Supplementary submission from Chris Bryant
MP
I am writing in response to your letter regarding
the sitting hours of the House.
I am particularly keen that we should retain
the present arrangements, with the moment of interruption at 10.00
pm, 7.00 pm, 7.00 pm and 6.00 pm respectively on Monday through
to Thursday.
I believe that the earlier start of business
on Tuesday to Thursday makes it far easier for Parliament to drive
the political agenda—and indeed to get coverage in the national
newspapers. I also believe that a return to the old hours, even
on just one of the days, would signal that Parliament is not serious
about reforms that bring us more into line with the working practice
of the modern world. This is not about MPs making life easier
for themselves. Indeed under the new arrangements it could be
argued that MPs have to rise earlier in the morning. It is simply
about accepting that the job of work we do is not from a different
realm as that in which our constituents live and work. It is only
logical that it should therefore be conducted at a time that is
more sympathetic to the pressures of the modern world.
As for the arguments that MPs have nothing to
do of an evening I believe that we have seen over the last year
a steady process whereby Parliament has opened up far more in
the evening and more and more MPs are choosing to congregate in
the House on a more informal basis. Far from denuding the House
we have seen more visitors coming to the Commons thanks to the
change in hours. This could be built on if we had more accessible
and better catering arrangements for visitors.
The one further change I would like to see is
moving Private Members' business to Wednesday evening so that
out-of-London MPs can have an equal opportunity to take part in
these debates and votes without harming their constituency work.
July 2004
| 
