---

Column 1060

Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

Mawhinney, Dr Brian

Merchant, Piers

Milligan, Stephen

Mills, Iain

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Mitchell, Sir David (Hants NW)

Monro, Sir Hector

Moss, Malcolm

Needham, Richard

Nelson, Anthony

Neubert, Sir Michael

Newton, Rt Hon Tony

Nicholls, Patrick

Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)

Norris, Steve

Onslow, Rt Hon Sir Cranley

Oppenheim, Phillip

Page, Richard

Paice, James

Patnick, Irvine

Patten, Rt Hon John

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

Pickles, Eric

Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

Portillo, Rt Hon Michael

Powell, William (Corby)

Rathbone, Tim

Redwood, John

Renton, Rt Hon Tim

Richards, Rod

Riddick, Graham

Robathan, Andrew

Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn

Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S)

Robinson, Mark (Somerton)

Rowe, Andrew (Mid Kent)

Rumbold, Rt Hon Dame Angela

Ryder, Rt Hon Richard

Sackville, Tom

Shaw, David (Dover)

Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)

Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Soames, Nicholas

Spencer, Sir Derek

Spicer, Sir James (W Dorset)

Spink, Dr Robert

Sproat, Iain

Squire, Robin (Hornchurch)

Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John

Steel, Rt Hon Sir David

Stephen, Michael

Stern, Michael

Stewart, Allan

Streeter, Gary

Sykes, John

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

Temple-Morris, Peter

Thomason, Roy

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

Thornton, Sir Malcolm

Thurnham, Peter

Townsend, Cyril D. (Bexl'yh'th)

Tracey, Richard

Trotter, Neville

Twinn, Dr Ian

Viggers, Peter

Walden, George

Wallace, James

Waller, Gary

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Waterson, Nigel

Wells, Bowen

Wheeler, Rt Hon Sir John

Whitney, Ray

Widdecombe, Ann

Wigley, Dafydd

Willetts, David

Wolfson, Mark

Yeo, Tim

Young, Sir George (Acton)

Tellers for the Noes :

Mr. Sydney Chapman and

Mr. Timothy Wood.

Question accordingly negatived .

Mr. Spearing : On a point of order, Dame Janet. Can you help the House by confirming the rules of order? I understand that my hon. Friend the Member for Neath (Mr. Hain) had been making his speech for about 10 minutes when the closure was moved. Is it the custom of the House for hon. Members, for reasons of courtesy, to wait until the end of a speech before moving the closure, or have you discretion to accept it immediately if you think that sufficient debate has taken place on a matter of this importance?

The Second Deputy Chairman : It is perfectly within the rules for the closure to be moved in the middle of a speech--and, in fact, the hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain) had spoken for 15 minutes.

Mr. Cryer : On a point of order, Dame Janet. Would it be in order for documents relevant to the debate to be laid on the Table? It is the custom and practice of Parliament for relevant documents to be made available to hon. Members. I have in mind the document that sets out the deal between the Government and the Liberals, under which the Liberals voted with the Government so that they can get away on Friday to go to a conference at Dunoon or somewhere similar.

The Second Deputy Chairman : If such an agreement exists, it certainly does not have the status of a state paper.

---

Column 1061

Mr. Winnick : The matters that are due to be debated, some of which have already been debated, are of great political and economic significance. Is it the case that you, Dame Janet, have complete discretion over whether to accept the closure motion? In view of the rumour, which is presumably correct, that the Government intend to debate amendments and new clauses until 1 pm on Thursday, what will be the position of the Chair with regard to closure motions moved by the Government? Surely there should be plenty of time to discuss these issues. The Government should not take the opportunity to run through them all in one night which, judging by the 10 o'clock business motion which they won with the Liberals' support, they intend to do. I hope that those points will be duly taken into account by the Chair.

The Second Deputy Chairman : I do not offer hostages to fortune by speculating on what might or might not be. I deal with situations as they arise.

Mr. Austin Mitchell : On a point of order, Dame Janet. I had tabled eight amendments in the previous group but was not called to speak. That group covered a major issue--the future of the central bank--and was decided in a brief six and a half hours. If, as you said, you have the discretion to turn down a closure motion, may I ask how you are able to consider the matter in the middle of an hon. Member's speech?

The Second Deputy Chairman : I make my own decisions on that and I am confident that I made the correct decision. The role of the Chair is simply to ensure that there is no gross abuse of the rights of the minority. After that, it is for the Committee to decide whether to curtail debate.

Mr. Wilkinson : Further to that point of order, Dame Janet. I would not for a moment question your ruling, which is wholly within the letter of the rules of procedure, but is it in the spirit of this place, which works effectively by agreement, understanding and tolerance, for the Government to move closure motions in the middle of speeches?

The Second Deputy Chairman : I have already explained that it is perfectly within the rules and I do not think that I can make any further observations.

Mr. Skinner : On a point of order, Dame Janet. You may have noticed that, during the past few years, debates have taken place in other parts of the country, for example, in Scotland and Wales. I wonder whether you are prepared to have a word with Madam Speaker about having a series of Maastricht debates in Newbury in the run-up to the by-election? Labour Members could explain about the conspiracy between the Tory and Liberal parties, tell the Newbury electorate that they are both in one bag and give the people there a chance to vote for members of the Labour party who will vote against Maastricht.

---