I am sure we do, which is why I have consulted my local trust, Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust, about the Bill’s merits, and why I have tabled some amendments as a direct consequence of the discussions that I have had with the trust. I find the idea that only the Government are interested in moving forward with consensus rather offensive. I have been trying to move forward with consensus, too, as the hon. Member for Croydon North knows only too well. We have reached the stage at which the Government are saying, “I wish we’d known about some of these amendments earlier, because in that case we may well have been able to accept them.” What on earth is the point of having a deadline for the tabling of amendments three days beforehand if the Government cannot organise themselves to decide within that timescale whether those amendments should be agreed to? They should operate like most organisations and business do: if they have a timescale to meet, they should meet it, rather than pretend that the timescale is of only passing interest to them.
Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Philip Davies
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 15 June 2018.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
642 c1207 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-11-03 13:30:39 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-06-15/18061539000207
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-06-15/18061539000207
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-06-15/18061539000207