Practical considerations
8. In terms of presentation, the solution to Mr Dismore's
request could be straightforward: that is, to permit the Chairman
of a committee to insert a symbol on the amendment paper beside
his or her name when tabling an amendment in the capacity of chairman.
The drawbacks to this approach are similar to those to the current
position in that it might not distinguish sufficiently that an
amendment had been tabled by the committee, and it might also
be regarded as somewhat obscure, since readers of the amendment
paper would be expected to make the link themselves between a
particular Member and a particular select committee. It might
even lead to ambiguity or confusion should a Member be chairman
of more than one committee.
9. An alternative would be to grant select committees
the power to table amendments in their own names or that of the
Chairman, "on behalf of the Committee". This would
be a greater break with tradition since at present even Government
or Opposition amendments are tabled by a single Member and, as
the Clerk of Bills argued, "The House readily understands
that, just as an amendment tabled by a single Minister is a Government
amendment, an amendment tabled by one or more spokesman for an
Opposition party is in practice an amendment tabled on behalf
of that party."[8]
In addition, the precedent of motions moved on behalf of the Committee
of Selection is far from exact because in that case the procedure
is determined by the Standing Orders. Nevertheless, the formula
is one with which the House is familiar and it has the advantage
of clarity.
10. We also understand that it is more practical
to introduce this second option. The Clerk of Bills told us that:
"In FrameMaker (the software used to produce the Amendment
notice papers), it would in fact be easier to use the full name
of the committee than to use footnotes or symbols."[9]
He noted that "As extra names after the first six Members'
names are set out in three columns, it may look a little odd on
the page if the 'Member, on behalf of XX Committee' is not among
the top six."[10]
We do not consider it likely that committees would wish to add
their name to an existing amendment, although we accept that it
may be a consideration if more than six committees concurrently
agreed to support a joint amendment which could occur where a
House issue affected all select committees.
8 Ev 2 Back
9
Ev 2 Back
10
Ev 2 Back
|
