I support my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) and some of the comments of the hon. Member for North Southwark and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes).
This is truly a dreadful programme motion. It is consonant with all that the Government are about, and the nearest thing I can think of—the risible equivalent—is the Dangerous Dogs Act 1989, which served the then Conservative Government so well in the '80s. No case has been made that there is such a national emergency that we need the suspension of Standing Orders and the imposition of an intolerable guillotine by the Government on the House, by majority, to consider a matter of considerable national importance. Five months they have had to come to a determination; they now insist, according to their motion, that the House dispose of the business in about five and a half hours.
The other point, which has already been made, is the consideration of their lordships, if they make amendments. We now treat ourselves with contempt, when they have double the time in the House of Lords to consider such an important issue that touches on our national honour and that has brought this country's management of its financial affairs into some disrepute in the world. The Chancellor well knows this, the Treasury well knows it, and we well know it, too. The House is therefore required to consider, in proper and effective detail, the proposals contained in the Government's extraordinary Bill, which covers every bank in the country. No, no—this House should repudiate it.
I say this to Labour Members: it is all very well thinking that a majority is sufficient to justify the actions of the Government, but this House is increasingly becoming a place merely of announcements. We are expected to be pulled by strings and say, ““Hail! Hail!”” That is absurd. This is a debating chamber. This matter touches on very important issues, and the Government's motion is a corruption of the processes that we have. If they go on like this, they will be denying legitimacy to the very measures that they seek to secure.
Banking (Special Provisions) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Richard Shepherd
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 February 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Banking (Special Provisions) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c163-4 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:57:17 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446019
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446019
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446019