Speaker's Absence

HC Deb 16 June 2003 vol 407 cc43-78

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Speaker have leave of absence on Wednesday 18th June to receive the honorary degree of Doctor of the University of Glasgow.—[Ms Bridget Prentice.]

4.38 pm

Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst)

On the face of it, the motion may seem to be a routine matter but, happily, such items occur so rarely that it is worth the House pausing for a moment to consider its full implications. The motion covers the Speaker's role, the arrangements that can be made for the Speaker's absence and, as in this case, the timing and duration of that absence.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham)

Before my right hon. Friend goes on, I point out another consideration: our desire that the Speaker should not be away too long.

Mr. Forth

I hope to touch on that later in my remarks, if my right hon. and learned Friend will permit me.

When I saw the resolution, what attracted my attention immediately was the reference to the university of Glasgow. On this occasion, and I do not often have the pleasure of saying this in the House, I speak as a Glaswegian and as an alumnus of the university of Glasgow. It therefore gives me double pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to see that you are being honoured on Wednesday 18 June by my alma mater. I glanced at your entry in "Who's Who", just to check your Glaswegian credentials, not that they were ever in any doubt.

You went, Mr. Speaker, to St. Patrick's boys school in Glasgow, which is not, sadly, the school that I went to, although it is not a million miles away. You then served as an AUEW shop steward at Rolls-Royce in Hillington. That is not Hillingdon, which is of course part of London, but Hillington, which is also known to me. You then had a distinguished career in this House, including a 10-year spell as the Chairman of the Scottish Grand Committee. Before that, of course, you had the honour of being a councillor in the Balornock ward in Glasgow from 1974 to 1979.

I say all that because it relates directly to the motion, referring as it does to the honour that the university of Glasgow will do you on Wednesday 18 June. Lest anyone had any doubt about the reason for your requesting leave of absence from the House, we are already beginning to see the kernel of the connections, which you personify, between the House and the great city of Glasgow. I hope that none of my right hon. and hon. Friends will be in any doubt as to the honour not only that Glasgow does us but that you, as our Speaker, do the university. This is a happy coincidence and a two-way process of respect being shown by the university and city of Glasgow.

Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. I yield to no one in my admiration for the excellence of the academic institution of Glasgow university, notwithstanding the fact that my right hon. Friend happens to be a graduate of it. Does he agree, however, that thoroughly worthy though the honour is, and timely though its conferral in the course of your speakership, Mr. Speaker, might be, it is a trifle inconsiderate, not to say maladroit, of the university to hold the ceremony on the occasion of Prime Minister's questions, which might, as a result, be slightly less orderly than it otherwise would be?

Mr. Forth

My hon. Friend, as ever, anticipates a later part of my analysis, but I do not want to rush into that. I think that he would be disappointed if I did not stick to at least some coherence in my speech. I do not want to leap about because although my hon. Friend would be able to follow my logic without any effort, it might cause some Labours Members to struggle a bit.

Having glanced on the Glaswegian aspect of the motion, I am struck by the fact that the House must pause for a moment to consider—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have to leave the Chair; I say to the right hon. Gentleman that I am very touched by his remarks, but when I was at Rolls-Royce in Hillington, I only had to ask the foreman for a day off. [Laughter.]

Mr. Forth

I thought that we should then go on to consider, because it is relevant to the motion, the great responsibilities placed on the Speaker. I shall then risk, and it is a risk, touching on the delicate relationship between the Speaker and the Deputy Speakers, including yourself, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate)

Before my right hon. Friend leaves the Glasgow connection, has it not crossed his mind that he is not going up to Glasgow on Wednesday because of his former membership of the Communist party? Will he confirm that, although his background is similar, Mr. Speaker does not share that in common with my right hon. Friend?

Mr. Forth

Mr. Speaker and I share many things in our background, including the fact that we were both raised in tenement buildings in Glasgow. I think that I am also right that Mr. Speaker's father and mine were both members of the Merchant Navy. We therefore have many things in common, but although I indeed stood as a Communist candidate in my school days, I suspect that Mr. Speaker had a much more respectable youth, which is probably why he is where he is, and I am where I am.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that the doctorate to be conferred on Mr. Speaker by the university of Glasgow is a great deal more respectable than the doctorate in English that our late, lamented colleague, Sir Frederic Bennett, received from the university of Istanbul? Is Mr. Speaker's degree not a more appropriate mark of affection and esteem for the House?

Mr. Forth

rose—

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst)

Order. I do not believe that the scope of the motion allows us to discuss the general question of the conferment of degrees on Members of the House.

Mr. Forth

Indeed, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have tried to focus, as you know, very much on the Glaswegian aspects of the motion.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield)

Before my right hon. Friend leaves the conferment of degrees in Glasgow, is he aware that this Wednesday at the same time as Mr. Speaker is honoured in Glasgow, a similar honour will be conferred on Mr. Gus O'Donnell, the spin doctor for the last Conservative Government before 1997?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I am assured that that lies entirely outside the scope of this matter.

Mr. Forth

I am grateful, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire)

As Wednesday is Waterloo day, is Mr. Speaker to be escorted by a guard of honour from Scottish regiments?

Mr. Forth

I am sure that it would greatly help the House if we had further particulars of the ceremony in which Mr. Speaker will participate. However, perhaps other colleagues can help because, sadly, I have not had time to research the nature of the ceremony or its appropriateness.

Mr. Hogg

My right hon. Friend will know that the former Lord Chancellor attended the university of Glasgow, so perhaps Mr. Speaker may wish to ask him whether he would like to go to Glasgow too so that he can get an honorary degree as a small consolation for being peremptorily discharged.

Mr. Forth

Would that I had influence on such matters. Sadly, I have not been approached by my alma mater, but I am delighted that Mr. Speaker has. Whether the former Lord Chancellor deserves any recognition by his alma mater is entirely a matter of judgment. My right hon. and learned Friend has described it as a compensatory gesture, but that is further than I would like to go.

Mr. David Cameron (Witney)

Has my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) not hit the nail on the head, and pointed to the dangers of Mr. Speaker going away, given that the Lord Chancellor, who performs the duties of Speaker in the other place, was peremptorily dismissed? Is it not a risk for anyone occupying a post more than several hundred years old to leave Westminster as they may be labelled a member of the forces of conservatism and treated in a similar fashion? Would not Mr. Speaker be better advised to stay at home?

Mr. Forth

I suspect that my hon. Friend has trailed the speech that he wants to make. There is a legitimate analysis to be made of Mr. Speaker's request, given the statement being made as we speak in another place. We may want to look at the risk that he runs in any prolonged or even brief absence from the House, given the Government's mood about Officers presiding over parliamentary Chambers. However, that is a matter for my hon. Friend, not me.

Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham)

Did my right hon. Friend not notice that Mr. Speaker seemed very relaxed when this matter came up for debate? Should we not have a fount of good will towards Mr. Speaker on this of all days, as he has stood up for the rights and liberties of this House and insisted on a statement from the Prime Minister? Will my right hon. Friend take that into account when thinking about requests for leave of absence?

Mr. Forth

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. I will touch on that later in my remarks, but just to give a hint of the argument that I might want to employ, it is the absence of Mr. Speaker on Wednesday 18 June that might cause us some concern. He made a magnificent gesture today in defending the rights of the House and effectively summoning the Prime Minister, and we may not have that at our disposal on Wednesday.

Were there to be by Wednesday a continuation of the undoubted constitutional crisis that we are now suffering, the burden might fall on your shoulders, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I do not want to drag you into this unnecessarily, but it may be unavoidable to touch on your role, because during Mr. Speaker's absence you will in almost every sense of the word be an able substitute for him. I shall return to that later.

Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury)

On the way into the Palace of Westminster there is the mural of Sir Thomas More as a young Speaker defying the King's man in the demand for money without debate, so there is a precedent going back a long way for denying the Lord Chancellor, who was then the Head of the King's Government too. Given the fact that the Lord Chancellor has been threatened, as others mentioned, and that, as my right hon. Friend said, something of a constitutional precedent has been set by the Speaker demanding that the Prime Minister come to the House, is it not a good occasion to reflect that we need the Speaker here, and to consider whether in future there may be occasions when the House might ask the Speaker not to leave the premises?

Mr. Forth

That is a matter for judgment on each occasion, and the House will have to make its judgment because the motion—I think I am right in saying—as well as being debatable is votable, and it is possible for the House to vote not to give Mr. Speaker leave of absence, as the motion requests.

I shall argue, if I am allowed to proceed—I have only got into my introductory remarks—that on this occasion we should give leave of absence to Mr. Speaker, not just because of the pride that we must all feel in the honour being done to him, and not just because of my personal involvement as a Glaswegian, but because on this occasion we might want to test the waters, as it were, to see whether we can manage without Mr. Speaker even for a day, and even for a day as important as Wednesday will be, as I hope to point out.

Mr. Hogg

Does my right hon. Friend agree that we would all be much more likely to agree that the Speaker should go away for a day if we got an assurance from those on the Government Front Bench that there will be no attempt to mount a coup against the Speaker in his absence, as there was against the Lord Chancellor?

Mr. Forth

That would be helpful.

At this point, it would be only courteous of me if I welcomed the new Deputy Leader of the House to his place. He is most welcome. I only regret that he did not seek to catch Mr. Speaker's eye at the beginning of the debate in order to set out the reasons for the motion. It is, of course, in the name of his right hon. Friend, that bi-cephalous man, the Secretary of State for Wales and Leader of the House, who sadly is not with us. His deputy, I am sure, would have ably moved the motion and, I hope, will equally ably reply to the debate. He might then be able to give my right hon. and learned Friend the assurance that he sought. I hope that he will.

Mr. Bercow

I am grateful, once again, to my right hon. Friend for giving way. I am, as he knows, a person of generous heart and public spirit, but I am highly sceptical whether the case has yet been made for the Speaker to be absent for a day. It could be constitutionally perilous if that were to happen. In trying to assess the pros and cons of the argument, in which respect I know my right hon. Friend would wish to assist me, may I ask him the rather prosaic question whether the university of Glasgow has considered holding the important ceremony on a non-sitting day?

Mr. Forth

That raises an interesting and relevant point, which is typical of my hon. Friend, concerning eminent and ancient institutions such as my alma mater, the university of Glasgow. Happily, it was founded in the 15th century, so one would have thought it had been around long enough to understand the nuances involved in inviting someone as eminent as Mr. Speaker, and I should add, as it is relevant to the answer that I am trying to give, that my degree is indeed in politics and economics.

One would therefore have thought that the department of politics at the university might have advised it of the inadvisability of inviting Mr. Speaker to attend the ceremony while the House was sitting.

Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk)

I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. He has mentioned a very important point about the university of Glasgow—his alma mater. Does he know whether Wednesday's ceremony will be a special one-off event for Mr. Speaker or part of a wider jamboree to which other people have been invited to receive honorary degrees? If it is the latter, it would be difficult to cancel the event. However, if there is to be a unique, bespoke ceremony for Mr. Speaker, his argument that the university might show some flexibility could be more convincing.

Mr. Forth

It certainly would not be a jamboree. That is certain, as the university of Glasgow does these things properly. However, my hon. Friend makes an important point. While this short debate is going on, one of my hon. Friends might seek further particulars from the university as to the nature of the ceremony itself. That would help to set in context what Mr. Speaker will be expected to do when he is in Glasgow and in whose company he may find himself when he is given the honour.

Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)

It is, of course, technically possible for the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues to continue debating the motion in this so-called hilarious fashion until 10 pm, which would mean that proceedings on the Licensing Bill continued until 4.30 in the morning. While that sounds clever, does it really enhance the reputation and dignity of this House?

Mr. Forth

I hope that idle Labour Members are not already thinking about when they can leave the building, although it sounds as if they might be doing so. This debate will continue for as long as we wish and while we remain in order, or indeed until the Government are unwise enough to seek a closure. That option is always available to them, although I would not advise that they take it on this occasion. If the right hon. Gentleman is suggesting that a matter that features on the Order Paper and is available for debate somehow need not or should not be debated, that would give the lie to the attitude of all too many Labour Members, as these days, on the Government Benches, they do not believe that this House should exercise its proper responsibilities in a proper way.

Mr. Foulkes

Quite the reverse. I agree that we should exercise our responsibilities. We should also exercise our judgment and discretion.

Mr. Forth

That is exactly what I am trying to do.

Mr. John Taylor (Solihull)

In view of the fact that my right hon. Friend's alma mater understands the historical proprieties in these matters, and bearing in mind the analogy of the state opening, would he consider it appropriate to ask the university whether we may have a hostage pending Mr. Speaker's safe return?

Mr. Forth

I am very happy to offer myself as that hostage on this occasion, as a graduate and alumnus.

Mr. Soames

My right hon. Friend has been speculating about what may happen during the ceremony, and I hope that one of my hon. Friends will seek to contact the university to find out. However, does he agree that there is a distinct possibility that Mr. Speaker will be invited to make a speech in Latin? That is indeed a task of a high order for anyone. Does he agree that, on this particular occasion, it would be appropriate for the House to be informed about Mr. Speaker's exact duties while he is away from us?

Mr. Forth

I think that I have already conceded that point. In my day—I graduated in 1966—a large part of such ceremonies was conducted in Latin, and my degree certificate is, appropriately, in Latin as well. Sadly, I am not now sufficiently in touch with the university to know whether it has undergone that ghastly modernisation process so beloved of the Government and their supporters and changed the proceedings from Latin to English.

It would be useful to inquire of the university about that before we go much further.

Mr. Hogg

As regards the possibility that the Speaker will have to make a speech in Latin, would my right hon. Friend respectfully request a translation on behalf of the House, so that we know what he says?

Mr. Forth

I am surprised that my right hon. and learned Friend would require a translation—I should have thought that he is fluent in most of the classical languages—but that is not an unreasonable request. I hope that it will have been taken into consideration, even at this early stage of the debate.

I want briefly to consider the role of the Speaker to enable us to judge how far it might be compromised by his absence. I turned first to that source to which we always turn—namely, the Library. It has produced an excellent factsheet on Mr. Speaker, which says: The direction and guidance the House receives from its … (Speaker) is central to the House's whole way of life. One could not put it better than that. It neatly sums up the centrality of the role of Mr. Speaker as far as the House is concerned, and gives us some cause for concern as to how on earth we will manage if he is to be absent even for the one day that is mentioned in the motion.

"Erskine May", to which we all resort on these occasions, because it is our guide and our bible on such matters, says, on page 188: The Speaker's functions fall into two main categories. On the one hand the Speaker is the spokesman or representative of the House in its relations with the Crown, the House of Lords and other authorities and persons outside Parliament. We should pause there for a moment, because that is a matter that is currently at the forefront of everybody's mind. The mention of the Crown, the House of Lords and other authorities and persons outside Parliament reminds us of the developments that are rapidly taking place, even as we speak, in another place. Given the rapidity with which events are unfolding, the question arises as to whether Mr. Speaker will be required to be here on the day after tomorrow to carry out the responsibilities adumbrated in "Erskine May". It goes on to say: On the other hand the Speaker presides over the debates of the House of Commons and enforces the observance of all rules for preserving order in its proceedings. What we will have to judge—I shall return to this later—is how far the absence of the Speaker in any way compromises those very important responsibilities that are laid upon him.

Mr. Hogg

One of the Speaker's responsibilities is to safeguard the rights of Back Benchers. I think that my right hon. Friend will be the first to agree that this Government tramples on those rights. Is not that a reason why we should view the departure of the Speaker, albeit only for a day, with considerable concern?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. Before the right hon. and learned Gentleman develops his argument too far, I should tell him—I suppose that I may have to declare an interest—that Standing Order 3(2) indicates that in the absence of the Speaker, the Chairman of Ways and Means shall perform the duties and exercise the authority of the Speaker in relation to all proceedings of this House".

Mr. Forth

I am most grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You are hinting at delicate territory. I hope that we will not be forced to make any kind of judgment about whether we would regard the absence of the Speaker as being in any way detrimental to the House, given that you would then act wholly and fully in his place.

I want to touch on one or two of the Speaker's other responsibilities. In relation to the Lords, "Erskine May" says, on page 189: The chief function of the Speaker in relation to the House of Lords is to consider bills brought from that House and Lords amendments to Commons bills to see whether they infringe the financial privileges of the Commons". I am sure that you will confirm, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that as Chairman of Ways and Means you will exercise in all matters the full powers that Mr. Speaker would otherwise discharge. However, the House will want an assurance—perhaps it can come only from you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, even in the light of the Standing Order that you quoted—that there is no responsibility, role or power exercised by Mr. Speaker that you cannot exercise in his absence.

We want that reassurance because there may be circumstances in which it could become relevant. I would welcome your guidance on that, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I can give the right hon. Gentleman that assurance. In the absence of the Speaker, if that is approved by the House, the Chairman of Ways and Means has the full authority of the Speaker in all the matters that might be of concern to the right hon. Gentleman. I am sure that he does not question the fact that a Chairman of Ways and Means would behave no less impartially than Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Forth

Of course not, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am sure that we are greatly reassured by what you have said. It may even allow me to truncate my remarks, and you will, therefore, have been doubly helpful to the House.

One of my hon. Friends took the trouble to look at one of those horrible website things and get some information, which is headed "The University of Glasgow". Under the title, "University of Glasgow confers honorary degrees", it states: The University will confer honorary degrees on seven distinguished men and women at the annual Commemoration Day ceremony on Wednesday 18 June. It lists those who will receive honorary degrees. They include a Mr. Augustine Thomas O'Donnell, permanent secretary at Her Majesty's Treasury; Dr. Sheena Elizabeth McDonald, political journalist; and Keenan Smart, head of a natural history unit. Of course, it includes our Speaker, the right hon. Michael Martin, Speaker of the House of Commons and MP for Glasgow Springburn. We can be reassured that our Speaker is in mixed but appropriate company.

However, the website does not go into details about the nature of the ceremony and the answer to the question that has exercised one or two colleagues about the language in which at least part of it will be conducted. Perhaps we could request further particulars and revert to the matter later in our analysis.

You have gone some way, Mr. Deputy Speaker, towards allaying any fears about the full power and discretion that you and your fellow Deputy Speakers might have in the absence of Mr. Speaker. I hope that any nervousness about his lack of availability on 18 June is rapidly being dispelled. However, there is another consideration. Let us consider the business for Wednesday 18 June. As one of my hon. Friends has already pointed out, Wednesday is now the day on which we have questions to the Prime Minister. However, this Wednesday, we also have questions to the Deputy Prime Minister. Questions will be asked to the two most senior members of the Administration on Wednesday.

Mr. Hogg

My right hon. Friend must not overlook the fact that Wednesday is not an usual day because the Prime Minister—as I understand it, at Mr. Speaker's request—will make a vital statement on the constitutional changes.

Mr. Forth

Indeed, he will. Wednesday will not be an ordinary parliamentary day—if there is such a thing. I have always resisted the suggestion that there could be an ordinary parliamentary day. Every day in the House of Commons and in Parliament is an extraordinary day.

Mr. Foulkes

The right hon. Gentleman borders on being disrespectful to the Deputy Speaker. I have been present on a previous Wednesday when the Deputy Speaker took the Chair and did so admirably. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will withdraw the disgraceful slur that he puts on you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Forth

I am delighted that the right hon. Gentleman, in his seniority and maturity, remains so feisty. I welcome his participation in this little debate. I hope that he wants to catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to give us his thoughts on the matters as the debate develops. After all, we are on the initial canter through the subject. I hope that there is much more to come.

Wednesday 18 June is a critical day in the parliamentary timetable when the House can be unruly—or boisterous, to put it more neutrally.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I know that you will be able to handle matters with your usual aplomb, expertise and poise, but in the event that you were not available on Wednesday—you might be indisposed; who knows?—that burden would fall on one of the other Deputy Speakers who are not as experienced in these matters as you. That would be a challenge both to them and to the House, to which I am sure they would rise magnificently—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The right hon. Gentleman should be quite careful in the words that he is using. He is verging on an appraisal—or indeed, a criticism—of those whom the House has been good enough to choose as the occupants of the Chair. I am sure that he would not wish to do that.

Mr. Forth

Of course not, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Any perusal of Hansard will show that I had no such intention and that I was choosing my words pretty carefully. I accept what you have said, however, and I shall move on. I shall bring my remarks to a conclusion, because I want others to be able to participate, although it has been generously and helpfully pointed out that we have until 10 pm to complete this debate. There is therefore no need for it to be hurried or truncated in any way whatsoever. This matter can be properly dealt with, rather than being subject to any of the artificial restrictions of time to which we have become rather too used.

Mr. Bill Wiggin (Leominster)

It occurs to me that the level of excitement might reach such a pitch on Wednesday that the Speaker might not wish to be away. He has always been very courteous and polite to me, and has often called me to speak. He probably feels the same obligations to the good people of Glasgow who have so kindly invited him to be there. Perhaps he would rather be here but, far from wishing to cause offence, has duly accepted—or hopes to accept—the invitation to go and receive his award. Perhaps, given the importance of what the Prime Minister will have to say on Wednesday—considering the damage that has been done to our constitution and to the office of the Lord Chancellor—the Speaker would rather be here. I wonder what my right hon. Friend thinks about that?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. Perhaps I should say to the hon. Gentleman—and to the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) before he is tempted to answer—that the Speaker is always prepared to submit himself to the judgment of the House.

Mr. Forth

Indeed, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The only thing that I want to say to my hon. Friend is that I am sure that Mr. Speaker takes the view that this is an honour not just for him but for the House, and that we should gladly accept it as such. It is in that spirit that, having considered the matter somewhat carefully, I have reached the judgment that on this occasion the House should give Mr. Speaker leave of absence, as the motion requests, so that he can receive the honour being done by the university of Glasgow and so that we may, in our different ways, bask in the reflected glory and pay our respect to the university. It is in that spirit that I hope that my right hon. and hon. Friends will be happy to approve the motion.

5.13 pm

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham)

This debate, which my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) has rightly initiated, revolves around two themes. The first, which wish to develop at a little length, is our respect for Mr. Speaker, and how glad we are that the university of Glasgow is paying this tribute to him. The second is our concern that he should not be away too long, partly because, in his absence, the Government Front Bench might begin to take liberties with the rights of Members, and partly because he might be the subject of a coup. The House will wish to consider those two points in the context of this motion.

Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)

In the context of a coup, it might be argued that such a thing would not be possible because, as my right hon. and learned Friend will be aware, a Speaker can be elected only at the beginning of each Parliament. Is my right hon. and learned Friend similarly aware, however, that this is agreed through the Standing Orders of the House dated 22 March 2001—Standing Orders Nos. 1, 1A and 1B—which could be overturned if a motion to that effect were presented to the House on Wednesday morning?

Mr. Hogg

Indeed, I was aware of that, and I rather think that something similar is happening in the other place even as we speak. Last week, we were told that the post of Lord Chancellor had been abolished and that the noble and learned Lord Falconer was going to be something different, yet the following day there he was in wig and gown, sitting on the Woolsack. It was discovered, suddenly, that the post of Lord Chancellor could not be abolished.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is going well beyond the scope of the motion. Nothing can happen in this House during the Speaker's absence on Wednesday that cannot be taken care of under Standing Orders.

Mr. Hogg

I was indeed led astray by the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant). I apologise to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The right hon. and learned Gentleman has been a Member long enough to know when he might be tempted into being led astray. He should not do it.

Mr. Hogg

That is why I was apologising to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I recognised the fact that I should not have been led astray, and I was very contrite. I know you of old, and I know perfectly well that you like me to stand in sackcloth and ashes. I sinned and I apologised, although I was just a trifle surprised when you abused me for doing so. Well, I will overlook the matter on this occasion.

If I may, I shall revert to the main thrust of my remarks, and there are two bits to it. The first is to caution the Speaker against being away too long—not for the technical reasons on which we have just been trespassing, but for the more general reason that in many important respects he has safeguarded the rights of Back Benchers. While I would not for a moment suggest that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and your colleagues would not seek to do likewise—that is not the thrust of what I want to say—sometimes the authority of the Speaker as such is necessary to safeguard our rights. Therefore we do not want Mr. Speaker to be away from the House longer than need be.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. Perhaps I should remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman of the terms of the motion, in that the House has one question, and one question only, to decide: whether Mr. Speaker should be given leave of absence on the sitting day of 18 June.

Mr. Hogg

That is exactly why I am welcoming the fact that the motion provides for an absence of only one day. On subsequent occasions, such a motion might suggest that Mr. Speaker be absent on more than one day. I am speaking to the motion—namely, that he should be absent on only one day—and explaining why it is so important that he be absent for only one day. He has used the authority of the Speaker's Chair in a number of important respects to safeguard the rights of Back Bench.

Mr. George Osborne (Tatton)

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that a good example of how Mr. Speaker has safeguarded the rights of Back Benchers is his asking the Prime Minister to come to the House on Wednesday to explain the reshuffle? That is a classic example of the role of the Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I have already had to tell the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst that Standing Orders provide for there to be a substitute for the Speaker with all the same powers. It is to be hoped that they will be discharged in the same manner in defending the rights of Members of the House.

Mr. Hogg

I accept that of course, and I have no doubt that when you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and indeed your colleagues, are in the Chair, you will not seek to do otherwise. As I ventured to say, however, this matter is rather like Secretaries of State: sometimes the authority of the office, not just the authority of the person, is needed to impress other powers in the land. There is no doubt, if I might respectfully say so, that the fact that the Speaker qua Speaker made the request to the Prime Minister had an impact on No. 10.

I say that not in any way to belittle you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but it is a basic truth. That takes one, therefore, to a fundamental proposition: Mr. Speaker has, qua Speaker, done a number of things, in his personal capacity and with the authority of the Chair, to reinforce the rights of Back Benchers, which is why we do not want to see him gone for more than one day.

I think that I will not in any way trespass on the patience of the House if I identify some things that Mr. Speaker has done to safeguard the powers and privileges of Members and say why, therefore, we do not want to spare him. The first involves the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne). Mr. Speaker has, on occasion, impressed on Secretaries of State the importance of making all public statements on policy change to this House first, and not through leakage. His request to No. 10 today is a reflection of that.

You may not have been in the Chair, Mr. Deputy Speaker, although you will have heard that the Deputy Prime Minister apologised earlier today for the leak in the weekend press as regards his statement.

That, I suggest, is one of the consequences of the action of the Speaker qua Speaker in deploring that habit. In that respect, the Speaker has been safeguarding our interests, rights and privileges.

Mr. Bercow

Given that the decision to award Mr. Speaker an honorary doctorate constitutes both a testimony to his meteoric rise to his present post and a comment on his excellent custodianship of the role of Speaker, does my right hon. and learned Friend not think that if the university of Glasgow were made aware of the significant anxiety, at least among Conservative Members, about Mr. Speaker's prospective absence—which might be reflected in the negativing of the motion—the university would in all probability agree to rearrange the date? Might not that avenue be usefully explored?

Mr. Hogg

I do not think that the House would wish, in a cavalier fashion, to disappoint either the university or Mr. Speaker. It is clear that Mr. Speaker wishes to go to the university; otherwise we would not be debating the motion. I would not want to see Mr. Speaker disappointed, or the university disappointed. As we have been promised that Mr. Speaker will be away for only one day, I do not think I would adopt the course suggested by my hon. Friend.

Mr. Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight)

Earlier, my right hon. and learned Friend mentioned the Deputy Prime Minister's apology for a leak to the weekend press of the statement that he made earlier. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the announcement made at 6 pm on Thursday was in fact an announcement of a change in Government policy—of a new Government policy, indeed—and that, as such—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. What the hon. Gentleman is saying is well outside the scope of the motion.

Mr. Hogg

I take the hint, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I shall not respond to my hon. Friend's question, as I think you would say that I was out of order. I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me.

Michael Fabricant

Further to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow)—whose question was, of course, in order—is there not a danger that if the university of Glasgow thought the House believed it would be wrong for the Speaker to be absent on that day, the award of the degree per se might be jeopardised? If the degree were not awarded, would that not be to the detriment not just of the Speaker but of the House? After all, the awarding of a doctorate is not only a great privilege for the Speaker; it reflects well on this place.

Mr. Hogg

I agree with that. I think it would be a great pity if the university cast the doctorate into question for any reason. Not only is it an honour to the Speaker, and, as my hon. Friend says, an honour to the House, in a sense; it also stresses the integrity of the United Kingdom. In many ways, the integrity of the United Kingdom, by which I mean its unity, has been put at risk by the Government's policies. It is therefore rather cheering to observe the university of Glasgow recognising that there is in Mr. Speaker a proper recipient for an honour, and thus demonstrating the integrity and oneness of this realm.

I am afraid that I have been diverted, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I know that you like me to keep strictly in order, so I shall do my best to return to the main themes that I had in mind. As you will recall, I was saying that the Speaker qua Speaker, exercising his personal authority and influence, has done much to safeguard the rights of Back Benchers. One thing that he has done—if you will forgive me for saying so, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is more difficult for Deputy Speakers to do this—is grant emergency questions. Emergency questions, Mr. Deputy Speaker—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. There is absolutely no difference between the responsibilities involved. If the Speaker is absent, the Chairman of Ways and Means exercises full responsibility and makes exactly the same judgments, based on the same criteria.

