Oral Answers to Questions

Tom Brake Excerpts

Thursday 25th January 2018 Commons Chamber

[Angus Brendan MacNeil (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)]

3. To ask the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington, representing the House of Commons Commission, what estimate the Commission has made of the potential cost of introducing electronic voting in the Chamber.

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington)]

The Commission has given no formal consideration to a move to electronic voting in the House. Its responsibility in that matter is limited to the financial or staffing implications of any change to the present system, were a change to be agreed by the House.

[Angus Brendan MacNeil]

The voting system here is a bit crazy, Mr Speaker: last week, we spent two hours on eight votes. Most other Parliaments in the world would laugh at that—indeed, they do. Given that MPs do value meeting each other in the Lobbies, can we consider a hybrid system so that we move to something electronic when there is more than one vote? That would save those two hours.

[Tom Brake]

I have some sympathy with the point that the hon. Gentleman is making, but as I am sure he—now an expert in these matters—knows, this is a matter for the House. If he chose to, he could approach the Procedure Committee and ask it to look at this issue.

[Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)]

We do have a sort of electronic voting now because the Clerks are using iPads—but using the iPads takes longer than using the pieces of paper of the past because it takes more time to spot the individual names.

I still support our going through the Lobbies—it is a good opportunity to meet Ministers and other colleagues—but it would be good if every vote did not take 16 minutes. Would it not be a good idea to consider some swifter form of technology for the Division Lobbies? We could use a fingerprint or thumbprint to vote.

[Tom Brake]

The hon. Gentleman has made a sensible point, which I am happy to take back in considering whether the electronic voting that he has described could speed things up.

The right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Christian Matheson (City of Chester) (Lab)]

9. To ask the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington, representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps the Commission is taking to ensure the highest standards of employment practice from contractors working on the Palace of Westminster renewal and maintenance projects. [R]

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington)]

The House service’s contract requirements and terms and conditions make provisions for contractors to provide adequate working conditions for employees. The provisions include health and safety, security, training, remuneration and payment of at least the London living wage to employees if working on the parliamentary estate. The working conditions provided by the contractors must be compliant with relevant legislation and ensure appropriate welfare and maintenance of stable and skilled workforces to ensure successful delivery of our contracts.

[Christian Matheson]

I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and thank the right hon. Gentleman for that answer.

Companies such as McAlpine, which is up to its neck in blacklisting, have contracts on the parliamentary site. Since the best form of protection for workers is membership of a strong trade union, will the Commission consider giving named officials of the relevant trade unions security access so they can come in and check to make sure blacklisting is not taking place on these premises?

[Tom Brake]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for advance notice of the supplementary question. I am afraid that the current position is that passes can be issued, for instance by Members, only for a specific purpose in supporting that Member. However, the hon. Gentleman has made a specific request and I undertake to secure a written response to it for him.