Business without Debate

John Bercow Excerpts

Thursday 31st October 2019 Commons Chamber

Delegated Legislation

[Mr Speaker]

We come now to a series of motions that I think we should take separately, for reasons that will become obvious. Before I invite a Whip to move motion 6, which is the first in the sequence, I must announce my decision on certification for the purposes of Standing Order No. 83P—“Certification of instruments”. On the basis of material put before me, I certify that, in my opinion, the instrument does not meet the criteria required for certification under that Standing Order.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)),

Income Tax

That the draft Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 (Amendments to Chapter 2A of Part 5) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 14 October, be approved.—(Leo Docherty.)

Question agreed to.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)),

Representation of the People

That the draft Representation of the People (Annual Canvass) (Amendment) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 14 October, be approved.—(Leo Docherty.)

--- Later in debate ---

[Tony Lloyd (Rochdale) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I understand that the Historical Institutional Abuse (Northern Ireland) Bill has now passed all its remaining stages in the other place, which means that there is capacity for the Bill to come to the Commons. The Opposition have made it clear to Government business managers that we will cause no impediment to the orderly and rapid passage of that Bill through this House. The House recognises that this is a matter of justice for people who were the victims of abuse and are now survivors, some of whom are very elderly. They deserve both the recognition that the Bill will give and some level of financial compensation. I hope that, if the business managers were to approach you, Mr Speaker. you would ensure that the facilities of the House could be managed such that the Bill could come before the Commons in the days before Dissolution.

[Mr Speaker]

It is up to the business managers. Is there scope for that to happen? The answer is yes, and it is perfectly feasible to imagine that the hon. Gentleman will achieve successful closure. It is not in my hands, but he has made his point with force and alacrity. It is on the record, and it will have been heard by the most senior representative of the usual channels, who is bestriding the Treasury Bench—none other than the Patronage Secretary.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. My right hon. Friend the Member for Lagan Valley (Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson) has been very industrious today, talking with the Government to ensure that there will be no obstacles to the Historical Institutional Abuse (Northern Ireland) Bill coming forward next week. Will the Government do everything they can to ensure that the legislation can come before the House on Tuesday, so that it can become law before Parliament dissolves, meaning that these victims who have been waiting years for compensation can have their just deserts?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I do not think that that requires any response from me, other than to say that the hon. Gentleman has made his point with great clarity. It will have been heard, and he will have to await events.