I thank the noble Baroness for her very kind comments, which are much appreciated. We are a self-regulating House. We have a Companion; we do not have fixed rules, but we have conventions, and we all try to work around those. That enables the House to work in the unique way it does. In some ways it is not like the House of Commons. I know colleagues who come from the House of Commons say how strange they find it when they first arrive here, but it does work.
Although the Companion advises us to rise at around 3 pm on Fridays, I checked and since 2021 we have sat beyond 3 pm on PMBs 24 times. We have already sat beyond 3 pm on the two days of Second Reading for this Bill. Although it is advisory and it is the convention, it is not a hard and fast rule. We do not have those sorts of hard and fast rules.
On the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Stowell of Beeston, because we are self-regulating, I do not think it sets a precedent. At the end of the day, this House can decide what it wants. As I said earlier, if noble Lords want to adjourn at 3 pm and carry a Motion on it, then we will adjourn at 3 pm. However, I accept that this is a very important Bill and there are strongly held views on both sides. People want to give it scrutiny and we have to have the flexibility to ensure that is what happens.
My Lords, for the obvious reason, I want to place on record my personal thanks to the Government Chief Whip, because I know he takes these matters extremely seriously. He is placed in an invidious position because our procedures, it seems to me, are just not designed for large, controversial, notionally Private Members’ Bills of this nature. The Government Chief Whip, for whom I have the highest personal regard, is really caught in the middle in a very difficult position. I wanted to put my thanks on record.
I should tell the House the way we are going to deal with it today. My noble friend Lord Kamall is attending Friday prayers, so I am here. Then from 3 pm, when I will be observing Shabbat, he will be here. I hope that is an example of the ecumenical way these Benches deal with these matters.
I thank the noble Lord for those very kind comments. Again, I say that, although this is difficult, I have only ever had courtesy and warm discussions from colleagues around the House with different views. It is challenging at the moment, but I love being the Government Chief Whip and the Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms. It is an absolute honour and privilege. I want to work to serve the House to get this right; thank you very much.
(2 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I am grateful for that point from the noble Lord.
I do not want to bring my own personal circumstances into it, but the plain fact of the matter is that I will not be able to participate in the next group because, for obvious reasons, I have to leave. I am a practising barrister. I set aside time to contribute—usefully, I hope—to the work of this House, but there are other pressures on time. If this were a government Bill, we all know how government Bills work. This is well beyond my unpaid pay grade, but it seems to me that we are perhaps trying to pour a quart into a pint pot by doing this Bill as a Private Member’s Bill; as I say, though, that is way beyond my pay grade.
I will sit down in a moment but, because of the exchange we have just had, I want to place on the record the fact that I will not be here for the next group. Having said on this group that the two groups are interrelated, I hope that that will not be a discourtesy to the Committee—certainly not to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, who is the sponsor of the Bill.
My Lords, as it is nearly 2.30 pm, it might be helpful to the Committee to know that, when my noble friend Lady Merron has responded for the Government Front Bench and my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer has responded, I intend to invite the House to resume; that will bring today’s debate to a close. That is my intention but, obviously, it is a matter for the Committee to decide what it wants to do.