Business of the House Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Leader of the House

Business of the House

David Winnick Excerpts
Thursday 27th January 2011

(13 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Young of Cookham Portrait Sir George Young
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I understand my hon. Friend’s strong feelings on the matter. The Public Bodies Bill is currently in another place, and I hope it will reach this House once the Lords have sorted themselves out. There will be an opportunity then for him to speak on that specific issue, but as I have just announced, there will also be an Opposition day debate on it next Wednesday. I hope that he has read the written ministerial statement and seen that we are ensuring that public benefit is written into the change. The Government have no plans for a widespread disposal of assets in order to raise money. We want community trusts and local organisations to take ownership of some of our valuable woods.

David Winnick Portrait Mr David Winnick (Walsall North) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Instead of farcical exchanges about stewards and barons in relation to resigning from the House, would it not be better, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) has suggested, and as I did yesterday, if a simple letter of resignation were sufficient? Why should we keep a procedure simply because it has been in existence for the number of years that the Leader of the House mentioned?

Lord Young of Cookham Portrait Sir George Young
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

For the last 13 years we had a Modernisation Committee and, to my knowledge, not once did it consider the procedure for resignation, so it clearly did not think that it was a priority. The procedure has worked perfectly well for 260 years, and given all the pressures on the House’s time, I wonder whether we should really give priority to this matter.