The second irony today is the fact that my hon. Friend has, if I may say so politely, perhaps been responsible for a couple of the delays in being able to debate the Bill, whereas there has been a full and forthright debate on it in the other place, including in Committee. My point, to him and the House, is that there should be more opportunity to debate it.
The Minister's announcement that there is to be a study of the issue by Durham university is broadly welcome. Why not allow the Bill to move on to Committee, where we would be able to take evidence from more individuals and organisations, so that we could reach a better understanding of what is happening? The Bill would then, if I am correct, return on Report, which would give the hon. Gentleman—I mean my hon. Friend; I must remember that he is still my friend—the opportunity to say, ““I've had enough—I believe we should let this one go.”” Let me plead with him now, as I probably will at the end, to allow the Bill to advance. It has to come back on Report, but there is clearly much to learn.
I pay tribute to Lord Eden of Winton.
Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order)
Proceeding contribution from
Tobias Ellwood
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 12 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c554-5 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:16:40 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481549
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481549
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481549