HL Deb 24 March 1983 vol 440 cc1234-5
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Aberdare)

My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

Moved, That the Second Report from the Select Committee be agreed to.—(Lord Aberdare.)

The Report read as follows:

"1. SHORT DEBATES: DEFINITION OF "BACK-BENCHER" The Committee have considered whether it is necessary to define the term "Back-Bencher" as used in the Rules for the Conduct of Short Debates (Companion to the Standing Orders, Appendix D). The need for clarification arises from the fact that a number of Lords who belong to opposition parties act from time to time as spokesmen for their parties, without having full Front Bench status. However, in the light of undertakings from the Leaders and Chief Whips of the opposition parties that they will issue lists of those Lords who have full Front Bench status, the Committee do not consider it necessary to define the term "Back-Bencher". The Leaders and Chief Whips of the opposition parties also undertook to continue to respect the spirit of the rules governing the conduct of Short Debates, namely, to allow Back-Benchers rather than Front-Benchers the opportunity to raise subjects for debate. The Committee also considered whether or not a Motion relating to a Report of a Select Committee of the House is appropriate for balloted Short Debates. The Committee see no reason why such a Motion should not be included in the ballot but consider it desirable that Lords should inform the Chairman of the Select Committee, or Sub-Committee, concerned.

"2. AMENDMENTS EN BLOC The Committee have considered the proceedings in the House on Tuesday, 15th March when the House divided on two amendments which had been moved en bloc. They are of the opinion that these proceedings were not in accordance with the customary practice of the House. The appropriate procedure for dealing with linked amendments is for the first amendment in the group to be moved, and the question on it resolved, separately from the rest. If the amendment is agreed to, the subsequent amendments in the group may be moved en bloc, and without further discussion, provided that they are consecutive and confined within a single clause or schedule when the House is in Committee. If the first amendment is either disagreed to or withdrawn, the remaining amendments are not normally moved. There is thus never an occasion when it is necessary or appropriate for a Division to take place on amendments moved en bloc or for amendments to be withdrawn en bloc".

Lord Shackleton

My Lords, I should just like to ask the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, whether he sees a danger of all Select Committee reports being taken within this procedure? I hope—and I do not doubt that the Procedure Committee took this view—that it will be very exceptional for the Short Debate to be used for debating the reports of Select Committees or subcommittees for which the Government ought really to provide the time. Obviously we accept this now, but I do so with a warning.

Lord Aberdare

Yes, my Lords, I would have thought that normally an important report of a Select Committee would have been debated in Government time. Certainly so far as the European Committees are concerned they normally make recommendations themselves as to which reports should be debated; but we also felt that nothing should detract from the freedom of Back-Benchers to put down whatever matters they wish to put down for short debates.

On Question, Motion agreed to.