Hansard·Lords Chamber·Vol. 841

Business of the House

Monday, 9 December 2024

10 contributions3 members

Contributions

  1. Motion on Standing Orders

    View contribution permalink →

  2. Moved by

    View contribution permalink →

  3. Baroness Smith of Basildon

    That Standing Order 38(1) (Arrangement of the Order Paper) be dispensed with on Wednesday 11 December to enable the second reading of the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill to begin before oral questions.

    View contribution permalink →

  4. The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Smith of Basildon) (Lab)

    My Lords, in moving this Motion, I thought it would be useful to set out for the House how proceedings on Wednesday will work. We will sit at 11 am to start the Second Reading of the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill. We will pause proceedings around 1 pm. The House will then sit at 3 pm for Oral Questions in the normal way. We will then resume the Second Reading of the Bill and complete it that day. Currently, we expect that the advisory speaking time for Back-Bench contributions to the Second Reading will be five minutes. We will advertise the final advisory time in the usual way when the list closes at 6 pm this evening. I beg to move.

    View contribution permalink →

  5. Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)

    My Lords, does the Minister really think it appropriate that, for a major constitutional change of the kind that is proposed in the Bill, we should be limited to five minutes? Of course, Members of the House will realise that that is advisory, so we may be sitting very late indeed.

    View contribution permalink →

  6. Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)

    My Lords, the advisory time is based on the number of Members speaking. It is advisory out of courtesy to the whole House. Looking at other debates of a similar nature and time, I am confident that the House can make its views known in that time.

    View contribution permalink →

  7. Viscount Hailsham (Con)

    My Lords, following what my noble friend has just said, would it not have been better to have had a two-day debate? I declare an interest: alas, because of professional engagements, I cannot get here at 11 am, and I had hoped to participate in the Second Reading debate. A two-day debate would have been altogether preferable.

    View contribution permalink →

  8. Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)

    My Lords, I am sorry about that; I would have welcomed the noble Viscount’s contribution. However, he will appreciate that two days are sometimes difficult for other colleagues. This was agreed, via the usual channels, with the Chief Whip’s Office.

    View contribution permalink →

  9. Motion agreed.

    View contribution permalink →

Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 4783635.

Partner sites