Fixed-term Parliaments Bill

Thank you, Mr Amess. I thought that the hon. Lady was intervening on me, but I soon realised that she was not. I have commented on amendment 22, and I hope that the Minister will be able to respond. Amendment 36 would provide extra time, if the House were already adjourned or prorogued, for the House to come up with a new motion of confidence. In some ways, this mirrors quite a lot of existing legislation relating to Dissolution and Prorogation and to the use of extraordinary powers. For instance, if the reserve forces were to be summoned when the House was adjourned or prorogued, there is a special power for Parliament to be called back early. The amendment seems sensible, and I hope that the Minister will respond to these points before we decide whether we want to vote on it. Amendment 37 insists that the Prime Minister should resign within seven days of a motion of no confidence being passed. Again, I hope that the Minister will give the Committee his views on this, because this was an element of the Conservative manifesto in the general election. We might therefore want to return to the matter on Report. What does he understand would happen to the Prime Minister if a motion of no confidence in him personally, as opposed to a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty's Government, were carried? What does he think would happen if a motion of no confidence just in the Government were carried? Our amendment 25 would provide two categories of no confidence motions. The first would be expressed in the terms:"““This House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government””." The second would have to be expressed in the terms:"““This House has no confidence in the Prime Minister””." That obviously precludes any of the other elements. I think it would be clearer for the House if we set down in statute the stipulation that the clause would click in only in those two instances, as set out in the Bill, and that only in those circumstances would the Speaker be able to issue a certificate. I understand that some hon. Members think that there should be great leniency and that it should be entirely up to the Prime Minister to determine whether there is a motion of no confidence. I believe that, especially as we move towards a system in which the Government assert that the Prime Minister is relinquishing the power to dissolve Parliament himself, it makes far more sense to make these matters clear in the Bill, rather than dragging the Speaker into what is and is not a motion of no confidence.