Business of the House (Lisbon Treaty)

No, I will not. Hon. Members asked about the provision in paragraph (4) of the business of the House motion, which prevents an emergency debate from taking place on the day allotted to the treaty until after the conclusion of proceedings on the treaty. They complained that that was a novel way of proceeding that takes the initiative in the matter of emergency debates away from the Speaker, but that is not true. This is not a new provision in substance at all. The existing provisions for programme motions under Standing Order 83I(4) already provide for delaying emergency debates until after the end of programmed business. Paragraph (4) of the motion simply replicates that for the proceedings on the treaty. The only reason that the motion had to make express provision for this instead of simply applying Standing Order 83I(4) is that when the House agreed to the present sessional experiment changing the arrangements for emergency debates under Standing Order 24, it failed to make the necessary consequential amendments to Standing Order 83I(4). Paragraph (4) of the motion therefore makes the necessary provision to make the existing procedure for programmed business work for proceedings on the treaty. Of course, if some extreme emergency arose so that the House desperately wanted to abandon business on the treaty for the day and proceed to the emergency debate, it would be open to the House to conclude the day’s proceedings on the treaty very fast and get on to the emergency debate. In those circumstances, the Government would consider—