EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I should like to make a Statement about the procedure on Back-Bench Members' short Wednesday debates. As your Lordships will remember, it was decided that one Wednesday a month would be set aside experimentally until Whitsun for limited-time debates of two and a half hours each, to be initiated by Back-Benchers. The first of these Wednesdays will be February 23, and the other 808 three dates will be March 29, April 26, and May 24—the last Wednesday in each month. Leaving aside the method of choosing the subject of debate, which the House has not yet decided, the Procedure Committee and the usual channels have been giving thought to the mechanics of the experiment, and I thought it would be for the convenience of the House if I were now to explain what is proposed.
The "No Day Named" section of the Order Paper will be divided into two parts, the first fulfilling the purposes of the section as they are at present, and the second being available for Peers to enter suitable subjects for their Wednesday debate. So far as the second section is concerned, no Peer will be allowed to have down more than one Motion standing in his name, and for the purpose of the present experiment, which will last only until Whitsun, a Peer who has been successful in having his Motion debated will be debarred from placing another subject in that section of the Order Paper. I would urge your Lordships to table suitable Motions for these small debates as soon as possible. In normal circumstances, the subject for debate will be chosen a month before they are debated, but in the case of the first Wednesday, February 23, the subjects will be chosen as soon as possible after the House has decided on the procedure for so choosing. A considerable number of small details have yet to be worked out on procedure. Some of these will be settled in due course, while others will no doubt evolve as the procedure develops.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, on the first part of that Statement concerning the Third London Airport, I think it is worth saying that we agreed that this Statement should not be taken orally only because there is a Bill down for tomorrow and if any noble Lord feels he is being deprived of the opportunity to comment on the Statement there will be an opportunity then.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord for explaining the new procedure. Clearly this is going to be very much of an experiment and I think it would be fair to suggest to noble Lords who find the procedure difficult to understand or otherwise unsatisfactory that they should be patient while we work it out in the light of 809 experience. I have no doubt it is a very worthwhile experiment. May I suggest to the noble Earl a point which he may bear in mind? There are a number of Motions, "No Day Named", on the Order Paper. I noted about half a dozen of them—one by my noble friend Lord Wynne-Jones, another by the right reverend Prelate, the Bishop of Chester, and others—which seem to be eminently suitable for this type of debate. Some of the Motions are of a kind which, in the normal course of events, would not get chosen easily. I take it that it will be possible for noble Lords who have Motions already on the Order Paper under "No Day Named" to take them off and put them under the new list. Perhaps the noble Earl has some suggestions about how that might be done.
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord. The Procedure Committee considered this point yesterday, and I do not think that I should be giving away confidences if I said that they asked the Clerk of the Parliaments to write to all noble Lords who have Motions down under "No Day Named" drawing their attention to the new procedure and asking them to consider whether they wished to transfer from the first list to the second.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, I hope that I have sufficient sense not to want to delay the important debate that we are to have, but with regard to the Statement on the third London Airport, the noble Earl will be aware that some of us have a ferocious interest in this matter. Is there any way, through some unusual subterranean channel, by which we can obtain a copy of that Statement to-day, without having to wait until to-morrow?
§ LORD SOMERSMy Lords, to go back to the other part of my noble friend's statement, is not the term "Back Bencher" a little elastic? Technically speaking, it may range from somebody, for instance, of the eminence of the noble Earl who is moving, to-day's Motion, to somebody as insignificant as myself. Who is to decide who is a Back Bencher and who is not?
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, I have always assumed the interpretation to be that if Members are not sitting on the Front Benches, they are Back Benchers.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, could my noble friend arrange for a copy of the Statement on the Third London Airport to be placed in the Library, so that other noble Lords, as well as the noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, may have a chance of reading, it?