Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Haselhurst (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 February 2011. It occurred during Adjournment debate and Backbench debate on Parliamentary Reform.


Parliamentary Reform

I am going to be slightly meaner in my disposition towards interventions, otherwise, I shall never get through my argument. The hon. Lady's point is absolutely relevant to something that I will say later in response to the proposals by the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion. The House has renewed itself, and the fact that we are in this Chamber is one symbol of that. The fact that we are here at the behest of a Backbench Business Committee is further testament to the fact that we are capable of doing things differently. At first, this Chamber was greeted with suspicion, but it is now readily embraced and is ripe for further exploitation—a point that is also made in the Hansard Society paper. Why not use this Chamber for uncontentious Second Reading debates? Why not repeat the experiment with cross-cutting question sessions, which was cast aside too lightly? Why not table questions to the person representing the House of Commons Commission or the Church Commissioners in this Chamber, rather than in the main Chamber? We might also bring into the sequence the Chair of the Finance and Services Committee or the Chair of the Administration Committee—I mention the last of those modestly. The fact is that such things should be open to more questioning by hon. Members.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
522 c351-2WH 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Accountability Debates House of Commons Electronic voting Electronic equipment Private members' bills Members Parliamentary scrutiny Parliament Parliamentary session Working hours Reform Religious practice Resignations Divisions Times of sittings
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk