That is why the constraint on the Select Committee to make that recommendation has to be removed. If the Select Committee makes a recommendation exercising a discretion and a political judgment that the process is unsuitable, I accept that it would be a bold Government indeed who went ahead with the change, although the point made was valid: we are not talking about the Government having to expose themselves to a full debate on the Floor of the House or some particular process to get their resolution through. We have now reached a stage at which half the time votes on orders and procedures have been reduced to a ritual part of the process of the House. If we are talking about the reality, the change would probably be decided by a deferred Decision on Wednesday, as I think the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome said. If we are being indiscreetly candid, probably a very high proportion of the Members of Parliament ticking the piece of paper would not bother to inquire closely exactly what subject they were voting on. It is too trivial a procedure to override such a change.
I do not accept that the small body of Members who have the privilege of being on the Select Committee should be our only protection. A substantial body of the membership is enough.
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clarke of Nottingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 16 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c917 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:39:31 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324143
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324143
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324143