§ Angela WatkinsonTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many(a) clauses and (b) schedules were (i) fully debated, (ii) partly debated and (iii) not debated during the committee stage of the Extradition Bill. [100222]
§ Mr. Bob AinsworthFor a clause or schedule to be debated during the Committee Stage a member of the Committee must either table an amendment to it or speak to the motion that it should stand part of the Bill. In the case of a large number of clauses in the Extradition Bill, no member of the committee chose to do so.
The number of Committee sessions for the Bill was agreed through the usual channels. The figure of nine was first suggested by the official Opposition.
At its first meeting the Committee sessions for the Bill was agreed the terms of a programme motion which imposed a number of cut-off points by which discussion of a particular part of the Bill had to be completed.
On only one occasion did the knife fall before the Committee had completed its discussion of the relevant part. This was in respect of Part 1 of the Bill which covers clauses 1–67. The knife fell when the Committee was discussing clause 63.
Amendments to clauses 63, 64 and 65 had already been discussed at previous Committee sittings. At the point when the knife fell, the Chair was obliged to put the question for each of the remaining Part 1 clauses that it should stand part of the Bill. It was open to any member of the Committee to oppose it. No member of the Committee chose to do so in respect of clauses 66 and 67.
964WWhen it became clear that there was a possibility that the knife might fall before the Committee had completed its deliberations on Part 1, the Government made several offers to change the timetable. All of these offers were rejected by the official Opposition.