Today’s Business of the House

Debate between Peter Bottomley and Lord Hague of Richmond

Thursday 26th March 2015 Commons Chamber

[Sir Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) (Con)]

My right hon. Friend read out the words on page 11 of the report. May I take some words from the earlier report? It suggests that an

“open division for deciding the question can be seen as a deterrent to the House expressing its views honestly”,

wherein it is bound by the seven principles of public life to be honest. That seems to be a plus for the motion. It says:

“A secret ballot…may…seem unnecessarily unwieldy.”

That seems a bit odd. Its reference to

“a more frequent turnover of Speakers”

makes me question whether you, Sir, have been asked whether you have a personal objection to the House considering this and whether you mind what decision we come to.

[Mr Hague]

I think it is for me, rather than you, Mr Speaker, to answer that, since the questions are to me. My hon. Friend correctly quotes other passages of the report. Those are indeed issues that can be discussed in the debate that we are about to hold, and in the considerations in favour of a secret ballot on these occasions.

Procedure of the House

Debate between Peter Bottomley and Lord Hague of Richmond

Thursday 26th March 2015 Commons Chamber

[Sir Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) (Con)]

May I suggest that we accept that, with the presence of the Speaker in the Chair now, it is a depersonalised issue and one for the House and the procedure it wants to follow, rather than a yes or no against a particular person?

[Mr Hague]

I think the House should treat this issue in that way because we are talking about procedures of the House that may stand for a long time. They may of course be changed by a subsequent Parliament, but it should be treated in that way.