I cannot allow the words of the hon. Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter) to go unchallenged, as they were both mischievous and inaccurate. The Committee stage was undertaken in a good spirit, and I thank the Government for largely allowing enough time for debate. It is true that at the very end we were slightly short of time for consideration of some new clauses, but broadly speaking there was enough flexibility in the timetable motion to render it acceptable.
However, the Report stage is not a prolongation of the Committee stage but a separate part of the consideration of a Bill. Leaving aside tomorrow, the amount of time that we have this afternoon is utterly woeful. The Minister knows very well that the chances of getting through the 21 Government amendments that we must consider before 6.30 pm—let alone all the other amendments—are negligible, and I suspect that we are most unlikely to get through more than two groups of amendments. That is a scandalous state of affairs. It is entirely unnecessary, but it fits a pattern that we have seen so often over the past eight years that it leaves one thoroughly demoralised.
I shall not take up any more of the House's time, as I want to get on with the debate. However, the sooner we get away from this absurd timetabling of Report stages, the better.
Counter-Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(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 c168-9 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:07:56 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483114
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483114
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483114