| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Davies: My hon. Friend speaks with genuine feeling. She has a considerable record in the House of speaking with great knowledge and understanding, particularly on disability and incapacity issues. I can understand her concern at the frivolous way in which the Government have treated our procedures, quite apart from the cruel way in which they propose to treat recipients of the various benefits. There is a fascinating contrast between the participation of Labour Members in the substantive discussions earlier and their participation now in the procedural debate, when we find that the Government Benches have almost filled up.
It is even more fascinating that few of the Back Benchers who have been on the Government Benches during any part of our proceedings tonight have sought to defend what the Government are doing. They were clearly embarrassed. Those who were disposed to be more loyal to the Government stayed away. Those who contributed
to our proceedings--we have had distinguished speeches from many Labour Members--invariably spoke against the Government proposals, particularly those on bereavement benefit.
Therefore, it is clear that the Government cannot mobilise their Members to support them on the substance--on their policies. The best that they can do is mobilise some support to adjourn proceedings, appealing to matters of personal comfort. Although it is understandable that people should like to go back to their homes at this time of night, surely that should not be decisive in determining the way in which we conduct our proceedings in the House of Commons.
Mr. Hayes:
I risk disagreeing with my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning), who, as my hon. Friend says, has enjoyed a distinguished career in the House, despite her rather radical feminist views--with which I do not agree, I hasten to add. I believe that it would be inappropriate to adjourn the debate. The hon. Members for Kingswood (Mr. Berry), for Gedling(Mr. Coaker) for Croydon, North (Mr. Wicks), other Opposition Members and I have sat throughout the long debates, listening quite carefully to what has been said, because we wanted to debate matters of on-going concern.
Although I accept--as the Deputy Speaker has ruled--that we are here to debate not what happened in the past, but the present, I must tell my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham and Stamford (Mr. Davies) that the public will find it very strange indeed if, having reached this point in the debate, we should choose to end it at 4 o'clock in the morning. It would have been acceptable to end the debate before completing our consideration if we had chosen to do so last night, but, having got so far into the night, the public will expect us to see the matter through.
Mr. Davies:
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend.
Mr. Swayne:
I should like simply to draw my hon. Friend's attention to the fact that, when the business statement is made to the House on Thursdays, it is always prefaced with the remark, "subject to the satisfactory progress of business". Many Labour Members take great pleasure in being away from this place. I should warn them that, given that the House's business will not have progressed satisfactorily today, we might meet next Thursday to proceed with it.
Mr. Davies:
The Government have an overwhelming majority and, ultimately, can do what they like with the House of Commons--which is what is so terrifying about the position in which we find ourselves. Nevertheless, today, the House of Commons has had a victoryagainst an overbearing and arrogant Government. The Government were not able, as they had originally planned, to carry on through the night. They found that they just could not take the heat any longer, and that they could no longer effectively mobilise their supporters to back them. They also knew that, with the stakeholder pension, they were entering extremely difficult country, and that--with their pernicious plans to rob the incapacitated and
The best that the Government could do today was to throw in the sponge, hoping against hope that, at some point in the future, they might somehow get away with their proposals. They are a Government who are in denial about their own obvious failure to convince either side of the House of their intentions.
Sir Richard Body:
Will my hon. Friend give way?
Mr. Davies:
No; I shall not give way again. I have already taken quite a few interventions.
Mr. Keith Bradley (Treasurer of Her Majesty's Household)
rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.
Question put, That the Question be now put:--
Mr. Roger Gale (North Thanet):
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The closure was taken when only one Opposition Member had been called to speak, on a matter that was debatable and could have been discussed for a considerable time. That is worrying to those of us who are concerned about the manner in which the procedures of the House are being manipulated. My point of order very specifically for the Chair--
4.30 am
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |