Business of the House (Lisbon Treaty)

No; perhaps later. I find that deeply depressing and deeply distressing, because this Chamber should be the cockpit of the nation. This Chamber should be full at the moment. One of the main reasons why it is not—of course there are other causes, such as conflicting demands on time and televisions in Members’ offices; one knows about all those things—is that people do not feel any more that what they say in here really will count. They certainly know that their comments will not be reported in the press tomorrow morning, because all the press have abandoned proper parliamentary coverage. That is another significant and regrettable development of the last two or three decades. However, those of us who believe passionately in Parliament—who want this place to function, and who believe that it can be brought back more or less to where it was in terms of influence—should make a real point of attacking motions such as the one before us. I am extremely sorry that an articulate and excellent Minister such as the one who will reply to this debate, a man for whom I have a great deal of time, is party to such an appalling Executive conspiracy. What we are really talking about tonight is not a particular Bill, but a principle—the principle of the balance of power between the Executive and the legislature. Where, as in our country, the Executive is drawn from the legislature, there is an underlying right—I referred to it earlier—for the Executive to get their business, but not at the expense of scrutiny and debate. We have to hold the Executive, from whichever party they come—