Mr. Hogg

I accept, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that there is no difference between the nominal powers of the Deputy Speaker and the Speaker. You will recall, though, from my point about what Mr. Speaker had done with regard to No. 10, that sometimes—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is now trying to make too much of one particular point. There are absolutely no grounds for supposing that any occupant of the Chair would have taken any different decision on the basis of the advice available. It is a false argument—and the right hon. and learned Gentleman does not remain in order by suggesting it—that there is any division to be drawn between the Speaker and anyone else appointed by the House in the Speaker's place.

Mr. Hogg

I would in no way formally quarrel with what you are saying, Mr. Deputy Speaker. However, with your enormous experience of this place, you will know how the House prefers to see a Secretary of State rather than a Minister of State—and it applies even more in respect of an Under-Secretary—answering from the Dispatch Box. That is not to criticise the persons concerned, but to say that, for some purposes, the full authority of the office has to be deployed. Although it is perfectly true that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, possess all the nominal powers of Mr. Speaker, it remains the case that sometimes, however rarely, one needs the authority of the office as opposed to the formal powers of the function.

Mr. Bellingham

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, when an approach is made qua Speaker to No. 10 or to a Department, it is surely made from the Speaker's office and the office itself carries that authority? In that light, surely it does not matter too much whether the Speaker or the Deputy Speaker is in charge?

Mr. Hogg

That is the point that Mr. Deputy Speaker is putting to me, and I accept it. When I think back to my days as a Minister, I was conscious—and my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) would confirm it—that a request from the Secretary of State carried more weight than one from a Minister of State, even if the Minister of State in question happened to be my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal. It is sometimes necessary to deploy the full weight of the office.

Michael Fabricant

Surely my right hon. and learned Friend is not impugning the integrity of No. 10 Downing street! Surely he is not saying that it would need the weight of the Speaker, rather than the Deputy Speaker acting qua Speaker, to take a rational decision. Surely he is not saying that Downing street would be swayed by such an action.

Mr. Hogg

I am sorry to disappoint my hon. Friend, but I am indeed saying precisely that, and I know that he will be shocked. Although I make no express or implied criticism of Mr. Speaker, Mr. Deputy Speaker and colleagues, I cannot be so generous to No. 10. I ask myself the question whether No. 10 is likely to be more embarrassed by refusing a request from Speaker qua Speaker than it would be by refusing one from the Deputy Speaker. We can make our own judgments about that, but many will believe that the authority of the office adds to the force of the request.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I should tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman that Mr. Speaker has ensured that No. 10 did give a response in respect of the particular day on which the Speaker's absence was to be debated. It seems to me that the point has been proved. In seeking to split the hairs of such judgments as I have made, the right hon. and learned Gentleman should know that, if he is worried that the Deputy Speaker does not possess the full authority of the Speaker, I may be tempted to exercise my authority in the use of Standing Orders to demonstrate that I do indeed have the fullest powers.

Mr. Hogg

I fully recognise that when a Member is not in order, you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, possess the full powers. That is why I hope that I have carefully remained in order. However, so that I do not trespass on your patience—I would not want to do that, Mr. Deputy Speaker—I have several other points that need to be made.

Mr. Bellingham

I do not wish to be pedantic, but does my right hon. and learned Friend believe that, in dealing with issues of grave urgency, Mr. Speaker himself is likely to telephone No. 10, or will discussions take place within the Speaker's Office? It was probably the Speaker's secretary who made the call, through the usual channels. It is the collective weight of the Speaker's office, including the Chairman of Ways and Means and the other Deputy Speakers, that adds the requisite weight in these circumstances.

Mr. Hogg

I do not wish to exhaust your patience, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I have a feeling that if I go into the detail of what happens in the Speaker's Office—I do not know, but I assume it is like a Secretary of State's office—you might say that I was trespassing too far. Indeed, your eyes seem to signal that that is the case. That being so, I am minded—if my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham) will forgive me—to move on to my next point. I shall skirt over the subject with some caution, because it goes to the prolixity of Members. Mr. Speaker, in person, has made clear his desire to ensure that Government Front Benchers do not go on too long, especially in their response to questions—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I cannot accept that as a point that is relevant to this debate. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman thinks back—as an assiduous attender of the Chamber—he will realise that he has heard such exhortations from all the occupants of the Chair. I do not accept that as an argument relevant to this debate.

Mr. Hogg

I was making a slightly different point, and it goes to the authority of the office. Mr. Speaker himself—as you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, will be the first to acknowledge—has said to a number of Front Benchers, on both sides, "Too many questions and too many answers". That is a very good thing, too, and that is why we do not want Mr. Speaker to be away for too many days. He has put a curb on the mouths of Front Benchers on both sides, and that is a good thing, but it requires the weight of Mr. Speaker himself—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I must correct the right hon. and learned Gentleman. That depends entirely on the Standing Orders and the way in which the occupant of the Chair, whoever it is, interprets them. I do not want the right hon. and learned Gentleman to pursue that line of argument.

Mr. John Gummer (Suffolk, Coastal)

rose—

Mr. Hogg

I shall give way to my right hon. Friend.

Mr. Gummer

Perhaps I may assist you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and my right hon. and learned Friend on that point. But a fortnight ago, I had occasion to intervene to ask whether it was acceptable to have a guillotine that was so tight that the Minister was not able to finish explaining her amendment before we voted. The occupant of the Chair was one of the Deputy Speakers, and I was happy to be assured that the Speaker—spoken of as the office itself—would take seriously the issue that had been raised. That is an indication in this instance. However, it is right to say that if the Speaker were known not to be present for a period of time, the office itself would be significantly diminished.

Mr. Hogg

That is true, because—and I mean no disrespect to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker—the Chairman of Ways and Means and his colleagues are the deputies of Mr. Speaker, and we do not want him to be away from the House more than he must. That is not a criticism of the occupant of the Chair, but a recognition that Mr. Speaker, qua Mr. Speaker, adds something extra to the proceedings of the House. However, I realise that you do not wish me to go on further about the matter of prolixity, Mr. Deputy Speaker, so I shall turn to the matter of the choice of amendments.

I was put in mind of the subject by what my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal said about the guillotines. I shall explain the relevance in a moment—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I am afraid that I must rule the right hon. and learned Gentleman out of order if he wishes to discuss the powers of selection. That cannot be relevant to the absence of Mr. Speaker. Once again, the Standing Orders tell us that the Chairman of Ways and Means or other Deputy Speakers have the full powers of selection. Indeed, they are exercised on many occasions.

Mr. Hogg

I understand, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I would be the last person to challenge your ruling. I shall therefore move on.

Mr. Bercow

Leaving aside the issues of deterring prolixity—on which subject we have been admirably reassured by your good self, Mr. Deputy Speaker—and of the powers of selection, can I interest my right hon. and learned Friend in the relevance of the subject of the business on Wednesday, for it is to that day that the motion relates?

Does he think it a matter of legitimate concern to Members that although we are not scheduled to have a vote on that day, there will be an important debate on the Floor of the House on the European Union? Given the constitutional significance of that debate, is it entirely seemly that it should take place on a day on which the Speaker is absent?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. That point is absolutely irrelevant. The authority of the Chair is such that whoever is occupying it can cope with any eventuality of that kind.

Mr. Hogg

I defer, of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to what you have just said, but I understand my hon. Friend's personal regret for the fact that Mr. Speaker will be away on Wednesday. My hon. Friend has a ten-minute Bill, and I know that he is anxious that Mr. Speaker should personally hear what he has to say on domestic violence. All speeches are, of course, addressed to the Chair.

Mr. Bercow

I am most grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend for making that point. He has been my generous and unpaid consultant in so doing, for he knows that my natural self-effacement and reticence prevented me from making any reference to that important point.

Mr. Hogg

That is why I felt compelled to make my remark. I know that my hon. Friend is a very modest man who would not wish to draw attention to himself.

I shall turn to something slightly different, and to a point that is personal to the Speaker. Mr. Speaker represents a Scots constituency—Glasgow, Springburn. That, no doubt, is why he is to receive a doctorate, honoris causa, from the university of Glasgow. That gives Mr. Speaker a very special position in safeguarding the rights of English Members against oppression from Scottish Members.

Mr. Andrew Turner

Will my right hon. and learned Friend give way?

Mr. Hogg

May I develop my argument, then I shall of course give way?

My point is becoming of particular importance now that a Secretary of State who represents a Scottish constituency has been put in charge of English health.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The right hon. and learned Gentleman must not get himself into the position of appearing to question the impartiality of the Speaker in his relationship to any Member of the House.

Mr. Hogg

I was not, indeed, doing that.

Mr. Forth

Will my right hon. and learned Friend give way?

Mr. Hogg

I shall, but I must first give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner).

Mr. Andrew Turner

rose—

Mr. Foulkes

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. On five occasions that I have counted, the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) has said that he accepts your ruling, and has then gone on to challenge it in what he says. Since you are acting with all the powers of the Speaker, as you have told us on a number of occasions, is it not about time that the right hon. and learned Gentleman had the courtesy and grace to accept your rulings properly?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. It is my responsibility to try to keep to order within the terms laid down by the Standing Orders. I am seeking to do that. I have no doubt that the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) will respect the judgments that I have made and that we will make progress.

Mr. Hogg

Indeed I will, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Had I not done so, I feel confident that you would have been the first to tell me. Whenever you have indicated that I was trespassing rather overmuch on your patience, I have moved on.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. It is not a matter of trespassing on my patience, but of stepping over the bounds of the Standing Orders of the House. That is the only thing of which I am guardian. My personal considerations are totally outwith the scope of the debate.

Mr. Hogg

I am deferring to your rulings on what is in or out of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Whenever I may have strayed out of order, you have been kind enough to indicate in the most courteous manner that I have done so, and I have, I hope, moved on properly to another subject so as not to run, in any way, the risk of incurring your displeasure.

