Skip to main content

Business question from Roger Gale (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 1 December 2005. It occurred during Business statement on Business of the House.


Business of the House

You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that this time last Thursday, the Leader of the House sought to give us the impression that Members would have an opportunity to debate legislation relating to the reorganisation of the police. It is true that, were Kent to be merged with another county, the Channel Tunnel Act 1987 would have to be amended through primary legislation, but I do not think that that is quite what the Leader of the House had in mind. He knows perfectly well that all the reorganisation can be dealt with by means of statutory instruments. At the end of the famed Adjournment debate in Westminster Hall, the Minister for Policing, Security and Community Safety sought to explain to the House—as has the Deputy Leader of the House today—that there would be an opportunity for a debate on the police. Almost immediately afterwards, sources very close, shall we say, to the Home Secretary were to be found briefing lobby journalists, saying that the measures would go through, that it was all done and dusted and that it did not matter. There are two non-sitting Fridays between now and Christmas. Why can we not have the debate on one of them?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c394 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Legislation Police Reorganisation
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk