Future Flood Prevention

Debate between Patrick Grady and Natascha Engel

Monday 27th February 2017 Commons Chamber

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you give some clarification? The title of the motion on the Order Paper is, I accept:

“Supplementary Estimate: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Subject for debate: Future flood prevention)”

However, the text of the motion states:

“That, for the year ending with 31 March 2017, for expenditure by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

(1) further resources, not exceeding £420,838,000 be authorised for use for current purposes as set out in HC 946”,

which is the document that my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries and Galloway (Richard Arkless) was speaking to. Is the ruling of the Chair that, in fact, the contents of HC 946 as they relate to DEFRA are not for debate in this estimates debate?

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Yes, if the hon. Gentleman looks again at the Order Paper, he will see that the notes below—which are in very small print—state:

“This Estimate is to be considered in so far as it relates to future flood prevention (Resolution of 21 February).

The Questions necessary to dispose of proceedings on the above Motion will be deferred until 7.00 pm on Tuesday 28 February”.

That is the critical element in this regard.

Points of Order

Debate between Patrick Grady and Natascha Engel

1st reading: House of Commons
Thursday 27th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Natascha Engel)]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for advance notice of his point of order. As he knows, the Chair is unable to compel Ministers to appear before Select Committees, but he has chosen the timing of his point of order well—the Leader of the House, who is very attentive, is here and will no doubt take those concerns to the Government.

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. At questions to the Leader of the House before business questions, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling (Steven Paterson) the Leader of the House—in all sobriety and apparently without any hint of irony—presented the behaviour of the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for East Surrey (Mr Gyimah), last week in talking out a private Member’s Bill as nothing more than answering questions from Members in the normal course of a debate. Every Member present knows that the reality—

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. This is a continuation of a debate rather than a point of order. The hon. Gentleman will have to use other avenues to pursue his grievance.

Bill Presented

Technical and Further Education Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Secretary Justine Greening, supported by Secretary Greg Clark, Secretary Damian Green, Ben Gummer, Damian Hinds, Robert Halfon, Mr Nick Gibb, Edward Timpson, Caroline Dinenage and Joseph Johnson, presented a Bill to make provision about technical and further education, and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed (Bill 82) with explanatory notes (Bill 82-EN).

Off-patent Drugs Bill

Debate between Patrick Grady and Natascha Engel

Friday 6th November 2015 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Two closure motions have now been moved and twice I have said that I am not prepared to accept them. I am afraid that is just how it is.

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Given what you have said, let the record show that at least 13 Scottish National party Members have given up their Fridays in their constituencies to come here on behalf of their constituents. This is an outrageous abuse of parliamentary procedure.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Can we please stop it there? Two Members have tried to move the closure and I have refused to put the Question. If any more Members try to put that Question, they will be challenging the Chair.