Children and Social Work Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2017-03-07
Topic: Government Operations
Peter Wishart (Scottish National Party, Centre-left): I was loth to speak in this debate, although I think that I am the main contributor to Legislative Grand Committee debates: I believe that I have spoken in them more than any other Member. However, I did not have a clue what was going on. One of my hon. Friends asked me, "What exactly did the Speaker rule in his statement about the certification of English-only business?" I should be interested to learn whether the Minister knows what it all meant, because my colleagues and I have not got a clue, and that goes to the heart of this nonsense about English votes for English laws. No one knows what is going on. The Constitution Unit examined it in detail, and concluded that it was opaque in the extreme No one has much of an idea about what we are actually discussing here. I think I heard something about a procedure requiring double consent. What comes first, the English-only vote or the whole-House vote? I know that I cannot take part in one of the votes, but which one is it? That has not been made clear to us today If we are to continue to have these Legislative Grand Committees, we shall need a little bit more than a Minister going to the Dispatch Box, touching it with his hands, and then sitting down again. The Mace goes up, goes down and then goes up again, and nothing is debated and discussed. We were told that English votes for English laws was just about the most important innovation in Parliament when it came to debates in the House, and it is not good enough for Members not to take advantage of these opportunities. I appeal to at least one English Member to stand up and speak about the English-only clauses. If they are so important that we suspend our business, surely they should be addressed I hope that in future I shall not have to speak about Legislative Grand Committee motions. [Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] For once, I concur with Conservative Members. This procedure has reached a stage at which it is beyond a farce. It is bizarre; it is unnecessary; it disrupts the business of the House, and no one is even bothered about making a contribution Question agreed to. The House forthwith resolved itself into the Legislative Grand Committee (England) (Standing Order No. 83M(4)(d)). Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83M(4)(d)), That the Committee consents to the following certified clauses and schedules of the Children and Social Work Bill [Lords]: Clauses and schedules certified under Standing Order No. 83L(2) as relating exclusively to England and being within devolved legislative competence Clauses 1 to 7, 11 to 31 and 41 to 67 of the Bill as amended in the Public Bill Committee including the amendments made on Report; New clause 15, new clause 16, new clause 17 and new clause 18 added on Report; and Schedules 2 to 4 to the Bill as amended in the Public Committee, including the amendments made on Report.—(Edward Timpson.) Question agreed to. The occupant of the Chair left the Chair to report the decisions of the Committees (Standing Order No. 83M(6)). The Deputy Speaker resumed the Chair; decisions reported. Third Reading