|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The proceedings on consideration shall be taken on each of the allotted days as shown in the first column of the following Table and shall be taken in the order so shown, and each part of the proceedings shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at the time specified in the second column of the Table.
|Proceedings||Time for conclusion of proceedings|
|First allotted day New Clauses relating to Part 1, amendments relating to Clauses 1 and 2, Schedule 1, Clauses 3 and 4, Schedule 2, Clauses 5 to 34, Schedule 3, Clauses 35 to 58, Schedule 4, Clauses 59 to 68, Schedule 5, Clauses 69 and 70, new Schedules relating to Part 1.||7 p.m.|
|Remaining new Clauses (other than Government new Clauses 9, 10 and 11 and other new Clauses relating to forfeiture of leases).||10 p.m.|
|Second allotted day Amendments relating to Clauses 71 and 72, Schedule 6, Clauses 73 to 102, Schedule 7, Clauses 103 to 123, Schedule 8, Clauses 124 to 149, Schedule 9, Clauses 150 to 155, Schedule 10, Clause 156, Schedule 11, Clauses 157 to 162, Government new Clauses 9, 10 and 11 and other new Clauses relating to forfeiture of leases, amendments relating to Clauses 163 to 168, Schedule 12, Clauses 169 and 170, Schedule 13, Clauses 171 to 174, Schedule 14, Clauses 175 to 177, remaining new Schedules and remaining proceedings on consideration.||9 p.m.
We believe that this motion will allow appropriate time to consider each part of this important Bill. The second programme motion amended the original motion at the request of the Opposition by allowing a second day's consideration on Report. This motion has also been discussed with the OppositionI am extremely grateful to the hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash) for his co-operationand it simply sets some timings for the two days of consideration.
Hon. Members will see that the lion's share of the ample time available will be devoted to considering part 2, which relates to leasehold reform, on which most interest has been focused hitherto. To achieve that, hon. Members will see that the usual order of consideration has been changed slightly to allow full consideration of part 1 before moving on to part 2, and consideration of part 2 will begin no later than 7 pm today and continue on the second allotted day, which will be Wednesday next. The usual order has also been changed to allow new clauses relating to forfeiture to be taken out of order on the second
Mr. William Cash (Stone): I hear what the Minister has to say, and agree with most of it. The fact is that there has been a very full discussion of the Bill in the other place. It has undergone about five separate procedural stages, so many of these matters have been discussed exhaustively. However, a number of important matters were discussed at length in Committee in this House, and every member of that Committee concluded that we had had a good Committee stage on this fairly esoteric subject. Labour Back Benchers made some extremely coherent arguments, as did Opposition Members, and some of my hon. Friends made some notable speeches. As a result, we eventually managed to create a climate in which the Government were prepared to consider making a number of important amendments and, in certain respects, to break new ground. Those amendments may not go as far as we should like, as we shall no doubt find as we proceed on Report.
Some important changes are proposed in relation to forfeiture, which we shall discuss on Wednesday. That issue has been embedded in the law of property since well before 1925in fact, from the middle ages onwards. We may not agree with every aspect of what is proposed, but, by the same token, real progress is being made, so I am glad to be able to say that we do not want to delay matters on Report by dividing the House on the programme motion.
In my view, two days will be sufficient to deal with these matters, but I hope that there will be vigorous debate because we are not content with all the Government's proposals. Indeed, we have tabled our own amendments, which we intend to pursue vigorously, especially on unanimity with regard to commonhold and on forfeiture. The Opposition believe that the programme motion should be agreed to without Division.
Mr. Adrian Sanders (Torbay): It is logical to consider the Bill on two days and to have a break between them, but I hope that there will be flexibility if it looks as though we might go over a time barrier on one or two issues. The reason, ably set out by the hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash), is that there are some contentious issues. We have a contribution to make on forfeiture and are particularly interested in marriage value. Although I do not expect that our amendments and new clauses will take an inordinate amount of time to debate, I hope that there will be time to put them to bed.
Mr. Bill Wiggin (Leominster): Given the prevailing climate, in which statements are sprung upon us, may I urge the Minister to persuade his colleagues not to make statements before the Bill's proceedings on Wednesday?