Mr. Andrew Turner

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for giving way. He has mentioned that the degree will be conferred at the university of Glasgow, which, as we know, is in Scotland, and which is therefore some considerable distance from this place. My concern is that the terms of the motion may be impaired, or even contravened, if, for example, there were to be serious travel problems for Mr. Speaker on his return from Glasgow to England on Wednesday, or even the following day. He may not be able to get back—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman would have to get up a lot earlier in the morning to fool me on that point.

Mr. Hogg

The point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight had not occurred to me, although, knowing British railways, it should have done. In the Government wind-ups, it would be extremely helpful if we could be told that a manuscript amendment will be tabled to the motion, either today or to deal with the situation on Thursday, should it occur, to excuse Mr. Speaker for a further day against the possibility that rail strikes or other inauspicious circumstances may prevent his return on Thursday. That is an important point and I am ashamed to say that it had not occurred to me.

Mr. Forth

I may be able to help my right hon. and learned Friend on the question that he posed a moment ago as to the provenance of the honour that the university is doing Mr. Speaker. From my memory of the document that I saw a few moments ago, which was furnished by one of my hon. Friends but is now, sadly, with Hansard for the greater accuracy of the record, I believe that the citation referred to Mr. Speaker both in his capacity as Speaker of the House of Commons and as Member of Parliament for Glasgow, Springburn. There was a duality to the citation, which honoured Mr. Speaker in both regards. I hope that is helpful.

Mr. Hogg

Indeed, and it makes it even more important that we do nothing to put at risk the granting of that honour, so I shall support the motion, my reservations notwithstanding.

As I know that other right hon. and hon. Members want to speak, I shall draw my remarks to a conclusion simply by saying that the honour is both to the Speaker and also to the House. The House is pleased to see Mr. Speaker honoured in such a way, because he has done a lot to protect and preserve the rights of Back Benchers. It is a good thing that he is being honoured, yet at the same time we do not want to lose him for very long.

Mr. Bercow

I am extraordinarily grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend, who has been generous in giving way. Given the importance of this place and of the speeches made in it as a means whereby one colleague can persuade and, occasionally, even convert another, will my right hon. and learned Friend accept that, as a result both of the intellectual content of his speech and of his personal eloquence, I, a sceptic on the subject of the motion, am duly persuaded. There can be no greater tribute to the quality and power of my right hon. and learned Friend's mind and mouth.

Mr. Hogg

It goes without saying that I am deeply flattered by that observation. May I also express the hope that my hon. Friend will address the House, so that we can know in detail the reasons for his conversion?

Mr. George Osborne

I note in passing that my right hon. and learned Friend should be cautious of the conversions of the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow)—my good friend.

To return briefly to an issue touched on by my right hon. and learned Friend a few moments ago—the possibility that the Speaker may not make it back for Thursday—given that the House has new hours and that we sit earlier on Thursdays, and the likelihood that the Speaker may be attending a dinner or similar occasion held in his honour on Wednesday evening, will that not make him even more vulnerable to travel problems on his return to London?

Mr. Hogg

It certainly will, and I am sure that Members on the Treasury Bench would like to deal with such points when they make their respective wind-ups.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell

I am not quite so persuaded as our hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow), but the eloquence of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) has moved me considerably further towards support for the motion. He has been probing the extent of the likelihood that Mr. Speaker may not be able to return on the same day or indeed for the following sitting day. Has my right hon. and learned Friend given any thought to the possibility that, as a result of this honour and award from Glasgow, many other universities throughout the British isles will also want to honour our Speaker—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. We are discussing a motion about the Speaker's absence on 18 June. Other occasions will be dealt with separately.

Mr. Hogg

That was entirely the point that I was about to make to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell): one can deal only with particular applications on their own merits. If there be another invitation for a particular day, the House will wish to discuss it, but now is not the time to do so, because that would be to stray out of order in a very serious manner.

I have said that the House owes Mr. Speaker the recognition that he has fought for the rights of Back Benchers, which is a serious point. It is also the reason why we do not want to spare him for more than a day. The rights of Back Benchers are under constant pressure from the Government and we want Mr. Speaker here permanently to fight for our rights.

Mr. Gummer

Has not my right hon. and learned Friend reached the position at which he can make that point and still be in order? The House chose Mr. Speaker, rather than any other possible candidate, because it saw him as being, of all people, the person most able in the circumstances to defend the rights of Back Benchers and, therefore, in that sense, the persona of the Speaker is separate—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The right hon. Gentleman has sufficient experience of the House to know that he is trespassing on very dangerous ground indeed.

Mr. Hogg

Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I do not wish to cut across your rulings, but the general point is that, sometimes, the authority of the office is necessary to carry the weight and influence that we require. I speak as a former Minister, conscious that the weight of the Secretary of State—rather than myself, as a Minister of State—was sometimes required. In the end, that is what I am saying: we do not want to spare Mr. Speaker from the House for more than one day, but we are pleased to do him honour.

5.46 pm

Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)

We have already heard the question, "Can a Deputy Speaker act qua Speaker?" and I think that the answer is a resounding yes. We have already heard the question, "Should Mr. Speaker be away for one day or more than one day?" and we have heard that that would be out of order. So I would like to pose a philosophical question: is it right that the Speaker have leave of absence on Wednesday 18th June to receive the honorary degree of Doctor of the University of Glasgow"? I believe that it is right to grant such leave.

My right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House quoted from an excellent journal, published by the Library, factsheet M2, but I also want to quote in pursuance of my argument that it is right that Mr. Speaker should be given that day off. I would argue that it is not a day off, because he is representing the House, as Speaker, as well as himself, as the Member of Parliament for a Glasgow constituency, in the university of Glasgow on that day.

I should like to quote from a colourful journal that has parliamentary copyright. I believe that it is also published by the Library; I certainly obtained it from the Library. It talks about the Speaker in a very interesting and personal way that is directly relevant to the question of whether it is right that he should be given leave of absence on that day. It is important that I read this paragraph because it is true and all hon. Members should listen to these words: In some ways the Speaker leads a rather solitary life.

Mr. Forth

Ah.

Michael Fabricant

But it is true.

It continues: Though receiving plenty of visitors at the splendid Speaker's House inside the Palace of Westminster, on becoming Speaker he gives up some of the comradeship previously enjoyed as an ordinary MP. The Speaker accepts restrictions on his right to socialise informally with other MPs, and no longer has the comforting sense of belonging to a party team. The Speaker has to be seen, at all times, to be completely neutral when it comes to party politics.

Mr. George Osborne

rose—

Michael Fabricant

That is the nub, but, before I pursue that argument, I shall give way to my hon. Friend.

Mr. Osborne

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, as he is certainly informing the House by quoting from that interesting document. He says that the Speaker has to be neutral of party politics, which is, of course, the case. I presume that, if there is a Division on the motion, it will be a free vote. However, does my hon. Friend agree that it was a shame that one political party in the House—the Scottish National party—chose to stand against Mr. Speaker seeking re-election at the general election?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. That is completely outwith the scope of the motion.

Michael Fabricant

I will, quite rightly, not answer that question, but my hon. Friend is at least right to say that this is not a party political matter—perhaps this is in order—and it is interesting that, so far, no Government Member has chosen to speak in the debate, other than to intervene.

Mr. Hogg

Before my hon. Friend moves on to another point, may I caution him against putting too much emphasis on the solitary nature of the Speaker's office? We might find Mr. Speaker facing many invitations from people wishing to relieve his solitary state, which would not be to the advantage of the House.

Michael Fabricant

My right hon. and learned Friend makes a powerful point, which is connected to some of the issues that he raised earlier, when he spoke about whether a precedent has been created. After all, the former Prime Minister, John Major, created many more universities out of polytechnics—with hindsight, we might argue about whether that was right—which provides so much more scope for offering honorary doctorates to the Speaker. That would be out of order, however, so I shall not pursue that line now.

There is a further important point. Mr. Speaker stands in a long line of great Speakers. Some of them, of course, have met with violent ends. If I may be allowed—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The answer to that is no. We are debating whether Mr. Speaker Martin may have leave of absence on Wednesday 18 June 2003.

Michael Fabricant

Of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you are right. As my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner) pointed out, Glasgow is in Scotland—he pointed out, too, that we are the United Kingdom—and given that my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) pointed out that Glasgow is in the United Kingdom, the visit to Glasgow on Wednesday in some ways reinforces the integrity of the United Kingdom. Although I shall not read out the long list of Speakers who have been beheaded—as has happened many times—and killed in battle, we have to worry about the welfare and well-being of the Speaker when he is not in the House. That raises an important and serious point. Given the genuine esteem that many of us feel for the present Speaker, because he runs this House in a way that is not only firm in direction but relaxed, and he has created an atmosphere—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. Before the hon. Gentleman goes too far down his eulogistic line, I assure him that Mr. Speaker will always treat with equity any applications from him to speak.

Michael Fabricant

I want to put it on the record, however, that I was not intending to curry favour for myself but to make the point that Mr. Speaker's lonely position is often exacerbated by unnecessary, cruel, hurtful and inaccurate press comments. We should therefore welcome the fact that he is being honoured in this way by the university of Glasgow.

Mr. Forth

I reassure my hon. Friend, as he is clearly anxious about Mr. Speaker's safety and peace of mind on his visit to the university of Glasgow, that Mr. Speaker will be on his home territory, in the city of his birth and upbringing, which rightly has a great influence on him, and in that sense he will be going home. I hope that my hon. Friend will therefore accept that we can be confident that Mr. Speaker will be looked after, cared for, loved and returned in one piece.

Michael Fabricant

I am reassured by my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House. In fact, it would also be interesting to know where the Leader of the House is for this important debate. Perhaps we can be told at some point why the Leader of the House is not present. I hope that the Deputy Leader of the House will make a detailed summing-up, and I hope that he will reassure me that adequate protection will be given to the Speaker at this particular time. We are well aware of the threats that exist to those in such a high-profile position in the United Kingdom.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell

I am surprised that my hon. Friend finds it necessary to ask where the Leader of the House is. Had he studied the press over the weekend, he would have discovered that he is only a part-time Leader of the House—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. That is a quite separate argument.

Michael Fabricant

I am grateful for the intervention from my new neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell). I had not read that particular point in the press, but I still await an answer from the Deputy Leader of the House, who will perhaps be able to point out where the Leader of the House is, and what excuse he has for not being present for this important debate.

Mr. Andrew Turner

The Leader of the House is in a sense a servant of the House in exactly the same way as Mr. Speaker. Would not it be appropriate for the Leader of the House to seek the leave of the House to be absent on a day such as this—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman should have learned from my last ruling.

Michael Fabricant

Of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you must forgive my hon. Friend, who is a new Member and not thoroughly apprised of all the procedures that exist in the House. I am sure, however, that the new Deputy Leader of the House will be more than capable of replying. It would, however, be interesting to know where the Leader of the House is today and what protection will be given to the Speaker in these difficult times while he is away from the Palace precincts.

Mr. Osborne

My hon. Friend has returned to the point about the protection offered to the Speaker on his travels. He will be aware that another Member of the House, the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, was recently robbed on a train going back to his constituency. Is he aware of any special laws in this country that protect the Speaker and that prevent citizens, or subjects, of this country from intervening in his travels from or, more particularly, to this place—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. When the hon. Gentleman started, I thought that he might have found a way of keeping in order, but he has spun out of control.

Michael Fabricant

Perhaps, again, the Deputy Leader of the House can answer that question in his long response.

Mr. Forth

I understand why my hon. Friend is struggling a little on this issue as, sadly, the Deputy Leader of the House did not seek to catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker, at the outset of this debate. If he had done so, he would have done the House the courtesy of explaining why his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales and part-time Leader of the House was not here. Perhaps my hon. Friend would give way to the Deputy Leader of the House to allow him to do so?

Michael Fabricant

I would be happy to do so. Perhaps the reason that the Leader of the House is not here is that he is only part-time. Does the Deputy Leader of the House wish to intervene?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman should be careful. Were he to sit down, I might be tempted to think that he had finished his speech.

Michael Fabricant

I would not wish you to think that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for one moment.

Mr. Hogg

Will my hon. Friend consider the fact that the motion is in the name of the part-time Leader of the House, and in his name alone? In those circumstances, does he not agree that we should expect the part-time Leader of the House to be in his place?

Michael Fabricant

On that, I seek your advice, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as you are acting qua Speaker at the moment. Is it in order? It seems most unusual. Normally, on a motion, one would expect to see both the name of the Leader of the House and the Deputy—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I think that the hon. Gentleman might know that any Minister can move a motion of this sort on the Order Paper, and any Minister can speak for another Minister. If it would assist him, however, I can tell him that the Leader of the House is currently at an introductory meeting with Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Hogg

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You have been kind enough to indicate where the part-time Leader of the House is. Does that indicate that as a general rule Ministers who have put their names to a motion but are not able to be in the Chamber should write to inform the Chair of where they are? If that is the case, we will want to ask the occupant of the Chair where the absentees are as a matter of general practice.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I think not. I suggest that the right hon. and learned Gentleman searches his memory about his own record on that matter, which might help to inform him of the procedures that Ministers follow on these occasions.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Given that the motion was tabled only relatively recently and that the Leader of the House must have known that he would be absent during the debate, would it not have been a courtesy to the House if the Deputy Leader of the House's name had appeared on the motion?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I think that I have already ruled that the name that appears is not significant. Both Government and Opposition Members often speak to a motion to which their name does not appear, although other Members' names do.

Michael Fabricant

I think that the House and you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, would welcome it if I moved on a little.

Mr. Andrew Turner

My hon. Friend referred earlier to the possibility of the Deputy Leader of the House—

Mr. Hogg

Full time.

Mr. Turner

My hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) referred to the possibility the full-time Deputy Leader of the House making an intervention. Is there not a sad lacuna in Standing Orders that prevents hon. Members from sitting down to allow Front Benchers to intervene—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. May I say respectfully to the hon. Gentleman that I do not think that I need such advice on procedure at this time?

Michael Fabricant

I shall move on and refer again to the excellent document that is obtainable from the Library of the House of Commons.

Mr. Anthony Steen (Totnes)

Free of charge.

Michael Fabricant

It is obtainable free of charge, as my hon. Friend says. The document features a nice picture of the Speaker in full regalia, and I hope that he will wear that or something similar in Glasgow. A picture of the Speaker's grandson is shown on the back cover of the document.

Mr. Andrew Turner

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Michael Fabricant

My hon. Friend is trying my patience but I shall give way.

Mr. Turner

My hon. Friend refers to the regalia that Mr. Speaker will wear when the degree is conferred. Is it not normal for those on whom degrees are conferred—

Mr. Steen

Graduands.

Mr. Turner

Is it not normal for graduands to wear the robe and gown—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I have had to rule the hon. Gentleman out of order on four out of four interventions. His comment cannot be relevant to the motion. I hope that the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) will not draw too heavily on the book that he has with him.

Michael Fabricant

I shall not, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I shall quote only one sentence because it is key to the issue and the philosophical question of whether it is right for Mr. Speaker to be given leave of absence from the House on Wednesday.

Page 8 of the document says: It is because the Speaker represents the House of Commons, which itself represents the people of the United Kingdom and is the safeguard of the fundamental freedoms of the country, that he or she is treated with honour and dignity.

Mr. George Osborne

We are aware that Mr. Speaker is receiving the honour not only as Speaker of the House, but as the constituency Member for Glasgow, Springburn. My hon. Friend should bear that in mind.

Michael Fabricant

My hon. Friend raises an interesting point but I argue that Mr. Speaker is probably receiving the degree primarily because he is Speaker of the House. I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) is nodding in agreement.

Mr. Osborne

I do not want to cross my hon. Friend but I am not sure whether it is entirely clear that the university of Glasgow—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. We cannot go down that particular lane.

Michael Fabricant

I am grateful for your protection, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I realise that the exact terms of the motion refer to the Speaker being given leave of absence on Wednesday 18 June. If my hon. Friend's idea were really borne in mind, the motion would have referred to the Speaker and Member of Parliament for so on and so forth.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I have just said that the point made by the hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne) should not be borne in mind at all.

Mr. Steen

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have been following the debate, as I am sure that you have. Will we have such a debate every time Mr. Speaker leaves the precincts or is this a one-off debate so that we can adjust to the situation and decide whether to join in or not?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The hon. Gentleman has not been following the debate for quite as long as me. This is a one-off occasion. We do not know how many times the occupant of the Chair or any Member of the House might be so honoured.

Mr. Forth

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. For absolute clarification, I hope that you will confirm that Standing Orders require that each time Mr. Speaker needs to be away from the House, except on Fridays, such a motion must be put before the House, debated and voted on, if necessary. I hope that you will confirm that each occasion of absence, other than on a Friday, is a matter for individual treatment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I can, indeed, confirm that. It is why there is a motion on the Order Paper that need, or need not, be debated according to circumstances.

Mr. Bercow

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am sorry but my brow is furrowed and I am frankly troubled by this afternoon's events. I seek assurance and I would be appreciative of your guidance. It was helpful that you advised us that the right hon. Member for Neath (Peter Hain) was holding the first of his meetings with Mr. Speaker this afternoon because the right hon. Gentleman did not tell us that himself. On a point of procedure and with regard to what might be described as old-fashioned parliamentary courtesy, would it have been appropriate for the right hon. Gentleman either to speak to the motion or to explain why he was not doing so, given that although he knew that he could not be here now, he did manage to be present for the Deputy Prime Minister's statement?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I have already explained that the appearance of Ministers' names on a motion does not necessarily indicate that all or any will be present to move it. I do not think that there is any difficulty at all or that we can continue to go over this ground. If the hon. Gentleman continues to have a furrowed brow, I suggest that he takes up the issue with his hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Sir Nicholas Winterton), who is Chairman of the Procedure Committee.

Mr. Hogg

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You and I have been Members of the House for a long time—you rather longer than me. Would you be good enough to confirm that a Minister will often stand up at the beginning of a debate to say a few words to the motion and to apologise for, and explain, the absence of a Minister such as the part-time Leader of the House when the latter's name heads the motion?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

No. I can speak from considerable experience to say that that does not always happen and that the House does not always take it in bad heart.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell

Further to the point of order made by my right hon. Friend the shadow Leader of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I understood that you made it clear that the House must pass a motion each time that Mr. Speaker needs to be away from the House. Will you enlighten me on what would happen if Mr. Speaker knew that he would be away for three days during a two-month period? Could that be allowed by one consolidated motion?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That is entirely hypothetical. The answer that I gave to the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) was crystal clear in the context of our debate today.

Michael Fabricant

I cannot help but ask myself whether it is right that Mr. Speaker should be given leave of absence on Wednesday 18 June, given the unique circumstances of having a part-time Leader of the House who cannot be present and who allows his full-time deputy to be present without putting the deputy's name—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I have dealt with that matter and have tried to assist the House as well as I can. We should proceed with the debate on the substance of the motion.

Michael Fabricant

I was merely going to ask whether such an action would be courteous.

Mr. Forth

Perhaps I can help my hon. Friend. That august body, the House of Commons Commission, is meeting as we speak. I am a member of the Commission for the time being, but I have chosen to fulfil my parliamentary duties by being in the Chamber. The part-time Leader of the House has chosen to be in the Commission meeting. I shall leave my hon. Friend and others present to judge which they think is the better choice.

Michael Fabricant

That is an interesting point. I hope that tens of millions of pounds will not be wasted on blank cheques because of the absence of my right hon. Friend, who is always cautious when he attends the Commission's meetings.

I was talking about the role of the Speaker in representing the United Kingdom. As I mentioned before, his receipt of an honorary doctorate in Glasgow strengthens the role of the UK at a difficult time. Only today we heard a statement on regional assemblies—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is becoming repetitious. He prompts me by saying "as I mentioned before". I remind him how close we might be to implementing Standing Order No. 42.

Michael Fabricant

I am grateful, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for your reminder of Standing Order No. 42 and for reminding me not to remind the Chair when I have already made a point. That might be good advice for when I am invited to take part in "Just a Minute" on BBC Radio 4.

My serious point relates to the role of Mr. Speaker in representing all of us in the United Kingdom.

Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet)

I remind my hon. Friend that next Wednesday sees a happy conjunction of events. First, Mr. Speaker will, we hope, have leave of absence to get his honorary doctorate at Glasgow university. I shall certainly vote for the motion. Secondly, the Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Ways and Means will celebrate his 33rd anniversary of being elected to the House. A few others will also celebrate that anniversary but, sadly, it is only a few. With his huge experience, the Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Ways and Means has my full confidence in acting for the Speaker on that day in particular.

Michael Fabricant

I am very grateful for that intervention. The whole House can congratulate the Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Ways and Means on his 33rd anniversary in the House. I for one have no doubt that even though we have a complex and difficult day on Wednesday 18 June, the Deputy Speaker, acting as qua Speaker, as my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham said, will do so with dignity and equal skill.

It will be a difficult day. That is relevant. As some hon. Members said, we have questions to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister. We have also learned that there will be a statement by the Prime Minister on the future constitution of Parliament, directly flowing from the Speaker's intervention and request. A 10-minute Bill is on the Order Paper—

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman does not need to go through the Order Paper. For all I know, it is as yet incomplete for Wednesday. He might know that I have sat in the Chair to deal with the contentious matter of 10-minute Bills before.

Michael Fabricant

Do you not think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the Domestic Violence (Law Reform) Bill, which will be introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham, might be so contentious that the House becomes disorderly?

Mr. Forth

Is my hon. Friend not slightly worried about the hint dropped by Mr. Deputy Speaker a moment ago when he said that the Order Paper "is as yet incomplete"? The anxiety is not what we already know about the Order Paper, but what could arise between now and Wednesday. Has my hon. Friend thought of that?

Michael Fabricant

My right hon. Friend raises an important point. Who would have thought that a statement would have bitten into Opposition day time last week? That was pretty surprising given the agreement on both sides of the House that that should not happen. We do not know what will happen on Wednesday. It is an important day. I have put my name down to speak in the debate on European affairs, and I hope that I catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman is going a good way about it.

Mr. Hogg

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. For the purposes of clarification, will you advise the House what aspects of my hon. Friend's speechifying are likely to disqualify him so that we can all learn from his experience?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I was merely alluding to the fact that the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) was bringing himself to prominence by stressing that he hoped to catch the eye of the occupant of the Chair at the relevant time on Wednesday.

Michael Fabricant

I am grateful for that—

Mr. Bellingham

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I left the Chamber a few moments ago to go to the gents and then to have a glass of water and make a few telephone calls. I left in the hope that by the time I returned my hon. Friend would have finished his speech. I notice from the annunciator that he started his speech at 6.8 pm. It is now 6.16 pm. There must be a mistake. I have a feeling he started at least 40 minutes ago.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

There is a mistake on the annunciator, but we were all so engrossed in the speech of the hon. Member for Lichfield that none of us noticed.

Michael Fabricant

Mr. Deputy Speaker, you are a generous man and I have no doubt that you will ably replace—if that is the right word—the Speaker on Wednesday 18 June. Given that the amount of time one speaks in this debate might be linked to one's chances of speaking on Wednesday, it might be useful if I concluded my remarks.

At the beginning I asked whether it is right to give the Speaker leave to go to Glasgow to have an honorary doctorate conferred on him. I believe that it is. It is an honour not only for Mr. Speaker Martin, but for the House. The Speaker performs his role with dignity and excellence. Those who carp about the Speaker would not dream of doing the job themselves. The criticisms of him are driven by class, arrogance and pomposity. He has created an atmosphere in the House that compares well, if not better, with that of certain former Speakers, who I believe created in some instances an aura of terror. I just wanted to get that point on the record. I for one will support the motion.

6.18 pm

The Deputy Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Phil Woolas)

I am in an unusual position, Mr. Deputy Speaker. If you will permit me, I shall stray from the narrow order of the debate simply to say what a great honour and privilege it is to speak from the Dispatch Box. I hope that in whatever time I spend in this post, I do my constituents of Oldham, East and Saddleworth, and the House and its rules, proud. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak.

I find myself in unusual circumstances also because, contrary to my assessment that this would be merely a pleasurable rubber-stamping exercise, the civil servants in the Office of the Leader of the House, whom I have already discovered to be excellent, advised me to prepare some notes in the event that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) wanted, with whatever motive, to make some remarks.

Mr. Bercow

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Woolas

Yes, but briefly and just once, if I may.

Mr. Bercow

I am very grateful indeed. Having known the hon. Gentleman for 18 years, I take particular pleasure in congratulating him on his appointment as Deputy Leader of the House. May I put it to him—in the context of the motion, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as you will readily understand—that his appointment represents a promotion not only on his previous post in the Whips Office but on the important role that he played 17 years ago as a very left-wing leader of the National Union of Students?

Mr. Woolas

Those 18 years have taught me not to wander into such territory, but I am grateful for the first part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

Mr. Forth

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for a Minister, however new, to come to the Dispatch Box, purportedly to wind up a debate, and say brazenly that he will take only one intervention? Is that in the spirit of the House of Commons? Indeed, does it accord with the Standing Orders of the House?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

It is entirely at the discretion of all right hon. or hon. Members whether and how often they give way in the course of debate.

Mr. Hogg

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it not usual in a debate such as this for the Minister to wind up at the end, when he has had the opportunity of hearing everybody speak, so that he can respond to them?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

If the Minister rises in his place, it is usual for the Chair to call him at that time.

Mr. Hogg

Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Of course, I understand that, but surely it is usual for the Minister to wish to listen to the views of right hon. and hon. Members before rising to his feet, so that he can respond to their points.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

That has nothing to do with the Chair.

Mr. Woolas

The motion is extremely narrow and relates simply to the decision by the university of Glasgow to honour our Speaker with a doctorate this Wednesday. The House will find it surprising that the Conservative Members who spoke for an hour and three quarters—we could conclude from that that there has been a failure of opposition—in attempting unnecessarily to prolong the proceedings have served almost to ridicule the honour to be bestowed by the university of Glasgow. I suspect that their contributions also bordered on disrespect for your position as set out in Standing Order No. 3, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as you rightly outlined.

Mr. George Osborne

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Surely it is for you to decide whether we are showing disrespect to the Chair, rather than for another Member to accuse us of doing so.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I have made one or two rulings in the course of the debate to try to guide right hon. and hon. Members away from any such criticism.

Mr. Hogg

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I think that you would be the first to say that right hon. and hon. Members have responded to your guidance and accurately reflected your wishes.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I would always like to think so.

Mr. Woolas

Suffice it to say that Labour Members are certainly delighted to hear the news of the honour for our Speaker, who, like you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is held in extremely high regard—on both sides of the House, I hope, but certainly on this side.

For the record, I have been informed that there have been five such motions in the last 10 years, so although infrequent, they are not unusual. I have also been informed—this may be of interest to the House and may serve as a lesson for Conservative Members—that such motions have never been objected to or, indeed, spoken to. That will explain my actions. As you rightly pointed out, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I am grateful to you for doing so, it is perfectly normal for a Deputy Leader of the House to move a motion in the name of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. Indeed, it is normal for an obscure, unheard of and brand new Deputy Speaker to do so.

Mr. George Osborne

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I believe that I heard the hon. Gentleman refer to the Deputy Speaker as obscure and brand new. Neither of those things applies to you.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I caught no such drift.

Mr. Woolas

I am sure that Hansard will record my remarks as being about myself, the Deputy Leader.

Mr. Bellingham

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Woolas

No, I am afraid not. I said earlier that I would not give way, and the House is anxious to get on to the substantive business.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chief Whip would support me in concluding my remarks quickly, given the important business before the House. As I said, Conservative Members have tainted the distinction that the university of Glasgow is to give our Speaker. It is a great shame that what should be a non-partisan issue has been used in that way, for whatever reason.

Michael Fabricant

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The shadow Leader of the House clearly was not listening to the debate. I alluded to a strange event last week when, on an Opposition day, the Government chose to make a statement. The Deputy Leader of the House might like to think about that.

Mr. Woolas

The shadow Leader of the House may not have been listening to the debate, and I shall not respond to those remarks.

We have had a wide-ranging debate, which, as you pointed out, Mr. Deputy Speaker, went beyond the subject of the motion on several occasions. I simply say that the time for the proceedings on the Licensing Bill, which is before the House later today, is protected, so it is difficult to understand the point of the last two hours of debate if the intention was to delay the consideration of the proposals for late licensing. Perhaps the only benefit of the Opposition's tactics has been to secure late licensing in the House of Commons. That said, the best thing to do is move on.

Mr. Foulkes

rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.

Question put, That the Question be now put:—

The House divided: Ayes 324, Noes 105.

