Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from David Drew (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 1 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.

Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The debate that we have just had finished very early. Some of us felt strongly that new clause 52 should have been put to a vote, but we were told very clearly that when the Government new clauses were put to the Committee and accepted, that would be prevented. That would have made some sense if we had had no time in which to vote, but there was plenty of time. May we have a ruling from you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on why the procedure was dealt with in that way?

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
505 c132 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Related items
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Monday, 1 February 2010
Proceeding contributions
House of Commons
Subjects
Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Criminal proceedings Appeals Capital gains tax Conduct Allowances Constitutional and administrative law House of Lords House of Commons Disqualification Income tax European Parliament members Inheritance tax Domicil Overpayments Pay Public appointments Pensions Members Members' interests Ministers Peers Parliament Pension funds Standards Taxation Committee on Standards and Privileges Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority Commissioner for Parliamentary Investigations
Legislation
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk