All 2 Baroness Laing of Elderslie contributions to the Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) Act 2019

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Tue 2nd Jul 2019
Wed 3rd Jul 2019
Plastic Pollution
Commons Chamber

1st reading: House of Commons & 2nd reading: House of Commons & 3rd reading: House of Commons

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Excerpts
1st reading: House of Commons
Tuesday 2nd July 2019

(5 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) Act 2019 Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
(3) a further sum, not exceeding £9,295,168,000 be granted to Her Majesty to be issued by the Treasury out of the Consolidated Fund and applied for expenditure on the use of resources authorised by Parliament.—(Wendy Morton.)
Baroness Laing of Elderslie Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)
- Hansard - -

I inform the House that Mr Speaker has not selected either of the amendments.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)
- Hansard - -

Order. There is quite a lot of time for the debate this afternoon, but, as the House can see, a great many people wish to speak. I hope that we can manage without a formal time limit, because the debate flows better without one. We can do so if hon. Members are courteous enough to speak for around eight minutes. If Members do that, everyone will have a fair and equal chance to contribute. If not, we will have a time limit.

Plastic Pollution Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Baroness Laing of Elderslie

Main Page: Baroness Laing of Elderslie (Conservative - Life peer)

Plastic Pollution

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Excerpts
1st reading: House of Commons & 2nd reading: House of Commons & 3rd reading: House of Commons
Wednesday 3rd July 2019

(5 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text

A Ten Minute Rule Bill is a First Reading of a Private Members Bill, but with the sponsor permitted to make a ten minute speech outlining the reasons for the proposed legislation.

There is little chance of the Bill proceeding further unless there is unanimous consent for the Bill or the Government elects to support the Bill directly.

For more information see: Ten Minute Bills

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Patrick Grady Portrait Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In the time it took the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to pour himself a glass of water, the House authorised the Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) (No. 3) Bill, which, among other things, includes

“authorisation for the use of resources for the year ending with 31 March 2020”

to be

“increased by £348,553,768,000.”

It goes on to authorise all the rest of the expenditure of similarly great magnitudes that the Government expect to use over the next couple of years, without any possibility of debate or amendment, which is not what Members from the Scottish National party were led to believe when the English votes for English laws process was introduced. We were told then that the estimates process would be how we would scrutinise the Barnett consequentials of estimates.

The Bill represents the supply element of the confidence and supply arrangement that one of the other parties in the House has with the Government—it is good to see that at least a couple of them are here, which is more than there were the last time the supply estimates went through the House. Will you advise me, Madam Deputy Speaker, as to whether any other mechanisms are available to groups of Members to secure £1.5 billion of funding for their constituencies without any of them really having to show up very often?

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order and understand the point that he has made. I will separate his party political points, which of course are not a matter for the Chair, from his procedural points, which are partially a matter for the Chair.

I advise the hon. Gentleman that although he and his colleagues might not have had the opportunity to examine every line of proposed expenditure, we had two days of debate—yesterday and the day before—on some aspects of the matters in the Bill that the House has just passed. The hon. Gentleman makes his point well, and I fully understand his criticism of the procedure. It is not for me to agree or disagree with him, but I am quite sure that the Procedure Committee and others will take seriously the points that he has made.