§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord)Before I call the Minister to move motion No. 1, the business motion, it might help if I say how Mr. Speaker proposes to proceed, assuming that the motion is agreed.
Mr. Speaker proposes that motions Nos. 2, 3 and 4 on hunting with dogs be debated together. He has not selected any of the amendments to the motions, so at the end of the debate—presumably at 10 o'clock—he will put the questions on motions Nos. 2, 3 and 4 one after the other.
§ Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. May I seek your guidance? I tabled an amendment that attracted cross-party support. More than 80 Members, including many luminaries—former Cabinet Ministers and current Ministers—support it, yet to my surprise it has not been selected for debate. Can you give me any advice so that, should this arise again, I shall have a better chance of getting my amendment selected for debate—perhaps by seeking more signatures, more prominent Members of Parliament or whatever?
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman is a very experienced Member of the House. All I can say is that all proposed amendments were given the most careful consideration. The reasons for selecting or not selecting amendments are never given, for very good reasons.
§ The Minister for Rural Affairs (Alun Michael)I beg to move,
That, at this day's sitting, the Speaker shall put successively the Question on each of the Motions in the name of Mr. Alun Michael relating to Hunting with Dogs not later than Ten o'clock, and such Questions shall include the Question on any Amendment which has been selected and may then be moved, and those Questions may be decided, though opposed, after the expiration of time for opposed business.The motion provides that, following the debate, there will be a series of votes on three options for dealing with hunting. The alternatives are, first, "supervision", which is nearest to the status quo; secondly, "hunting under licence" or regulation, known as the middle way; and, thirdly, what has been described as a ban or prohibition of hunting.In each case reference is made to "Bill 2", which is the Hunting Bill from the previous Session in the form in which it was introduced in December 2000. I understand that copies are available in the Vote Office.
All three campaigning organisations have told me that they accept this as a fair way of allowing the range of opinions across the House to be clearly expressed. Not later than 10 o'clock, the Chair will successively put each of the motions for voting, enabling hon. Members to vote for or against each of the options. The normal procedure would have the potential to constrain the House by preventing further votes once one motion had been carried.
I hope that the House will agree that this arrangement will allow us to cover the range of opinions, while still clearly expressing hon. Members' views through the votes at the end of the debate.
§ Mrs. Ann Winterton (Congleton)When I was first taken hunting as a child by my mother, I never expected that one day I would be standing at the Dispatch Box to defend the right of the individual to take part in one of the greatest of our traditions. Hunting and ponies definitely played a part in my eventually standing for Parliament, because it was while I was a member of South Staffordshire pony club that I met my hon. Friend—
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerOrder. Before the hon. Lady gets too far into her remarks, may I say to her that we are discussing a very narrow motion on how we shall proceed this evening? This is not the time for a broader debate.
§ Mrs. WintertonI am so sorry, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I misunderstood. I am happy with what the Minister said when he moved the business motion.
§ Norman Baker (Lewes)My colleagues and I are happy with the business motion, which is very narrow. That is probably the only point of agreement that there will be in the Chamber this afternoon.
§ Question put and agreed to.