The right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) is right in two respects. First, the programme motion replaces a previous one, which was determined at Second Reading. It cannot be right to determine the length of Report at Second Reading when no one—not the Whips, the Minister or the Opposition—can know the interests that Back-Bench Members may have in the Bill.
Secondly, I suspect that the right hon. Gentleman is right that had the programme motion not been moved today, proceedings on the Bill would have been completed well within the time allotted by the motion. We have now spent a substantial part of that time discussing a programme motion that I believe to be entirely otiose. Even at this point, the Minister may wish to withdraw it so that we can get on with the important substance of debate.
Criminal Defence Service Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
David Heath
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 26 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Criminal Defence Service Bill (HL).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c1556 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 20:34:21 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294803
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294803
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294803