Licensing Hours Extensions Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateMartin Wrigley
Main Page: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)Department Debates - View all Martin Wrigley's debates with the Department for Education
(1 day, 17 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI rise to speak only because I was not able to complete my intervention; as you rightly said, Madam Deputy Speaker, it was getting very long.
The point I want to make in my short contribution to this debate is that it is because of the lack of flexibility in the negative procedure that we find ourselves having to discuss the matter on Third Reading today. If the House had the ability to amend statutory instruments, and had a guarantee, more or less, that if there was an objection to an order made under the negative procedure, it could be the subject of debate, there would be less concern about orders being subject to the negative procedure, rather than the affirmative procedure.
This Bill has been dragged through this House at great length. I do not quite understand the explanation for that. Under the Bill, in the narrow context of a sporting event taking place that resulted in the need for a celebration that there had not been notice of at a time when the House was sitting—according to the Bill’s sponsors, it would be relevant only in such circumstances—the Government could allow a licensing extension.
claimed to move the closure (Standing Order No. 36).
As we have not yet heard from the Minister, I am not prepared to take a closure motion at this time.