peter Bradley (The Wrekin)

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Miller

No, I must make a little progress and end my remarks shortly, because other right hon. and hon. Members want to contribute to the debate.

I shall draw my remarks together by referring again to the debate on Braithwaite, in which the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst raised some important issues, but acknowledged that he knew nothing about them. The Braithwaite report referred to the process of management within the House of Commons and made several important recommendations. It strikes me, not only that the Commission should be composed of right hon. and hon. Members who not only understand the sensitivities of all the parties and interest groups represented in the House, but that candidates for a position should be people who can bring a certain expertise to the complex and varied functions of the Commission.

My concern is that the right hon. Gentleman did not know what the Commission does, so we do not know what expertise he can bring to it. We can read about what he has done and we have heard him make some interesting speeches in the past, but, at this time, the House has no knowledge as to whether or not he is an appropriate candidate for the Commission. I agree that the process in which we are engaged is unsatisfactory, but it is the best one we have.

I should now draw my speech to a close because others want to speak. Irrespective of the outcome, I genuinely hope that tonight's important debate will stimulate discussion within the Commission about the process of future appointments—[Interruption.] I am pleased to see the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire acknowledge that point.

Mr. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire)

Before my hon. Friend concludes his remarks as to the suitability of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), will he refer to the terms of reference of the Commission, which include responsibility for the British-Irish interparliamentary body? In the light of the right hon. Gentleman's remarks on 19 January, will my hon. Friend emphasise that when we discuss people from the Republic of Ireland we are talking not about aliens coming from a strange foreign country"—[Official Report, 19 January 2000; Vol. 342, c. 899.] but about people with local connections? Given the right hon. Gentleman's remarks, is my hon. Friend convinced that the right hon. Gentleman is an appropriate person to have such a responsibility? In addition, given the Commission's demanding timetable of 13 meetings a year, does the right hon. Gentleman have the time and energy to spare from persistent filibustering to fulfil such an arduous schedule?

Mr. Miller

I honestly do not know. I described earlier the qualities that I think the right hon. Gentleman has—his charm, his humour, his tie—[Interruption.] I do not think his waistcoat is that charming. Beyond that, all we know about the right hon. Gentleman is that, from time to time, he tends to frustrate many of us late in the evening. Perhaps I am doing the same to him now.

As a result of this discussion, I want the Commission to consider whether we ought to review the process of appointment, and I want the House to determine, through this process of interview—which I am not allowed to call an interview—whether the right hon. Gentleman is suitable for that onerous task.

10.46 pm

Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire)

I want to focus the attention of the House on the fact that the motion is important, and that this is a House of Commons matter. It has nothing to do with the Whips or with party political advantage. A vacancy that exists on the Commission must be filled. That is crucial for the functioning of the House of Commons. We are therefore right to spend some time collectively considering the people who are nominated to fill such vacancies.

The debate is good fun, but the subject is important. The hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) made some good points. We must make sure that the matter remains a House of Commons matter and does not get into the hands of the usual channels and the Whips. I know; I have been there, and I know that there are better ways of dealing with it.

The debate this evening has stimulated some important questions. As a result, it is possible that, in the context of Braithwaite, the Commission will reflect on a mechanism that gives hon. Members a chance sensitively to select people in whom they have confidence. If that does not happen, the Commission cannot do the work that it is charged to do.

Let me clarify what the House of Commons Commission does and the responsibilities of the Commissioners. The Commission is a corporate body, set up, as the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston said, under the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978. It has six members. The Chair is the Speaker. The Leader of the House is a member of the Commission by statute, and the Leader of the official Opposition has the power to nominate a third member of the Commission.

There are three remaining positions. One of them is the one that we are discussing tonight. There is another vacancy, because the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Dr. Moonie) has been promoted. It is important that we fill the vacancies quickly and do so in good order.

Three Members are nominated by the House to serve on the Commission. It has two principal functions. Briefly stated, it has the duty to appoint all the members of staff in the precincts of the Palace of Westminster. The number of staff, their remuneration and terms of service must be set down, considered and decided by the Commission.

Ms Ward

Does the hon. Gentleman not fear that, given the power of members of the Commission to appoint members of staff in the House, the right hon. Gentleman may discriminate by not wishing to favour anyone from the Irish Republic?

Mr. Kirkwood

That is a matter for each hon. Member. I have views on the suitability of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), but the decision is a matter for hon. Members. The hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston was right to refer to the Braithwaite report, because the right hon. Gentleman made an important contribution to the debate on it. Anyone who is interested in determining his views through that report is entitled to do that.

Judy Mallaber

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us whether Commissioners receive training on their employment duties, employment law and good practice? We might want to bear the answer in mind when considering the suitability of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst.

Mr. Kirkwood

That is a sensible question. We have no training, but we have access to the Board of Management, which comprises paid professionals, who are experts. If we believe that specific questions are not within our competence, we bring in consultants. The House of Commons Commission is responsible for providing appropriate terms and conditions for modern times. It is important that we set an example and get the best advice.

Mr. John Cryer (Hornchurch)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The narrow motion applies purely to the fitness of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) to serve on the Commission. It does not cover the Commission's functions.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

It is in order for the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) to refer to the Commission's functions because there is an interplay between that and the suitability of the candidate. However, I hope that he will not go into too much detail because the motion is narrowly drafted.

Mr. Kirkwood

I am not wasting time. I am trying to sketch briefly the role of a Commissioner because I want to develop my view on the qualities that are necessary to do the job properly. I cannot do that unless I explain some of the responsibilities.

The Commission consists of six Commissioners. It is chaired by the Speaker and appointed for a Parliament.

Mr. Frank Roy (Motherwell and Wishaw)

As a fellow Scot, who is aware of the criticism that Scots are over-represented in the House, and even in the Cabinet, does the hon. Gentleman believe that the appointment of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) would exacerbate that?

Mr. Kirkwood

If I followed that line, I would be ruled out of order.

I am trying, with little success, to describe briefly the Commission's responsibilities. Commissioners work with the Board of Management.

Mr. Clive Efford (Eltham)

The hon. Gentleman takes a fatherly tone with the House. Perhaps he could explain exactly what we should expect from individuals who are appointed to the Commission.

Mr. Kirkwood

If people would leave me alone, I could try to do that. The six Commissioners are charged with the responsibility of implementing best employment practice, working with consultants and being the best possible employer. That means being open, fair, efficient, and applying equal opportunities policy. The treatment of staff is a crucial element of Commissioners' work.

Another onerous responsibility is setting the votes and estimates that are to be placed before the House. They totalled £188 million in 1998–99. Commissioners must work them out with the various domestic committees and the Finance and Services Select Committee, ensuring that all the angles are covered and making proper provision for the expansion in services that we all support. Commissioners also consider staff salaries and Members' services.

Mr. Dismore

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Kirkwood

For the last time.

Mr. Dismore

The hon. Gentleman outlined some of the onerous duties of members of the Commission. I see from the last annual report that it met on 13 occasions in the year in question. How long did the average meeting last and how long would he expect the average meeting to last should the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) be appointed, bearing in mind his reputation for, I would not say filibustering, but a degree of prolixity?

Mr. Kirkwood

The hon. Gentleman should know that the Speaker is the Chair of the House of Commons Commission. If it comes to a contest between the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and the Speaker about how long a meeting takes, I know who my money is on—every time.

I described the background and the sort of duties and overall responsibilities that the six of us have to discharge on the collective behalf of hon. Members. I think that it is important for me to share my experience of the past two years. To be a successful Commissioner, one has to understand that the Commission works best as a small, closely knit team. Team working is a crucial part of the operation. Also one needs to accept a fair amount of advice from professional advisers. Members of the Commission need to be able to trust one another implicitly. To work well, the Commission needs to proceed with almost a Quaker-like consensus. Diplomacy and understanding are important for effective service and a need to co-operate on an active and continuing basis would also help.

The timing of the vacancy is also important. Three extremely serious issues confront the Commission. One is the Braithwaite report, which gives us a chance to reconfigure and modernise the structure of the House of Commons. It is important that that process should not be delayed.

Secondly, Portcullis house has still to be commissioned. It is important that that public space, which has been the subject of some controversy, is put into the service of hon. Members and their constituents as soon as possible without any further delay.

Finally, I would gently advise hon. Members that they may not be aware that the Commission is involved in some detailed legal negotiations—in actions in the civil courts. Elements of commercial sensitivity are involved and the protection of the reputation of the House.

Mr. David Taylor

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Kirkwood

No, I am about to sit down.

Let us consider the importance of trying to develop a system in which hon. Members feel that the three Commissioners they nominate, one of whom is in front of us this evening, have the confidence of the whole House. This is not a party political matter. They require consensus from both sides of the House. The work is important and the House would be well advised to consider with great care all new nominations.

10.58 pm

Angela Smith (Basildon)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion and will try to be brief. I appreciate that many other hon. Members want to contribute.

I greatly appreciated the contribution made by the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), which helped to put the debate in context. I was shaken by some of the facial expressions of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth).

Mr. David Taylor

They were all the same.

Angela Smith

I must correct my hon. Friend, as there were several expressions. Sometimes, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst seemed quite put out at the depth and breadth of the qualities needed.

It was helpful to be given an idea of the scope of the work and what the appointment is all about. All hon. Members will agree, I think, that any appointment to an important body needs widespread support from and the confidence of both sides of the House.

You may be aware, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that during the debate on the Braithwaite report, it was said that hon. Members knew little if anything about the work of the Commission. I hope that tonight's debate will put those fears to rest. The contribution from the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire should do so and I can see many copies of the report around the Chamber, so hon. Members have clearly done a great deal to remedy that position and ensure that they know a lot more about the work of the Commission. Those hon. Members who are relatively new to the House will have been surprised at the scope of the Commission's work and the fact that it was established in 1978.

In defence of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, it should be said that he has a reputation in the House for the forensic examination of legislation. That may be a quality that the Commission would find useful. His assiduous attendance on Fridays, particularly when the House considers private Members' Bills, will be known to many.

Mr. Michael J. Foster

With regard to the assiduous nature of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), when the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Luff) defeated the right hon. Gentleman in a selection contest, the right hon. Gentleman decided not to hold any further surgeries in his constituency. Would such a person be suitable—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is straying too far from the motion.

Angela Smith

I can understand the concern of my hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Mr. Foster), but I agree that that is not a matter for the House tonight when we are considering the qualities of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and the work of the Commission.

Mr. David Taylor

Does my hon. Friend agree that someone with a reputation for tedium, repetition and irrelevance would hardly be appropriate to represent the House in that important post on the Commission?

Angela Smith

I am sure, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that if any Member were guilty of those things, you would rule him or her out of order immediately. Those of us who sat through the debate on the Representation of the People Bill found it enjoyable and interesting.

Mr. White

The motion talks about not only the appointment of a new member to the Commission but the discharge of a current member. Does my hon. Friend accept that we should consider the reasons for discharging that person, the qualities that he has brought to the post, and whether he should not continue to do the excellent job that he is already doing?

Angela Smith

If hon. Members seek to divide the House, they will be able to make their own decision about who should be appointed to the Commission.

We should be addressing two points tonight. One is the role and scope of the Commission, and the other is whether hon. Members feel that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst is the person whom they wish to represent their interests on the Commission.

Many hon. Members who have been involved in private Members' Bills have been impressed by the way in which, at every opportunity, the right hon. Gentleman, regardless of the time available and the merits of the legislation, has sought to examine such Bills in minute detail. I see the right hon. Gentleman nodding in agreement. It would be fair to say that some of us—perhaps not all—who have sat through many debates have been disappointed that legislation has been lost as a result of the right hon. Gentleman's interest in it. However, he has exercised his right to examine legislation in detail. I wonder if that is a quality that he wishes to bring to the Commission.

In reply to an intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire referred to Madam Speaker keeping the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst in order. If Madam Speaker is not available, any member of the Commission can take the Chair. Hon. Members will wish to consider whether the right hon. Gentleman would be an appropriate person to take the Chair in that way.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)

Does the hon. Lady believe that a Member who has been a highly successful and articulate Minister and is a member of Her Majesty's Privy Council is unsuitable to fulfil a position on the Commission of the House of Commons?

Angela Smith

I am rather surprised by that intervention. I am sure that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst would argue, in his customary style, that all support for any matter should be examined in detail. If the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that a Member of the House's suitability for another role should not be scrutinised because he has been a Minister, I find that surprising. However, I have yet to make up my mind and shall have to listen to the rest of the debate.

Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)

Will the hon. Lady give way?

Angela Smith

I want to finish this point—[Interruption.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I am sorry to interrupt, but we must have calm in the House. The hon. Lady will decide whether to give way without assistance from anybody else.

Angela Smith

I am happy to give way.

Mr. Swayne

I want to assist the hon. Lady in making up her mind. She referred to the scrutiny exercised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, but said earlier—[Interruption.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I am sorry to interrupt, but Labour Members should behave themselves.

Mr. Swayne

The hon. Lady is disappointed that that scrutiny has cost a number of Bills that she wanted to progress, but that is as nothing compared with the number of private Members' Bills that her own Government have killed off in this Parliament.

Angela Smith

Unfortunately, none of the Labour Members to whom the hon. Gentleman refers are here tonight. If they were, I should still want to have exactly the same debate because Members of the House have the right to discuss this appointment in detail. The merits of other Members are irrelevant; we are discussing whether we want the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst to represent us on the Commission. Forensic examination of legislation is one of his talents and it is right to consider that in the context of the Commission's role.

Ms Ward

Does my hon. Friend agree that the presence of so many Conservative Members shows that they, too, believe that this is an important matter for the House to debate? Indeed, were attendance to be used to judge the issue, it might be considered more important than the health service, the green belt—which we discussed this evening—and many other issues.

Angela Smith

I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution, but she is at fault in suggesting that every Conservative Member supports the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and every Labour Member opposes him. We shall have to wait to find out whether that is the case.

Mr. Salter

There has been much talk about effective scrutiny. I urge my hon. Friend, if she has not already had the opportunity, to read the parliamentary profile of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst. She will find that the candidate before us was an apologist for the previous regime in South Africa and described the staff of a citizens advice bureau as a bunch of Trots. Is he suitable?

Angela Smith

Hon. Members will make up their own minds about that, but I return to the point that I have heard no complaint from the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst about the examination of his appointment. Given his reputation in the House, I am sure that he has none.

Time is short, so I move on to a couple of the Commission's functions on which hon. Members may want to reflect. Under the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978, the Commission may from time to time "increase or reduce" the number of House Departments, "allocate functions" to any other House Department or amalgamate or abolish House Departments. We need to hear whether the right hon. Gentleman has any plans along those lines. A number of hon. Members are greatly concerned about that and would want assurances before proceeding with his appointment.

Helen Jones (Warrington, North)

I understand that oversight of the Library, which is very important to us, is a duty of the Commission. My hon. Friend will be aware that some hon. Members have been debating whether the Library should stock fiction. Has she examined the views of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) on that matter, in particular his knowledge of contemporary British fiction? Considering his lamentable record as an Education Minister, does she think he is a suitable person to oversee that Department?

