I am grateful for that intervention. My right hon. Friend puts it far better than I could.
We had an example only a week or so ago, when the ““Yes Minister”” Bill was given unlimited debate. It took two hours and 44 minutes, leaving three hours of this Chamber's time unused. If a Bill is not controversial, we are given for ever to debate it, but on a controversial Bill—such as this one, or the one on the Lisbon treaty—our time is curtailed.
If the Government must impose a programme motion, why do they not give us set hours? If there were statements tomorrow, we could at least proceed for that set number of hours, rather than finish at the moment of interruption.
Counter-Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Peter Bone
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Counter-Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c166 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:07:53 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483104
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483104
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483104