Division No. 232]	[6:28 am
AYES
Adams, Irene (Paisley N)	Corston, Jean
Ainger, Nick	Cotter, Brian
Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)	Cousins, Jim
Alexander, Douglas	Cranston, Ross
Allen, Graham	Crausby, David
Anderson, rh Donald (Swansea E)	Cruddas, Jon
Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & Darwen)	Cryer, John (Hornchurch)
	Cummings, John
Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary	Cunningham, Tony (Workington)
Atkins, Charlotte	Darling, rh Alistair
Austin, John	Davey, Edward (Kingston)
Baird, Vera	Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)
Banks, Tony	David, Wayne
Barrett, John	Davidson, Ian
Barron, rh Kevin	Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)
Bayley, Hugh	Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)
Beard, Nigel	Dawson, Hilton
Benn, Hilary	Dean, Mrs Janet
Bennett, Andrew	Denham, rh John
Berry, Roger	Dhanda, Parmjit
Best, Harold	Dismore, Andrew
Betts, Clive	Dobbin, Jim (Heywood)
Blackman, Liz	Dobson, rh Frank
Blears, Ms Hazel	Donohoe, Brian H.
Blizzard, Bob	Doran, Frank
Blunkett, rh David	Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)
Borrow, David	Drew, David (Stroud)
Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)	Drown, Ms Julia
Bradshaw, Ben	Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)
Breed, Colin	Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston)
Brennan, Kevin	Edwards, Huw
Brooke, Mrs Annette L.	Efford, Clive
Brown, Russell (Dumfries)	Ellman, Mrs Louise
Browne, Desmond	Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)
Bryant, Chris	Farrelly, Paul
Buck, Ms Karen	Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)
Burden, Richard	Fisher, Mark
Burnham, Andy	Flint, Caroline
Burstow, Paul	Flynn, Paul (Newport W)
Byers, rh Stephen	Follett, Barbara
Caborn, rh Richard	Foster, rh Derek
Cairns, David	Foster, Michael (Worcester)
Calton, Mrs Patsy	Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye)
Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)
Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)	Foulkes, rh George
Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V)	Francis, Dr. Hywel
Caplin, Ivor	Gapes, Mike (Ilford S)
Caton, Martin	Gardiner, Barry
Cawsey, Ian (Brigg)	Gerrard, Neil
Challen, Colin	Gibson, Dr. Ian
Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)	Gilroy, Linda
Chaytor, David	Godsiff, Roger
Chidgey, David	Goggins, Paul
Clapham, Michael	Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)
Clark, Paul (Gillingham)	Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)
Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge & Chryston)	Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)
	Hain, rh Peter
Clelland, David	Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)
Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)	Hall, Patrick (Bedford)
Coaker, Vernon	Hamilton, David (Midlothian)
Coffey, Ms Ann	Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE)
Cohen, Harry	Hancock, Mike
Coleman, Iain	Hanson, David
Connarty, Michael	Harvey, Nick
Cook, Frank (Stockton N)	Healey, John
Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)	Heath, David
Cooper, Yvette	Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)	McWalter, Tony
Hendrick, Mark	McWilliam, John
Hepburn, Stephen	Mandelson, rh Peter
Heppell, John	Mann, John (Bassetlaw)
Hesford, Stephen	Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)
Heyes, David	Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)
Hill, Keith (Streatham)	Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)
Hinchliffe, David	Martlew, Eric
Hodge, Margaret	Meacher, rh Michael
Holmes, Paul	Michael, rh Alun
Hope, Phil (Corby)	Miliband, David
Hopkins, Kelvin	Miller, Andrew
Howarth, rh Alan (Newport E)	Moffatt, Laura
Howarth, George (Knowsley N & Sefton E)	Mole, Chris
	Morley, Elliot
Howells, Dr. Kim	Mountford, Kali
Hughes, Beverley (Stretford & Urmston)	Mudie, George
	Mullin, Chris
Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)	Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)
Humble, Mrs Joan	Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)
Hurst, Alan (Braintree)	Norris, Dan (Wansdyke)
Iddon, Dr. Brian	Oaten, Mark (Winchester)
Illsley, Eric	O'Brien, Bill (Normanton)
Irranca-Davies, Huw	O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)
Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead & Highgate)	O'Hara, Edward
	Olner, Bill
Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)	Öpik, Lembit
Jamieson, David	Organ, Diana
Jenkins, Brian	Osborne, Sandra (Ayr)
Johnson, Alan (Hull W)	Owen, Albert
Jones, Helen (Warrington N)	Palmer, Dr. Nick
Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C)	Perham, Linda
Jones, Kevan (N Durham)	Picking, Anne
Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)	Pickthall, Colin
Keeble, Ms Sally	Pike, Peter (Burnley)
Keen, Alan (Feltham)	Plaskitt, James
Keen, Ann (Brentford)	Pollard, Kerry
Kemp, Fraser	Pond, Chris (Gravesham)
Khabra, Piara S.	Pope, Greg (Hyndburn)
Kidney, David	Prescott, rh John
Kilfoyle, Peter	Primarolo, rh Dawn
King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green & Bow)	Prosser, Gwyn
	Pugh, Dr. John
Knight, Jim (S Dorset)	Purchase, Ken
Kumar, Dr. Ashok	Purnell, James
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen	Quin, rh Joyce
Lamb, Norman	Rammell, Bill
Lammy, David	Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)
Lawrence, Mrs Jackie	Raynsford, rh Nick
Laws, David (Yeovil)	Reed, Andy (Loughborough)
Laxton, Bob (Derby N)	Reid, rh Dr. John (Hamilton N & Bellshill)
Lazarowicz, Mark
Leslie, Christopher	Rendel, David
Levitt, Tom (High Peak)	Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry NW)
Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)
Linton, Martin	Rooney, Terry
Llwyd, Elfyn	Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)
Love, Andrew	Roy, Frank (Motherwell)
Lucas, Ian (Wrexham)	Ruane, Chris
Lyons, John (Strathkelvin)	Ruddock, Joan
McAvoy, Thomas	Russell, Bob (Colchester)
McCabe, Stephen	Russell, Ms Christine (City of Chester)
McCafferty, Chris
McDonagh, Siobhain	Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)
MacDonald, Calum	Sanders, Adrian
MacDougall, John	Sarwar, Mohammad
McFall, John	Savidge, Malcolm
McGuire, Mrs Anne	Sawford, Phil
McIsaac, Shona	Sedgemore, Brian
McKechin, Ann	Shaw, Jonathan
McKenna, Rosemary	Sheerman, Barry
Mackinlay, Andrew	Sheridan, Jim
McNamara, Kevin	Short, rh Clare
McNulty, Tony	Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S)
MacShane, Denis	Singh, Marsha
Mactaggart, Fiona	Smith, rh Andrew (Oxford E)

Smith, Geraldine (Morecambe & Lunesdale)	Ward, Claire
	Wareing, Robert N.
Soley, Clive	Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)
Southworth, Helen	Watts, David
Steinberg, Gerry	White, Brian
Stevenson, George	Wicks, Malcolm
Stewart, David (Inverness E & Lochaber)	Williams, rh Alan (Swansea W)
	Williams, Betty (Conwy)
Stewart, Ian (Eccles)	Williams, Hywel (Caernarfon)
Stinchcombe, Paul	Williams, Roger (Brecon)
Stoate, Dr. Howard	Willis, Phil
Stuart, Ms Gisela	Wills, Michael
Stunell, Andrew	Winnick, David
Sutcliffe, Gerry	Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C)
Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)
Taylor, David (NW Leics)	Wishart, Pete
Taylor, Dr. Richard (Wyre F)	Woolas, Phil
Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)	Worthington, Tony
Tipping, Paddy	Wray, James (Glasgow Baillieston)
Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)
Touhig, Don (Islwyn)	Wright, Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth)
Trickett, Jon
Truswell, Paul	Wright, David (Tefford)
Turner, Dr. Desmond (Brighton Kemptown)	Wright, Tony (Cannock)
	Wyatt, Derek
Turner, Neil (Wigan)
Twigg, Stephen (Enfield)	Tellers for the Ayes:
Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall)	Ms Bridget Prentice and
Vis, Dr. Rudi	Jim Fitzpatrick
NOES
Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)	Cameron, David
Amess, David	Cash, William
Ancram, rh Michael	Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet)
Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)
Bacon, Richard	Chope, Christopher
Barker, Gregory	Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey
Baron, John (Billericay)	Curry, rh David
Bellingham, Henry	Davis, rh David (Haltemprice & Howden)
Bercow, John
Blunt, Crispin	Djanogly, Jonathan
Boswell, Tim	Duncan, Alan (Rutland)
Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W)	Duncan Smith, rh Iain
Brazier, Julian	Evans, Nigel
Browning, Mrs Angela	Fallon, Michael
Burt, Alistair	Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster)
Butterfill, John

Flook, Adrian	Page, Richard
Forth, rh Eric	Paice, James
Francois, Mark	Paterson, Owen
Gale, Roger (N Thanet)	Pickles, Eric
Garnier, Edward	Prisk, Mark (Hertford)
Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)	Randall, John
Gillan, Mrs Cheryl	Redwood, rh John
Goodman, Paul	Robathan, Andrew
Grayling, Chris	Robertson, Hugh (Faversham & M-Kent)
Green, Damian (Ashford)
Grieve, Dominic	Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)
Hammond, Philip	Rosindell, Andrew
Hawkins, Nick	Ruffley, David
Heald, Oliver	Selous, Andrew
Hendry, Charles	Shepherd, Richard
Hoban, Mark (Fareham)	Simmonds, Mark
Horam, John (Orpington)	Soames, Nicholas
Howard, rh Michael	Spelman, Mrs Caroline
Hunter, Andrew	Spring, Richard
Jack, rh Michael	Stanley, rh Sir John
Jackson, Robert (Wantage)	Steen, Anthony
Key, Robert (Salisbury)	Streeter, Gary
Lait, Mrs Jacqui	Swire, Hugo (E Devon)
Leigh, Edward	Syms, Robert
Letwin, rh Oliver	Taylor, Ian (Esher)
Liddell-Grainger, Ian	Taylor, John (Solihull)
Loughton, Tim	Taylor, Sir Teddy
Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)	Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)
McIntosh, Miss Anne	Tyrie, Andrew
Maclean, rh David	Walter, Robert
McLoughlin, Patrick	Waterson, Nigel
Malins, Humfrey	Watkinson, Angela
Maples, John	Whittingdale, John
Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian	Willetts, David
Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton Coldfield)	Wilshire, David
	Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)
Moss, Malcolm	Young, rh Sir George
Murrison, Dr. Andrew
O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)	Tellers for the Noes:
Osborne, George (Tatton)	Mr. Douglas Hogg and
Ottaway, Richard	Michael Fabricant

Question accordingly agreed to.

Main Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That the Speaker have leave of absence on Wednesday 18th June to receive the honorary degree of Doctor of the University of Glasgow.