I apologise to the Committee for being late, but there was a degree of ambiguity in the documents that reached us during the Recess about when this Grand Committee was going to meet. I apologise for having been late as a consequence. As a result of being late, I did not hear the terms in which the original amendment was moved, but it is perfectly clear that there have been complaints about holding this Committee in this Room and not having the debate elsewhere. I started to rise because of that while the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms was in Grand Committee and I ask the Whip to pass on my observations to him.
When the Government started showing enthusiasm for a greater amount of business being done in Grand Committee, I said privately to the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms that the campaign would work much better if we could improve the facilities in which Grand Committees meet. I know that efforts have been made, but the fact remains that the score of people who are in this Room to conduct this Grand Committee are really too much for the Room, whereas we could do it perfectly competently in the Chamber.
My noble friend Lady Cumberlege knows a great deal more about this subject than I do and consequently she has a great many more papers. The only reason why I have any latitude at all to sit in this Committee is that she has kindly moved all her papers to the right. I would like the Whip to pass that back to the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms.
As for the Minister—whose mien, like my noble friend Lord Wakeham, I have had the opportunity to observe because he is straight in my flight path—I offer him what I regard as the last word on focus groups in terms of the conduct of government legislation. At a meeting of a cabinet sub-committee in Washington in 1944, there was unhappiness that the President had summoned the members on a Sunday afternoon. After the debate had been going on for some time, Cordell Hull said, ““Mr President, this is one of those occasions where there is insufficient time for us to wait while you decide where we wish to be led””. That is part of the problem about the way in which this Bill has been formulated. I greatly look forward to hearing the Minister’s reply.
Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 20 April 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Health Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
680 c558GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:07:32 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316098
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316098
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_316098