Business of the House

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 31st October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

It sounds as if my hon. Friend also got a good going over by some pupils in his constituency— a good education for him, I am sure. I join him in congratulating the students of Slaithwaite Church of England junior and infant school on their work. Climate change education and action inspires the next generation, and we will continue to support it.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

The Chamber is filling up nicely for the last contribution. I call Lee Barron.

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

I am proud to be the last man standing, Madam Deputy Speaker.

On 3 June 2024, the Environment Agency granted a permit for the Corby incineration plant, despite there having been no public consultation since its original permit was modified. We now know that incinerators are widely regarded as the dirtiest form of waste disposal. Does the Leader of the House agree that it is time for a debate to review the conditions under which such licences are issued and amended, especially in residential areas?

Business of the House

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

As the Opposition Chief Whip says from a sedentary position, he really did try to deliver the Bill. It was a cross-party effort, but the election was called a bit too early for that Bill, and perhaps for some of his colleagues as well, so it did not come to pass. We have strengthened the Bill and put fans at the heart of football.

My hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) will be pleased to know that the Government are committed to hosting the football regulator in Greater Manchester, but he might want to fight with me and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy), about whether it is in Wigan, Manchester or Rochdale.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I am not sure I will endorse fighting at the Dispatch Box.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Glastonbury and Somerton is home to wonderful cider, with producers including Tricky Cider in Langport, Harry’s Cider in Long Sutton and Burrow Hill Cider near Kingsbury Episcopi. Cider produces around £2 billion- worth of value for pubs each year, but damaging business rates are threatening the future of some pubs. Can we have a debate in Government time about the benefits of reforming business rates on pubs and hospitality?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

You will know the importance of Uckfield hospital, Madam Deputy Speaker—a hospital that you previously represented and that your constituents enjoy using locally. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on community and district hospitals? The Health Secretary spoke at the Dispatch Box about the importance of local access, but I hear that Uckfield hospital’s elective surgery has been mothballed for six months and that local staff are being sent elsewhere. That flies in the face of the decisions that this Government say integrated care boards should be taking.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Given the mention of Uckfield, I will be listening to the answer very closely.

[Lucy Powell]

I will try to make sure it is a good one for you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Lady is right to say that one of the key ways in which we can deal with the crisis in our NHS—and it is a very serious crisis that we face—is to get more services into communities so that people do not need to attend acute care at the wrong time, and to deliver that preventive community care model that the Health Secretary rightly pointed to. I do not want to make this party political, but the hospital building programme that we inherited was a work of fiction. Many promises made by the previous Government did not have any budget line allocated to them at all. I know that these are issues of high priority for the forthcoming Budget, and I hope that she will get the answers that she wants.

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Around a dozen Members wish to speak, and we have only a few minutes left, so let us try to be as short and sharp as we can.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

Last week, I joined Rabbi Neil Janes and Father Stuart Owen on a walk through my constituency to mark the Jewish festival of Sukkot, and to thank and raise funds for local organisations that support people in need of all faiths. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate on how we can support and encourage interfaith understanding, dialogue and action, of which this walk was a really powerful example?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Competition and Markets Authority has found that competition between fuel retailers has weakened, which, as he highlights, has had a detrimental effect on constituents such as his. I think he would get strong backing for a Backbench Business or Westminster Hall debate on that important matter.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Andy MacNae.

[Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. After last week, I shall heed your request for speed.

Rossendale is the only local authority area in the north without any sort of rail station or commuter link, as I may have mentioned in the House before. That cuts my constituents off from opportunity and constrains the growth of east Lancashire, despite years of hard work by the borough council—with the support of the county council and myself—on its excellent and deliverable plans for a city valley rail link. Will the Leader of the House agree to grant a debate on the delivery of that link in the context of a northern rail strategy?

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call James Asser, whose patience has been noted.

[James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The East London gymnastics centre in Beckton is a grassroots facility that is well used by local people and community sports groups, but it also contains national facilities used by Team GB and some of our Olympians. The facility has now been sold by its owner to a housing developer, and faces imminent closure despite a vigorous local campaign, which will have an impact on our national training facilities. Will the Leader of the House consider providing an opportunity to debate grassroots sport and what measures we can put in place to protect such facilities in future?

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend is last but by no means least. That development in his constituency is worrying, and I thank him for raising it. Our Team GB gymnasts and other gymnasts are the pride of our country and have always done very well, especially in recent Olympics and other games. I will certainly raise that important matter with the relevant Minister and ensure that my hon. Friend gets a reply.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

With over 50 contributions, many constituencies have been well represented.

Business of the House

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 17th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend is right: in recent years this country has had a woeful record of building and creating social homes, which is fundamental for many people. I was struck by what the Deputy Prime Minister said once—that she had grown up in a council house, which at the time was seen as impoverishment, whereas today it is considered a privilege to get a council house. The Government are committed to building 1.5 million new homes, a great many of which will be new social and council housing.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I look forward to meeting the Leader of the House next week to discuss the Committee’s work. I have encouraged parties on both sides of the House to ensure that we get the names in so that we can get the Committee up and running, but given that we are not up and running yet, may I make a suggestion for the general debate on 28 October that the Leader of the House has announced?

Many of my Jewish constituents enjoy playing golf at Hendon golf club. Recently, during Yom Kippur, the most abhorrent antisemitic statements were raked into the bunkers. That is under police investigation, but may we have a debate on 28 October on how we can create measures to combat hate crime across all religions and all backgrounds, so that we can unite and show the House that we are determined to stamp out behaviour of this abhorrent nature in society?

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. If we can keep questions short, I will do my best to get everybody in.

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. Long responses from the Leader of the House will mean that fewer colleagues will be able to get in.

[Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab)]

I have received a great deal of correspondence regarding the assisted dying Bill. I welcome the fact that Back Benchers will have a free vote. However, an issue as complex as this requires detailed scrutiny. As it stands, I am worried that colleagues will not have enough time to properly debate the Bill. Will the Leader of the House relay the concerns shared by many across the House that the assisted dying Bill should receive Government time over several days, so that we can do it justice?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

This Government stand firm on human rights, including China’s repression of the people of Tibet. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Foreign Secretary is to make a diplomatic visit to China; I know that he will raise these matters in his conversations. I will ensure that he comes to this House to give an update on how that visit goes.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

To show us how it is done in one or two sentences, I call Steve Race.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

Last night, the University of Exeter, the Met Office and Peers for the Planet launched the latest edition of “The Parliamentarians’ Guide to Climate Change”, which is a vital resource for us all. Will the Leader of the House welcome that report, as I do, and will she commend it to Members of this House and the other House?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)]

Rossington Main Ladies football club created a slice of history last weekend by qualifying for the first round proper of the Adobe women’s FA cup. Will the Minister join me in congratulating captain Steph Prescott and the team, and wish them good luck against Accrington Stanley—who are they?—in the first round in November?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

No time for jokes!

[Lucy Powell]

I congratulate Rossington Main Ladies football club and their captain Steph, and wish them great luck against Accrington Stanley, who we all remember fondly from adverts.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

The Government will set out in due course our plans for the regulation of the private parking industry, which causes many problems, as my hon. Friend describes. I will ensure that the relevant Minister comes to the House to update hon. Members at that time.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Jim Dickson—[Interruption.] No, I call Andy MacNae. I am going so fast that I am losing my place.

[Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)]

I will try to be equally fast, Mr Speaker.

My constituents face dangerous speeding on the roads past their homes and schools every single day. When they raise deep concerns with the police or the council, they are too often told that not enough people have been killed or seriously injured. They rightly feel that that makes no sense. They know the risks—they see the close calls every day—so why should they wait for a neighbour to be killed before action is taken? Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on the subject of prevention in road safety, using international best practice and new technologies?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

The issue of call lists and the desire for a more family-friendly Parliament have been raised by many hon. Members, especially those who are newly elected, and I hope that a wealth of people will input to the call for views that the Modernisation Committee opened today.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Alex Ballinger—your patience has been noted.

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

I recently met headteachers across my constituency to talk about the challenges they are facing after 14 years of Conservative mismanagement of the education sector. They raised several issues, but in the interests of time I will mention only curriculum reform, which they were particularly interested in. I ask the Leader of the House to schedule a debate in Government time on curriculum reform, so that we can consider the views of teachers in my constituency.

[Lucy Powell]

Last but certainly not least, my hon. Friend raises what I know is a big issue in Halesowen’s schools. The Government are committed to curriculum reform. One of the first acts of the Secretary of State for Education was to establish an independent review of curriculum and assessment, led by Professor Becky Francis CBE. I know that the Secretary of State will be regularly updating the House on that.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

It is fantastic to get everybody in. I will focus more on names.

Business of the House

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 10th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

More than 20 people are hoping to get in, so let us keep contributions short and snappy.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

I extend my birthday wishes to the Leader of the House.

One of my Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove constituents recently told me about the difficulty they were having in securing a test to qualify as a driving instructor. We have a dire need for more driving instructors to tackle the backlog of those waiting for tests. Will the Leader of the House make time to debate the matter in the House?

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. I am going to try to get everybody in, so let us keep questions really short.

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

I recently met campaigners in the beautiful village of Toft Monks in my constituency to talk about road safety in the area. There is a campaign running, which I am supporting, to lower the speed limit to 30 mph to make sure that children can walk to school safely on the village roads. Can we have a debate in Government time on highway safety in rural areas?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

I am delighted to congratulate the Cheshire county under-17 squad on successfully reaching the 2024 USA netball open championships—what an achievement. Netball is a fantastic sport; I really enjoyed it as a youngster, as my daughter does now. My hon. Friend might want to raise these issues in the next debate on the importance of sport in our society.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Having saved the best till last, I call Jim Dickson.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

You are too kind, Madam Deputy Speaker. Residents in the town of Swanscombe in my constituency are having their lives blighted and made a misery by the diversion of large vehicles through their narrow streets due to the collapse of the A226 Galley Hill Road 17 months ago. A combination of Kent county council, Thames Water and the Department for Transport is needed to fix this. Might a debate be scheduled to debate this important issue?

Business of the House

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 5th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend has raised an important issue. We are all familiar with what is happening in our hospitals, including our A&E departments. My husband is an A&E doctor, and I hear these stories on most evenings at home. The waiting lists, the waiting times, the chronic understaffing and underfunding and the lack of support for our NHS have left it on its knees, and one of the Health Secretary’s first acts was to resolve the junior doctors’ dispute so that strike action did not blight our attempts to deal with that. Getting waiting lists down, which is going to be tough, and restoring our NHS to a service on which people can rely are a key mission for this Government.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Shorter answers will be appreciated.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

During the exchanges that followed my urgent question about steel manufacturing earlier today, it was evident that the Minister was unable to give a detailed response in respect of, in particular, maintaining the capacity to produce virgin steel in the UK. In view of the many unanswered questions, will the Leader of the House arrange a debate, in Government time, on the future of the UK steel industry?

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. We have 10 Members still to speak and 10 minutes left. If Members each keep their question to a sentence, I can try to squeeze them all in.

[Claire Hughes (Bangor Aberconwy) (Lab)]

Community energy projects such as Ynni Ogwen in my constituency already play a vital role in the energy mix, and with GB Energy we will see a huge increase in clean power projects. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the important topic of community energy?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

I am sure the Transport Secretary will come to this House at some point to address driving tests for young people, which I know are a real issue. We support young people being able to get the independence that they need through driving. We have Transport questions on my 50th birthday—I know I do not look old enough—which is 10 October, and I am sure my hon. Friend will want to raise it then.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

That is a very early birthday present. We are going to get the last Member in, so well done everybody.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Care leavers all too often face a postcode lottery of inconsistent support, leading to wide disparities in accessing vital services such as social housing, financial advice and mental health support. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the development of a national care leaver offer, so that all our care leavers can get the support they need and deserve?

[Lucy Powell]

Care leavers really have had the poor end of the deal in recent years. They have poorer outcomes than others, and their lives are more difficult as a result of having been in care, which is why we want to see a strategic approach. In the King’s Speech, we announced a children’s wellbeing Bill, which will allow us to take forward some of the legislative changes that we need to address this issue.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the Leader of the House for taking everybody’s questions.

Bill Presented

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Pat McFadden, supported by the Prime Minister, Secretary Angela Rayner, Nick Thomas-Symonds and Ellie Reeves, presented a Bill to remove the remaining connection between hereditary peerage and membership of the House of Lords; to abolish the jurisdiction of the House of Lords in relation to claims to hereditary peerages; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 9 September, and to be printed (Bill 7) with explanatory notes (Bill 7-EN).

The Speaker’s Absence

Ordered,

That the Speaker have leave of absence on Monday 9 September to attend the funeral of Monsignor Michael McKenna in Chorley.—(Lucy Powell.)

Code of Conduct and Modernisation Committee

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 25th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Ghani)]

Before we come to the motions in the name of the Leader of the House, I remind the House, in relation to motion no. 4, of the requirement for hon. Members to declare any relevant interest or benefit that might relate to the proceedings in which they are participating.

I must draw attention to the fact that the motion on the code of conduct and guide to the rules appears on the printed Order Paper with a small error. Paragraph 2(a) of chapter 4 to the guide to the rules refers to

“advice about public policy and current affairs”,

which appears incorrectly as

“advice about public policy and public affairs.”

That has been corrected online and a corrigendum has been issued.

The motion on the Modernisation Committee will be debated with this motion. I inform the House that Mr Speaker has selected amendments (b), (c), (d) and (e) to the Modernisation Committee motion as listed on the Order Paper. I shall call Members to move their amendments formally and explain proceedings further at the appropriate time.

Standing Order No. 22C requires the Clerk of the House, as accounting officer, to set out the expected financial consequences of motions that have direct consequences of additional expenditure of at least £50,000. I should inform the House that a memorandum on the financial consequences of the Modernisation Committee motion is available in the Vote Office.

I call the Leader of the House to move the first motion, on code of conduct and guide to the rules, in the form it appears online.

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Lucy Powell)]

I beg to move,

That, with effect from 25 October 2024, paragraph 2 of Chapter 4 of the Guide to the Rules relating to the conduct of Members be amended to leave out:

“a) advice on public policy and current affairs;

b) advice in general terms about how Parliament works; and”.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

With this we shall discuss the following:

Motion 5—Modernisation Committee—

That—

(1) There shall be a Select Committee, to be called the Modernisation Committee, to consider reforms to House of Commons procedures, standards, and working practices; and to make recommendations thereon;

(2) The Committee shall consist of not more than 14 Members, of which 4 will be the quorum of the Committee;

(3) Members shall be nominated to the Committee by a motion in the name of the Leader of the House;

(4) Unless the House otherwise orders, each Member nominated to the Committee shall continue to be a member of it for the remainder of the Parliament;

(5) The Committee shall have power to send for persons, papers and records; to sit notwithstanding any adjournment of the House; to adjourn from place to place; to report from time to time; and to appoint specialist advisers either to supply information which is not readily available or to elucidate matters of complexity within the Committee’s order of reference;

(6) That this Order be a Standing Order of the House until the end of the present Parliament.

Amendment (b) to motion 5, in paragraph (2), leave out “14” and add “18”.

Amendment (c) to motion 5, in paragraph (2), after “Members” insert—

“which shall include the chairs of the Procedure Committee, the Committee of Privileges, the Committee on Standards and the Administration Committee; the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards may take part in proceedings of the Committee, may receive Committee papers and may give such other assistance to the Committee as may be appropriate;”.

Amendment (d) to motion 5, in paragraph (2), leave out “, of which”.

Amendment (e) to motion 5, after paragraph (4) insert—

“() The Committee—

(a) when it announces an inquiry, shall consider relevant reports from the Procedure Committee, the Committee of Privileges, the Committee on Standards and the Administration Committee and shall invite those Committees to report on the issues within the terms of reference of the inquiry;

(b) shall not consider matters that fall within the functions of the House of Commons Commission, as set out in the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978; and

(c) shall seek the views of the Speaker on matters within its order of reference;

() The recommendations of the Committee shall be subject to a motion in the name of the Leader of the House;”.

[Lucy Powell]

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I congratulate you on your election as Chairman of Ways and Means. I look forward to working with you in the coming weeks.

Over the past two weeks, it has been fantastic to watch so many new Members hit the ground running in representing their constituents, and it has been a pleasure to see returning Members resume their business, bringing their considerable experience and wisdom to the Chamber.

This new Parliament offers a chance to turn the page after the sorry and sordid record of the last. We face a crisis of trust in politics, politicians and Parliament. As we know, it is a great privilege to sit in this House: to be an MP represents an opportunity to change the country for the better. Underpinning that privilege is a set of solemn responsibilities. Chief among them is the responsibility that we all have to embody the highest standards of public service. Those standards are articulated in the seven principles of public life, which apply to all those who operate in public life and that inspire and inform the code of conduct for MPs. It is perfectly reasonable for a constituent to expect that when they cast their vote in a general election, their candidate will be sent to this House to serve them, not themselves. An MP’s first priority, therefore, must be to their constituents, and the rules of this House must reflect that obligation.

This Government were elected with a mandate for change and the Prime Minister pledged to return us to a politics of service. Today, we take our first steps to deliver that. In line with the Government’s manifesto commitment, I am proposing a tightening of the rules on second jobs for Members of this House in the first instance. Under current arrangements, Members must not provide, or agree to provide, paid parliamentary advice. They must also not undertake services as a parliamentary strategist, adviser or consultant. The rule prohibits Members from advising, in return for payment, outside organisations or persons on, for example, how they may lobby or otherwise influence the work of Parliament. However, the guide to the rules contains exemptions. The exemptions mean that advice on public policy in current affairs, and advice in general terms about how Parliament works, are not considered parliamentary advice.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) has just made a very good case, and has asked you a specific question: is it fair? From your lack of reply, I think it is implicit that you agree that it is not fair. You have it in your power to change that, as a matter of fairness and of listening to smaller parties. If you do not agree with that, I think constituents all over the country will find it absolutely astonishing.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Ghani)]

Order. Will Members refrain from using the word “you”? You are speaking through the Chair.

[Lucy Powell]

What is fair is that this House is made up of Members of Parliament who are elected by their constituencies, and Select Committees or Sub-Committees are made up of proportions of those Members. That is fair, and it has always been the case. As an incoming Government with a clear mandate for change—a clear mandate to rebuild trust in politics and restore respect for Parliament—and with a very large majority in the House, we could have proceeded without trying to take the House with us, not setting up a Committee but simply tabling various motions on a diktat basis, but I did not want to take that approach. I wanted to take the House with us and to represent Parliament as a whole—all parties and all Committees. That is why I commit myself again to enabling the smaller parties to have regular, meaningful engagement with the Modernisation Committee on issues of particular concern to them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Philp]

My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point, based on his long experience of the House. Amendment (b) does indeed address some of the points made in earlier interventions.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Leader of the House for the consultations we have had in the past three weeks following our appointments. She has been collegiate and constructive in our conversations, and I look forward to those conversations continuing in that spirit. But I might be permitted one very small grumble: the motion we are debating today was laid relatively late on Tuesday evening. Under the rules, it could have been laid later, so I appreciate that it was laid a little in advance, but we did not have a lot of time to discuss potential amendments between the two of us, or indeed with other parties.

I will make a request for the future. If we are considering motions that touch on these issues and seeking a cross-party approach, it would be really helpful to have some more time so as to be able to hold discussions between the Leader of the House, me and other parties to see whether we can improve the motions. I know that we have discussed this in general terms, but it is only when we see the detail of the motion in black and white—for example, the one on the Modernisation Committee—that we can discuss it in proper detail. I would appreciate having a bit more time in future, so that we can discuss that between us. That might avoid the need to table amendments, and it would enshrine the consensual approach that I hope she will take.

Let me turn to motion 4, which is listed on page 7 of today’s Order Paper under “Business of the Day”. As the Leader of the House has said, the motion removes two exemptions that exist in paragraph 2 of chapter 4 of the guide to the rules, which means that Members will not be able to be paid for providing advice on public policy or current affairs, or general advice about how Parliament works. That is a broadly reasonable proposition that we are happy to support.

I have two questions asking for clarification, which perhaps she will address in her summing up. First, if a Member is pursuing a paid activity that is not specifically to do with offering advice of the kind mentioned—for example, they might be a lawyer or doing work with a trade union on a paid basis—and the thrust of the work is not to do with that sort of activity, but they briefly undertake activity that might fall into the definition, how would the Leader of the House view that? Is there an absolute and complete prohibition, or is there some sort of materiality test that she would expect the Standards Commissioner to apply? It would be useful if she could provide clarification from the Dispatch Box.

My second question was raised by a colleague. On occasion, Members may be paid for a party political position or a trade union position, in the course of which they might give advice. To give a specific example, it has been the case in the past that the chairman of the Conservative Party has been paid not as a Minister, but by the Conservative party. Would the new rule preclude that person, or indeed someone being paid by a trade union—probably on the Labour side—from offering the Conservative party or a trade union advice on public policy matters? I would be grateful if the Leader of the House could shed some light on how she envisages that working. Broadly, however, we support the changes and will not be opposing them—in the new spirit of cross-party working, which we are nervously embracing.

For complete clarity, it is worth mentioning that there is a third exemption in the rules that the Leader of the House did not refer to: limb (c) of the relevant provision, which is contained in paragraph 2 of chapter 4. Limb (c) allows Members of Parliament to be paid for making media appearances, journalism, writing books, and delivering public lectures and speeches. For the sake of complete clarity, it is worth saying that the motion before us does not make any changes to that third limb—the Leader of the House will tell me if I have got this wrong—so Members will continue to be able to be paid for those activities. She might just confirm that, but it seems a fairly clear consequence of the fact that only limbs (a) and (b) are being deleted, and not limb (c).

I will now move on to motion 5, on the Modernisation Committee, which appears on page 7 of the Order Paper. In principle, the Opposition will work constructively with the Leader of the House and her colleagues to achieve some of the objectives that she set out in her speech—we have no objection to the principle of the new Committee. Of course, we want to ensure that whatever proposals it brings forward are carefully scrutinised.

On holding the Government to account, there are lots of things about the way this House operates that are very important for Opposition parties big and small, but also for Back Benchers, including Government Back Benchers. I am sure that Labour Members have heard a bit about private Members’ Bills, which provide a really good opportunity for Back Benchers on both sides of the House to bring forward what are typically quite specific Bills to bring about a change that the Government might not have time to legislate for. Back Benchers can bring forward a Bill to do something that is important to them, and I think we all want to ensure that is protected.

Similarly, the Backbench Business Committee sets out the business for Thursdays. Government and Opposition Back Benchers can go before the Committee and organise a debate on a particular topic, which I did as a Back Bencher a few years ago. It is a really good way of making sure that an issue that matters to Back Benchers gets aired not in Westminster Hall or on the Committee corridor, but right here in the Chamber. I remember organising a debate on the persecution of Christians around the world, which would not necessarily have been debated on the Floor of the House; using that mechanism, it was debated.

Westminster Hall also provides a great opportunity to raise issues of concern to a Member or their constituency. Opposition day debates are very important as well, because they offer Opposition Members a chance to hold the Government to account. There are a whole load of areas that we want to ensure are protected for Government and Opposition Back Benchers, and for Opposition parties big and small. I am sure that it is not the Leader of the House’s intention to undermine the effectiveness of the existing mechanisms, but if they are considered by the Modernisation Committee, we will collectively need to ensure that the rights of Back-Bench Members of Parliament and Opposition parties are properly protected.

I want to speak to the amendments tabled in my name and those of my right hon. Friends, and I hope that the Leader of the House can offer some assurances that go beyond those she has given already. If she is able to offer such assurances, I will not move the amendments, but if her assurances are insufficiently robust, I will move the amendments and we will vote on them. I should tell Members that, typically, business of the House like this is not whipped. We will not be whipping Conservative Members, who are free to vote according to their conscience. I hope the Government are adopting the same approach and allowing Government Back Benchers to exercise their conscience. It is a long-standing tradition that the business of the House, which this is, is not whipped. We are each voting on the motion as individual Members of Parliament and not, I hope, according to a party political direction handed out by the Whips Office. That is the approach we are taking, and I hope it is the approach the Government are taking as well.

To be clear, the purpose of the amendments is not to impede or frustrate in any way the objectives that the Leader of the House set out in her speech, which we accept. In principle, we support them and will work constructively with her and her colleagues, but some concerns have been raised by my colleagues—some of whom may speak later—who have previously served on some of the Committees, such as the Committee on Standards. In the last Parliament, the Committee on Standards was chaired by the former Member for Peckham, Harriet Harman. She was the Mother of the House, and a very distinguished and highly respected Member for many years. The Committee has done a lot of work in this area, and it is quite complicated. The way that the standards regime operates is not straightforward, and the questions are complicated. When Harriet Harman chaired the Committee, she spent a lot of time thinking about this issue and published the report to which the Leader of the House referred.

Various existing Committees are relevant here, particularly the Procedure Committee, the Privileges Committee, the Standards Committee and the Administration Committee. They are all important Committees of the House and have all done important work in this area. They are all elected by the House, and at least one of them, the Standards Committee, has external members—I think one of them is a retired chief constable. The Committees have an element of independence, and I am concerned that the establishment of the Modernisation Committee might replace, cut across or in some way supersede or impede the work of the other House Committees, which are highly independent.

With the amendments, I have tried to make a couple of things clear, so I am looking for explicit assurances from the Leader of the House on the following points. The first assurance that I am looking for is that if the Modernisation Committee is going to consider a particular matter, it will consider all the previous work done by the four Committees that I have mentioned—the Procedure, Privileges, Standards and Administration Committees—and will commission the relevant underlying Committee to do a fresh report on the matter in hand and report up to the Modernisation Committee. I think that is what the Leader of the House has in mind, and it is what she said to me privately, if I understood her correctly, but I would be grateful if she could be explicit and make it clear on the record that that is how she intends it to work.

The second important assurance is that the views of the Speaker will always be sought and fully taken into account on matters that are relevant to the work of the Committee. The Speaker is elected by all of us— unanimously, as it happened—and his views and the views of the Deputy Speakers are important.

The third assurance is that matters that would ordinarily fall to the House of Commons Commission will not be usurped, as it were, by the Committee. The Leader of the House said to me previously that the functions of the House of Commons Commission are not defined, but they are in the House of Commons (Administration) Act 1978.

In amendments (b) and (c), I propose that the Chairs of the Procedure, Privileges, Standards and Administration Committees be added to the Committee so that it has 18 members rather than 14. That would make sure that there is an opportunity for a smaller party to serve in that capacity and that the expertise of those Chairs comes directly to the Committee.

In addition, I propose that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards attends the Committee. They would not be a member, because they would have to be a Member of Parliament to be a member of a Select Committee, but an attendee or an observer, so that the commissioner could offer his or her opinion on the matters before the Committee, receive papers, and give other assistance as required.

All those amendments are designed to ensure that the existing Committees are properly taken into account and involved, and that their voice is heard, because they are important Committees with a lot of experience. If someone looks at some of these issues at first blush, such as second jobs, they might think that they are quite straightforward, but often they are not. There are all kinds of questions about people who have family businesses or a farm, or people who practise medicine or are doctors, that require careful thought. I do not want the work that has been done previously and that will be done in future to be lost.

I am asking the Leader of the House to give explicit assurances. In her opening speech, she gave general assurances that those Committees have a vital role, and that the Modernisation Committee would draw heavily on their work and not duplicate what they do, but I am asking for the specific assurances that I have just set out. If she can give all those assurances, or a substantial amount of them, I will not move the amendments, because I want to proceed in a spirit of cross-party harmony if at all possible. The Opposition stand ready to work constructively on these issues to ensure that Parliament’s reputation remains the highest of any Parliament anywhere in the world.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Ghani)]

Harmony is in all of our gift.