Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Peter Bone (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 November 2006. It occurred during Debate on Legislative Process.


Legislative Process

I entirely agree. I am arguing that there should not be an 11-week gap when the Government are not scrutinised. September sittings would give the opportunity to introduce new ideas and innovations. I do not buy the excuse that it would cost a huge amount of money for the Commons Chamber and the rest of the parliamentary estate to be open. It is open anyway during the recess, with thousands of staff and visitors using the site every day. The cost of running the Chamber would be a marginal extra cost. Are we really saying that cost should be placed before democracy? Above all, I do not buy the excuse that parliamentary sittings in September would prevent Members from spending time in their constituencies, for two reasons. First, the September sittings would be a period of debate, scrutiny and review, in which there would be no Divisions, and in which no new legislation would be introduced.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
451 c388 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Debates Legislative process House of Commons Public bills Members Parliamentary procedure Parliamentary scrutiny Public participation Modernisation Reform Select committees Allocation of time motions European standing committees Standing committees Sub judice rule Standing orders Time limits on speeches
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk