House of Commons (Removal of Clergy Disqualification) Bill (Hansard, 1 March 2001)

§ Mr. Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks)

On a point of order, Sir Alan. I am sorry for interrupting, but may I raise with you the availability of the responses to the consultation document, which underlie the Bill? As Committee proceedings get under way, it would be helpful if we had the fullest information, as a Standing Committee would have. The explanatory notes, which you may have before you, refer to the consultation process that the Government undertook before producing the Bill. On Second Reading, the Minister in charge prayed in aid the results of the consultation with the various Churches concerned. However, when I asked the Library whether the Churches' replies had been deposited there, I was told that this was not a public consultation exercise.

I have not telephoned the Minister's office—I gather that that is rather dangerous and one might lose one's job over it—but this point matters. Allowing priests to stand for Parliament is a significant change to the constitution and one would expect such a change to involve a consultation. A consultation has been conducted, but one would also expect the Minister to make the results available. On Second Reading, he said: All were content for the restrictions to be removed."—[Official Report, 6 February 2001; Vol. 362, c. 806.] However, perhaps that does not convey the complexity of the Churches' response on some issues and the Committee will therefore be forced to rely on his interpretation of those responses, rather than have the documents to hand.

Would it be in order to suspend proceedings for a few minutes so that the material could be made available? In Standing Committee, it is normal for such a request to be made and, indeed, for a Minister's office to supply the necessary documents.