Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)
My Lords, as I have previously, I will make a few remarks before we start today’s consideration in Committee. Last night, the House passed the Motion in the name of my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton. It will have no effect on our proceedings today, but next week I will seek a way forward in the usual channels to deliver the view of the House. With that in mind, though, there are things we can do today.
First, we are a self-regulating House, which means that we should have some self-discipline, show some self-restraint and apply ourselves to some self-regulation. As I have said before, there are no points of order in this Chamber. Many Members of the House have been elected members of other bodies, including the other place. They have given distinguished service in those bodies but, with the greatest respect, I say to them: you are now a Member of the House of Lords, and we do things our way. We do not want the ways of operating in those places brought into our self-regulating House.
Secondly, we should remind ourselves that this is Committee, and noble Lords should address their remarks to amendments under consideration, not make long Second Reading speeches going way beyond the substance of the amendment under debate. This is set out in the Companion on page 143, at point 8.81.
Also, we do not accept interventions on interventions. That is not the House of Lords way. Please refrain from doing this. I have asked the Government Whips on the Benches to intervene to stop this if necessary. I refer any noble Lord who wants to make an intervention on another noble Lord to the Companion, specifically page 60 and point 4.29, which makes clear that interventions should be brief questions of clarification only. When pressing or withdrawing amendments, noble Lords should also be brief. This is set out in the Companion on page 143, at point 8.82.
I expect, as I believe all noble Lords do, that despite sincerely held views and differences of opinion, we will always conduct ourselves with courtesy and respect for each other, and show the public watching our debates the House of Lords in the best possible light. So, as I have said before, please refrain from doing anything that would bring that into question. Shouting across the Chamber at other noble Lords, whether you are standing or sitting, is not acceptable. The acoustics are excellent in this Chamber and the microphones are very sensitive, so noble Lords should not hold conversations in the Chamber or make remarks that they would not wish to be broadcast live. If you wish to speak to other noble Lords, please retire to the Prince’s Chamber, the Royal Gallery, the Peers’ Lobby or the Long Room, and return when your conversation has ended. They are good places to have conversations and are in regular use on other days when we sit.
Rudeness and unpleasantness are never acceptable; they are wrong and certainly not noble. After every sitting Friday’s debates on this Bill, I have noble Lords with very different views coming to my office to express their frustration with those who talk to other noble Lords around them, causing annoyance and nuisance. Please bear this in mind and have your conversations elsewhere.
This is a Private Member’s Bill, and the noble Lord in charge of the Bill is my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton. It is not the Government Minister on the Front Bench. This is not a government Bill and will not become a government Bill. The Government remain neutral on the Bill, and that position is not going to change. I have said that every time I have spoken at this Dispatch Box in consideration of this Bill.
On behalf of the whole House, I thank all the staff of the House: those on duty today, in their various roles, and those who have been working in preparation for today’s proceedings. The whole House greatly values your work, and we all thank you for all that you do.
The Government Whips’ Office has circulated the updated groupings list. My noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton has, as previously, set a proposed target for today’s debate. As in previous weeks, I expect the House to rise at a convenient point around 3 pm. In line with the usual procedures and the Companion, we retain the typical flexibility to rise slightly before or slightly beyond this point to conclude the group being debated. Having considered 10 groups of amendments in four days in Committee, and in the light of the Motion passed last night, I think substantial progress should be made today in this Committee. This remains in the hands of the Committee, not mine in my role as Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms and Government Chief Whip, but it is my strong advice to all Members to note that.
I expect either myself or the Deputy Chief Whip, my noble friend Lady Wheeler, to come to the Dispatch Box this afternoon between 2.30 pm and 3 pm to further advise the Committee on how we will bring proceedings to a close at around 3 pm. Having made those opening remarks, which are given to assist the House, I think we should now move on to the substance of the issue before us.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton (Lab)
My Lords, I express my own thanks to the staff, who have done an absolutely excellent job on the Fridays. I will also express my response to what happened yesterday. We now need a process that brings us to a conclusion. I believe that we need the usual channels to come up with that process. That process needs to focus on what the main issues are and work out when we deal with them.
I got the very strong impression that it would be helpful if I indicated, on behalf of the sponsor of the Bill, my position in relation to each of those main issues. The noble Lord, Lord Carlile, and I thought there might be about 10 issues, some of which we have already dealt with. I would intend, if we can agree a process as quickly as possible at the beginning of next week, to include in that process me identifying my broad position in relation to those issues. In particular, I would indicate the commitments I am making in the various discussions I have had.
I indicated, for example, that I was willing to make amendments in relation to the position of those who are aged 18 to 25 and in relation to those who have been deprived of their liberty through the Court of Protection. I have indicated that we need a place for the multidisciplinary teams looking after people. I have a strong sense that people want to see those commitments in a concretised form, so I need to put those in— not by going through every single one of the 1,200 amendments but by indicating what my position is. Then we would know where we are going to get to and how we divide up the time we have. The flavour—indeed, the very strong will of the House expressed yesterday—was that we have to get through this in time.