Angela Smith

I have no knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman's reading habits, but I think the Conservatives might feel that one novelist in the party is quite enough.

Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow)

I think that the novelist referred to by the hon. Member for Warrington, North (Helen Jones) was expelled from the Conservative party today.

Angela Smith

I am grateful for the information, but I am sure that there are a number of other novelists. Sometimes, when we read Hansard, we could be forgiven for believing that some of it might come from "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland".

Mr. Dismore

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Angela Smith

I will give way once more, but I want to make some progress.

Mr. Dismore

I note that one of the Commission's responsibilities is the Refreshment Department. My hon. Friend may know little about the reading habits of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, but does she know anything about his eating habits? I for one would like the Refreshment Department to branch out into more adventurous cuisine, but does my hon. Friend think that the right hon. Gentleman's strong views on Europe may result in a much more traditional approach?

Angela Smith

Whatever the membership of the Commission, I am sure that hon. Members will wish to submit their dietary requirements. Personally, I would ask for more vegetarian food.

As we have heard, one of the Commission's principal roles is that of employer, and many of us are gravely concerned about the commitment of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst to employment legislation. I would want an assurance that he will support the minimum wage in future. A number of us are concerned about the terms and conditions of employment and the salaries of some of the staff of the House, and I hope that the Commission will address itself to that, whatever its membership.

Mr. John Butterfill (Bournemouth, West)

Is the hon. Lady seriously suggesting that a prerequisite for appointment to the Commission is that one voted for the national minimum wage, and that anyone who voted against it should be excluded? Such a prerequisite would exclude most of the Conservative party. That may be the intention of the hon. Lady and others who have spoken, but it is not the way in which the Commission functions.

Angela Smith

The hon. Gentleman has missed the point. I do not suggest that every member of the Commission would have to have voted for the national minimum wage, but once something is the law of the land I expect all hon. Members to uphold it. I am sure the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that Members should work against the law of the land and try to break it. Indeed, it is a criminal offence not to abide by the legislation on the minimum wage.

Perhaps my greatest worry relates to paragraph 6(2) to schedule 1 of the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978, which states: The Commission may determine its own procedure. I feel that hon. Members have cause for concern, given the attitude of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst to the procedures of the House, and his boast that he is determined to block legislation that is not given adequate scrutiny. Members of the Commission may want to reflect on how long they want their meetings to last. I would also want some assurances in regard to employment law. I should like to know that the right hon. Gentleman wished to meet representatives of the trade union movement representing the staff of the House to discuss matters.

The right hon. Gentleman's commitment to forensic examination of legislation does him credit. I am sure that he will agree that tonight's examination of appointments to the Commission is also important.

I want the regulations of the House to be fully upheld. In 1998, the right hon. Gentleman said: I'm a deregulator; I'm against regulations on business. I hope that he would not think that he was against regulations in the House, because that is one of the functions for which we exist. It is important that we have regulations to govern the way in which we work. Members should reflect carefully on the matters that are before them.

11.15 pm

Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne)

It will come as a surprise to some right hon. and hon. Members and a disappointment to others, but as a great relief to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, when I say that I have not the slightest intention of detaining the House for more than a few moments.

These motions are usually not debated but, as it has been decided that this motion will be discussed, we should ensure that the entire motion is discussed. Whatever we may want to say or not say about the Member who is being proposed, we should not let the debate go by—[Interruption.] I am coming to what I want to say about my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth). If the House is prepared to be serious, we should consider my right hon. Friend the Member for Fareham (Sir P. Lloyd), who has served the House and who has decided to relinquish his place on the Commission. It would be a pity if, during the debate, it was not made clear that it was our unanimous view that we should say thank you to my right hon. Friend.

I agree with some of the remarks of Labour Members. They have rightly said that to serve on the Commission is an onerous task. That being so, I am extremely grateful that my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst is willing to take on the task and look after my interests. I wish him well.

11.17 pm

Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow)

I shall make a short contribution to the debate.

I sometimes chide some of my local government colleagues about the size of their interview panels. After this evening's experience, I shall be on exceedingly dodgy ground if I continue with that approach. I welcome the debate. Sometimes these appointments go by omission and without discussion. Given the importance of the role and function of the Commission and the qualities of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), appropriate or otherwise in terms of the appointment, it is important that we discuss the matter. I hope that our discussion will be welcomed by the right hon. Gentleman.

My experience in the House since 1 May 1997 is that whenever, for example, a money resolution is before the House for debate, more often than not it is the right hon. Gentleman who intervenes to demand that it should not be moved formally and should be debated in detail. He goes further than that and demands that those who are putting forward the proposition should justify and defend it. I hope that, before this short debate ends, he will seek to justify and support his appointment.

Mr. David Taylor

Does my hon. Friend accept that there is a risk, if he pursues the line that he is apparently intent on in laying compliments on the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, that there may not be sufficient in the House accommodation budget to widen the doors of the Chamber to enable the right hon. Gentleman and his ego to leave it at the end of the debate?

Mr. Rammell

I shall temper my remarks as I proceed.

We are discussing a hugely significant role. When the role and function of the Commission were discussed in the context of the Braithwaite report, an intervention by the right hon. Gentleman elicited the response that the Commission is responsible for spending nearly £3 million of taxpayers' money per year. We are talking not about a minor functionary but about one of six Members who have significant responsibilities. It is a huge job. All of us recognise that we need improvements in the running and functioning of the House of Commons. It is within that context that we should judge the qualities, or otherwise, of the right hon. Gentleman. Hon. Members whom we put forward to serve on the Commission should recognise the need for change within the management of the House of Commons and show an interest in managing the House's affairs better.

I have nothing against the right hon. Gentleman. Indeed, I am sure that he has many fine qualities, which, unfortunately, I do not have time to go into.

Mr. John Cryer

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in a debate on procedure, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst said on time limiting Back Bench speeches: Will the right hon. Gentleman concede that another powerful reason in favour of the argument is that the restriction of speeches might discourage incoherent rambling and self-indulgent contributions and would encourage people to structure their speech in advance and produce a tight, taut argument?"—[Official Report, 31 October 1984; Vol. 65, c. 1344.] In view of what happened last Tuesday evening, does my hon. Friend think that consistency of argument is one of the right hon. Gentleman's strong points?

Mr. Rammell

That is a valid point. I welcome within the House and, indeed, within the management of the House, constructive and engaged opposition, but to do the job effectively, hon. Members need tolerance and self-restraint. That is one of the qualities that is often lacking in the contributions of the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Malcolm Savidge (Aberdeen, North)

In the context of the debate last Tuesday, I wonder whether it is not a particularly unfortunate time to discuss the matter. Members will remember that the Leader of the Opposition and his Whips lost control of their party, desperately pleaded to the Prime Minister for help—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. That has nothing to do with the motion.

Mr. Rammell

I am happy to take your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

As I have said, I have nothing against the right hon. Gentleman. However, I am sure that not even his closest friends, or members of his family, would say that he recognises the need for change in the management of the House of Commons and the fact that things need to function more effectively. After all, he is the candidate for the status quo. During the debate on 20 January, he said that he was depressed that the Braithwaite report had said that the status quo is not an option. Given the need for change in this place, I hardly think that we should put forward someone who is in favour of the status quo: of things continuing as they always have. That has been a consistent feature of the right hon. Gentleman's parliamentary career.

We need people who understand the functioning of the House of Commons Commission. By his own admission, the right hon. Gentleman does not possess that experience. Perhaps in the 13 days since he made that statement, he has undertaken a lot of homework. It is true that, occasionally, we need novices and people who bring new ideas and new experiences, but, for something as significant as the functioning of the House of Commons, it would be dangerous to put forward someone who, by his own admission, does not have that level of understanding and experience

There is inconsistency in the arguments of the right hon. Gentleman. We have heard that, in that debate, he called for elections, manifestos and hustings, so that people could put forward their views about the changes that were necessary in the House of Commons, yet, only 13 days later, the intention was to move the motion deep in the night, wholly unremarked, with his appointment, which is based on patronage, slipped through. That inconsistency needs to be challenged.

Conservative Members have argued for minority representation. In that long night last Tuesday, or Wednesday, the largest number of Opposition Members I remember voting was 16 or 17. Larger minority groupings than that on the Opposition Benches are worthy of representation.

Other hon. Members have already very effectively made the point on the role played by Commissioners in complying with employment legislation. Although I do not think that anyone would argue that one should have to have voted for the minimum wage to sit on the Commission, in every debate in which I have heard the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst speak, he has consistently opposed regulation and good employment practice. I am simply not convinced that those are the qualities that we should be looking for when appointing an hon. Member to the Commission.

Mr. Jim Murphy (Eastwood)

I speak with hesitation, as I am in hopeful anticipation that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) will aid my campaign in my constituency at the next general election. Nevertheless, does my hon. Friend believe that the right hon. Gentleman—who previously criticised wages councils for setting the minimum wage at £2.33—is a suitable candidate for a position in which he would be responsible for the employment and salaries of many low-paid people in the House?

Mr. Rammell

My hon. Friend makes that point very effectively, on one of the central concerns of Labour Members about the proposed appointment.

Mr. Nick St. Aubyn (Guildford)

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Rammell

I shall very briefly give way, but hope that, after it, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst himself will intervene.

Mr. St. Aubyn

Will the hon. Gentleman tell the House how many of those who work in the House and for all of us are subject to the minimum wage legislation?

Mr. Rammell

All staff in the House are subject to the minimum wage legislation. However, I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Eastwood (Mr. Murphy) was plucking out that specific example to show that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst has a discernible track record of opposing decent employment protection, which raises questions about his suitability to take on the post and responsibility.

All the facts that I and other hon. Members have provided militate in favour of a judgment that the right hon. Gentleman is unsuited to the position for which he is being proposed. One therefore has to ask why the Conservative Whips have proposed him for the position. I think that it is one of those old management, or Whip, judgments: it is better to have him on the inside with parts of his anatomy projecting outwards than the other way round. Although that might speak volumes for management style in the Conservative party, it should not influence our decision today.

The bottom line is that, in politics and government, it is a case of horses for courses. I am not quite sure what type of horse the right hon. Gentleman is, but I am absolutely certain that appointment to the House of Commons Commission is not, and should not be, his course.

I shall finish on a more serious note. When members of the public observe our proceedings in the Chamber, they are often concerned that we are still operating like a 19th century old gentlemen's club, rather than as a modern legislature that is trying to meet the needs and aspirations of people living in the 21st century. I am simply not sure that, with the appointment of the right hon. Gentleman, we shall be facing up to the needs and challenges of the 21st century.

Mr. Dismore

In the most recent report of the House of Commons Commission, in the section on the responsibilities of the Serjeant at Arms, it states that the number of visitors to the Gallery had increased by more than 188,000. Does my hon. Friend think that that is a very welcome trend? Does he also agree that the activities and behaviour in the Chamber of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst have probably had an entirely opposite effect on the trend, so that next year's report may well show a decline in visitors?

Mr. Rammell

That point is very powerfully made.

I am simply making the point that we need to be a modern and effective legislature. We need to manage our affairs in the House of Commons effectively. I am not convinced that the appointment of the right hon. Gentleman would move us in that direction.

11.29 pm

Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough)

We have had some fun tonight and there is no harm in that. For what it is worth, over the years I have found many of the views of my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) infuriating. We disagree on many of the social issues that I find most important, such as divorce and abortion. His views on those subjects may well be closer to those of many Labour Members.

Labour has a large majority in the House. If Labour Members wish to vote down my right hon. Friend they certainly have the power to do so, but I wonder whether they want to send out the message that they are prepared to use their majority to vote down somebody simply because he is a member of the awkward squad, because he is a dedicated parliamentarian, because he does not do what the Whips tell him and because his views are not always those of the majority of Members of Parliament. Surely the Commission has to represent all points of view. Regardless of whether we agree with him, my right hon. Friend is entitled to his point of view.

11.31 pm

Fiona Mactaggart (Slough)

I am glad to be called immediately after the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh). My reasons for opposing the appointment have nothing to do with the general political views of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth). I do not regard this as an opportunity to take revenge for sleepless nights. I believe that the House has a responsibility to treat appointments to the Commission very seriously, as it has traditionally done. I echo the words of the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) in paying tribute to the right hon. Member for Fareham (Sir P. Lloyd) for his contribution and the seriousness with which he has taken his role. The same is true of my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy (Dr. Moonie), whom we shall also have to replace shortly. I hope that the Labour Members responsible for nominating his successor will take into account some of the points that have been made during this debate.

My hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Angela Smith) referred to the very expressive face of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst. Conservative Members have probably not noticed which issues have provoked the most expressive responses. Some of those issues are serious and relate to the responsibilities of the House of Commons Commission. The first issue to provoke a force 10 "God how ghastly" face was when someone referred to the Commission's responsibilities for child care in the House. One of the Government's most serious failures is that, although we have created new child care places throughout the country—

Mr. St. Aubyn

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is this speech still in order? Is it still about the qualifications of my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth)?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

It is perfectly in order.

Fiona Mactaggart

We have created extra child care places throughout the country, but we have failed to do so for the children of employees in the House and in Whitehall.

Mr. Owen Paterson (North Shropshire)

If the hon. Lady bothers to turn to page 9 of the report of the House of Commons Commission, she will see that the first report of the Administration Committee on child care facilities in the House concluded that 79 per cent. of respondents to a questionnaire were generally satisfied with the existing provision.

Fiona Mactaggart

The hon. Gentleman obviously takes an interest in these matters, so he will know that the existing provision is a voucher scheme. If someone who cared about and understood child care issues was a member of the Commission—and I advise the House to appoint such a person—the questionnaire would not have been put out in that form.

Mr. Wilshire

So the hon. Lady would design it to get the answer that she wanted, would she?

Fiona Mactaggart

I would have preferred a questionnaire that was a more accurate test of the opinions of the people who need child care provision.

Child care is the first issue that makes the right hon. Gentleman roll his eyes up to the heavens.

Ms Ward

Does my hon. Friend agree that because child care is such an important issue for Members of Parliament, we shall want the Commission to return to it at some point? It is clear that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) would have no intention of ensuring that it returned to the issue if he became a member.

Fiona Mactaggart

It is clear from the right hon. Gentleman's face not only that he would not want the Commission to return to the issue, but that he thought it stupid and irrelevant.

The second issue that made the right hon. Gentleman's eyes do the force-10 roll was when someone talked about consensus and the important role of the Commission in building consensus among right hon. and hon. Members about how the House is run. [Interruption.] He is doing it again, so I am clearly right in my analysis. It is important for us to work together, but not in a party political way.

Dr. Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test)

Perhaps my hon. Friend will be interested to know that in April 1998, along with the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames), the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) forced a late night vote, making Labour MPs troop through the voting lobbies while Tory MPs nipped to the front of the Westminster taxi queue. Does that strike my hon. Friend as an example of consensus?

Fiona Mactaggart

I do not want to spend any more time on the record of the right hon. Gentleman. I want to focus on what the House of Commons Commission should do. If its real job is ensuring good order and good management of the House, it needs to command the respect of the whole House. That has nothing to do with party politics. It is certain that many right hon. and hon. Members have real respect for the work that the right hon. Member for Fareham has done. It is not a party political issue, but involves working in a way that can command the consensus and respect of the House.

The third lemon was when people started talking about change and modernisation. The latter word usually produces a kind of huff-puff noise from the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst.

My biggest shock on entering the House was the 19th century way in which we go about much of our business. I know that the House of Commons Commission has tried to modernise certain things and that its members are sometimes frustrated by the pace of change. If we were to appoint to the Commission another member who is committed to slowing the pace of change, we would do the House and the country a disservice. For that reason I find the lack of judgment shown by those responsible for putting forward the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst surprising. It shows a lack of care for the importance of the job; therefore we should throw out their nomination.

11.38 pm

Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East)

The speech by the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) sums up the way in which it is possible for a Labour Back Bencher completely to misread the mood of the House. Until she spoke, Conservative Members rather appreciated the irony, wit and good humour of Labour Members giving my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) what I am sure he would be the first to acknowledge is a taste of his own medicine. Instead of their wit, style and grace, she indulged in sour, humourless whingeing.

My right hon. Friend does not even have to open his mouth in a debate, as the hon. Lady attempts to interpret every twitch of an eyebrow and every flicker of expression. She is slightly living in a time warp—something of which I have occasionally been accused. She reminds me of those Kremlinologists who used to try to determine what was about to emanate from Moscow by judging the expressions of Brezhnev and Chernenko on the podium.

Mr. Peter Bradley

I am indebted to Andrew Roth's biography of the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth). I am sure that the hon. Member for New Forest, East (Dr. Lewis) will be fascinated to learn that, while at school, the right hon. Gentleman was a communist. [Laughter.]

Mr. Forth

indicated assent.

Mr. Bradley

Does the hon. Member for New Forest, East agree that once a red, always a red and will he be joining us in the Lobby tonight?

Dr. Lewis

I am delighted to have that piece of information. It only goes to show that, in order to rectify the terrible mistake of his youth, my right hon. Friend will need to go much further to the right than he has already done.

Mr. Bercow

Does my hon. Friend agree that one pre-eminent qualification of my right hon. Friend for the appointment is that, unlike the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart), he did not have a charisma bypass operation at birth? [Interruption.]

Dr. Lewis

I disagree with my hon. Friend only in that he takes for granted the outcome of the nature versus nurture argument. The operation may not have occurred at birth; it might have been when she realised that she was an inheritor of a great deal of money. That is always very embarrassing—[Interruption.]

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The debate is going downhill. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman return to the main point.

Dr. Lewis

Thank you for that guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I greatly regret the downhill contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow), which distracted me from the straight and narrow.

Ms Ward

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will reconsider his support for his right hon. Friend—as may many of his colleagues—when they realise that, according to Andrew Roth, he campaigned for the entry of the UK to the European Community.

Mr. Forth

indicated assent.

Dr. Lewis

I am indebted to the hon. Lady for pointing out that fact. I was not aware of it. I might seriously reconsider my support for my right hon. Friend, but for the fact that he still has time to make good that deficiency.

In conclusion, I make two serious points. The first is that, if my right hon. Friend does such a great disservice to the House as is alleged, why has he been selected as one of the final four in the competition for Opposition politician of the year? I am sure that that will be acknowledged on both sides of the House. [Interruption.]

The Government—

It being one and a half hours after the commencement of proceedings on the motion, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the Question, pursuant to Standing Order No. 16(1).

The House divided: Ayes 87, Noes 108.

Division No. 61]	[11.43 pm
AYES
Arbuthnot, Rt Hon James	Green, Damian
Beggs, Roy	Greenway, John
Bercow, John	Grieve, Dominic
Blunt, Crispin	Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archie
Boswell, Tim	Hawkins, Nick
Brady, Graham	Hayes, John
Brazier, Julian	Heald, Oliver
Brooke, Rt Hon Peter	Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas
Browning, Mrs Angela	Howard, Rt Hon Michael
Burns, Simon	Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)
Butterfill, John	Jack, Rt Hon Michael
Campbell-Savours, Dale	Jackson, Robert (Wantage)
Cash, William	Jenkin, Bernard
Chope, Christopher	Lait, Mrs Jacqui
Clappison, James	Lansley, Andrew
Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey	Leigh, Edward
Clwyd, Ann	Letwin, Oliver
Cormack, Sir Patrick	Lewis, Dr Julian (New Forest E)
Cran, James	Lidington, David
Davies, Quentin (Grantham)	Loughton, Tim
Davis, Rt Hon David (Haltemprice)	Luff, Peter
Day, Stephen	McLoughlin, Patrick
Donaldson, Jeffrey	Madel, Sir David
Duncan, Alan	Nicholls, Patrick
Duncan Smith, Iain	O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)
Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter	Paice, James
Fabricant, Michael	Paterson, Owen
Flight, Howard	Pickles, Eric
Forth, Rt Hon Eric	Pound, Stephen
Fraser, Christopher	Prior, David
Gibb, Nick	Randall, John
Gill, Christopher	Robathan, Andrew
Gillan, Mrs Cheryl	Robertson, Laurence
Gorman, Mrs Teresa	Ross, William (E Lond'y)

Ruffley, David	Viggers, Peter
St Aubyn, Nick	Wardle, Charles
Simpson, Keith (Mid-Norfolk)	Whittingdale, John
Spicer, Sir Michael	Widdecombe, Rt Hon Miss Ann
Spring, Richard	Wilshire, David
Swayne, Desmond	Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton)
Syms, Robert	Winterton, Nicholas (Macclesfield)
Taylor, Ian (Esher & Walton)	Young, Rt Hon Sir George
Taylor, John M (Solihull)
Townend, John	Tellers for the Ayes:
Tredinnick, David	Mrs. Eleanor Laing and
Trend, Michael	Mr. Peter Atkinson.
NOES
Adams, Mrs Irene (Paisley N)	King, Andy (Rugby & Kenilworth)
Alexander, Douglas	Kirkwood, Archy
Allan, Richard	Laxton, Bob
Atkins, Charlotte	Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)
Ballard, Jackie	Linton, Martin
Beith, Rt Hon A J	Mactaggart, Fiona
Blackman, Liz	Mahon, Mrs Alice
Blears, Ms Hazel	Mallaber, Judy
Borrow, David	Marshall-Andrews, Robert
Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)	Merron, Gillian
Brown, Russell (Dumfries)	Miller, Andrew
Browne, Desmond	Moffatt, Laura
Burgon, Colin	Moore, Michael
Cann, Jamie	Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)
Casale, Roger	Naysmith, Dr Doug
Clapham, Michael	O'Neill, Martin
Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)	Palmer, Dr Nick
Corston, Jean	Pearson, Ian
Cotter, Brian	Pickthall, Colin
Cox, Tom	Pike, Peter L
Cryer, Mrs Ann (Keighley)	Plaskitt, James
Curtis-Thomas, Mrs Claire	Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E)
Davidson, Ian	Prosser, Gwyn
Dawson, Hilton	Quinn, Lawrie
Dean, Mrs Janet	Reed, Andrew (Loughborough)
Dismore, Andrew	Rendel, David
Dobbin, Jim	Roy, Frank
Drew, David	Russell, Bob (Colchester)
Efford, Clive	Ryan, Ms Joan
	Sanders, Adrian
Ennis, Jeff	Savidge Malcolm
Fitzsimons, Lorna	Sawford Phil
Foster, Michael J (Worcester)	Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S)
George, Andrew (St Ives)	Skinner, Dennis
Gerrard, Neil	Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns)
Gilroy, Mrs Linda	Stinchcombe, Paul
Gordon, Mrs Eileen	Stunell, Andrew
Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)	Taylor, David (NW Leics)
Harris, Dr Evan	Temple-Morris, Peter
Healey, John	Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)
Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)	Turner, Dr George (NW Norfolk)
Hepburn, Stephen	Tyler, Paul
Heppell, John	Ward, Ms Claire
Hesford, Stephen	Watts, David
Hope, Phil	Webb, Steve
Hoyle, Lindsay	White, Brian
Hughes, Simon (Southwark N)	Williams, Mrs Betty (Conwy)
Iddon, Dr Brian	Willis, Phil
Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)	Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C)
Jones, Helen (Warrington N)	Wise, Audrey
Jones, Ms Jenny (Wolverh'ton SW)	Wood, Mike
	Woolas, Phil
Jones, Dr Lynne (Selly Oak)	Wright, Anthony D (Gt Yarmouth)
Keeble, Ms Sally
Keen, Alan (Feltham & Heston)	Tellers for the Noes:
Keetch, Paul	Angela Smith and
Kilfoyle, Peter	Mr. Bill Rammell.

Question accordingly negatived.

Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Government have just lost a Division on a motion in the name of a Minister. Will Government Front Benchers be tabling a motion to rescind the decision of the House?

The Parliamentary Secretary, Privy Council Office (Mr. Paddy Tipping)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will be well aware that this is a matter for the House. It has been consistently so over many years; the precedent is well known. The House has made its decision.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I do not think that the House would benefit from prolonged discussion of the matter. Neither the business of the House nor how right hon. and hon. Members vote is a matter of order for the Chair. There is nothing further that I can add on the issue.

Mr. Butterfill

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have been debating extensively a Government motion, yet it is clear that the Government did not vote for it. Is that not an abuse of the House?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I have already ruled that how right hon. and hon. Members vote is not a matter for the Chair.

Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it not extraordinary that the proposer of the motion neither spoke, moved or voted on it?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That is not a point of order.

Mr. Miller

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The will of the House has been expressed. In the light of the particular circumstances in which we have found ourselves, would it be appropriate, through you, to invite the House of Commons Commission to make fresh proposals on how the job should be fulfilled?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That is not a question on which I can rule. Tonight's proceedings will be studied and I have no doubt appropriate action will be forthcoming.