Every candidate has a supporter and a seconder who make a speech in their favour and the candidates themselves can make a speech. The House then votes on the candidates. To sweep that away for a system that is not proven is very strange indeed. Friend is inadvertently misleading the House. Uniquely, on the occasion of the last election of a Speaker, through the skill of our right hon.
Friend makes a procedural point.
As he knows, I put to his Committee certain suggestions for simple alterations to the Standing Orders governing the proceedings of the House. If, under the old system, an amendment to the original motion is carried, that becomes a substantive motion and must be put to the House immediately, so that no further amendments can be made to the already amended motion. However, it is the simplest thing in the world to take the amended motion not as a substantive motion, but as an ordinary motion to which further amendment can be made. The resulting system could not be more democratic or more open. That is why I think that the conclusion drawn by the Procedure Committee is a good one.