Amendments to Bills (Explanatory Statements) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateSarah Wollaston
Main Page: Sarah Wollaston (Liberal Democrat - Totnes)Department Debates - View all Sarah Wollaston's debates with the Leader of the House
(11 years ago)
Commons ChamberI think that this is quite straightforward: if a Member cannot explain the purpose of their amendment, why did they table it in the first place? Perhaps my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg) would find that his amendments had greater support if their purpose was set out clearly for Members to see. Many Members have referred to the extra costs that might be involved, but surely they are nothing compared to the costs of poorly drafted legislation. As for the cost in trees, not a single extra tree would have to be felled if the House moved towards the 21st century and had all amendments and explanatory notes delivered to Members’ iPads so that they could be absolutely clear about what they are voting for. I see no excuse for not moving towards such a system, which would improve the quality of legislation. I hope that Members will support the amendment.
That sounds more like luck than anything else. If he did not know what he was voting for, there is every chance that afterwards he might have regretted it, so he is very lucky that has not happened.
Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be very interesting to call a Division now to see how many Members arriving in the Chamber could tell what they were voting for?