Lord Empey (UUP)

My Lords, the noble Lord kindly allowed a number of us to make representations to him during the week, saying that his door was always open. Indeed it was, and I thank him for that. However, I raised the point last week that for those of us who do not live in London, running to 6 pm or thereabouts means that it is impossible for most of us to get home, requiring us to stay over until Saturday. Given that this is a Private Member’s Bill, given the pattern that has been adopted on Private Members’ Bills since I have been here and given that we are effectively discriminating against a group of people who do not live in the local area, as a matter of principle that is a mistake. If we allow it to happen on a regular basis, people who are not resident in the south-east of England are put at a disadvantage. I understand the point about leaving early and not observing the normal courtesies, but if you table an amendment, the point is to hear the response of the Minister and the promoter of the Bill. It is not an ad hoc thing where you can drift off at a certain point in time. Without any doubt, this decision means that those who have to travel a significant distance from this House to get home every week are at a disadvantage. That is a precedent. It might be those of us who live further away today, but it could be a different group of people next time. I think that is a mistake. I am not satisfied to leave this as it sits. I would not like to be in a situation where people were bouncing up and down to ask the House to resume as some ad hoc arrangement. It should be a situation that is agreed with the promoter of the Bill so that we do not have this business of people doing a count around the Chamber to see whether they can get the House resumed. We should have a more mature and professional way of doing business. I leave the point with the Chief Whip that this discriminates deliberately against people who do not reside in this area.