Michael Fabricant (Lichfield) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. We have lost an hour from the HS2 debate because of the very important statement on Ukraine. If the Government were minded to let you have a manuscript amendment to the Business of the House motion to extend the debate to midnight, would you be prepared to accept it?
Mr Speaker
What I say to the hon. Gentleman is that it would be possible for the Government to move a motion in lieu, rather than to amend the existing motion, but I think success of the kind that the hon. Gentleman envisages and hopes for would require the assent of the whole House. It might be thought on the part of the hon. Gentleman to be a triumph of optimism over reality to suppose that that would take place, but I hope he feels that his attempted point of order has been answered.
Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This morning a Treasury Minister, in an interview on Radio 4 about phase 1 of HS2, spoke about the route “into Birmingham and now through to Crewe”, yet the Bill before us today dealing with phase 1 speaks of a route from Euston only as far as Handsacre in Staffordshire. Have you received any indication from the Government that an amendment will be tabled to the hybrid Bill to extend phase 1 to Crewe?
Mr Speaker
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his point of order and I understand the concern which prompts him to raise the point in the Chamber. However, the route is a matter for debate rather than of order for the Chair. In so far as the hon. Gentleman is, in his characteristically courteous way, seeking gently or otherwise to chide the Minister for what he regards as a marginally inaccurate interpretation of the contents of the Bill, I feel sure that the hon. Gentleman’s observations will have been noted, not least by the reproved Minister. We will leave it there, I think, for now.