Appendix 1: Correspondence between the
Chair and the Acting Clerk of the House
Letter from the Chair to David Natzler, Acting
Clerk of the House, 10 March 2013
Thank you for coming to the Select Committee yesterday
to set out the procedures to be followed at the meeting of a new
Parliament.
We discussed the possibility of the House meeting
earlier than last time should the result of the Election be inconclusive.
This could take place on Saturday 9 May. However it was apparent
from the evidence and from the views of many colleagues that Monday
11 May, four days after the General Election, would find greater
support as a date to initially debate, and perhaps later to confirm,
any proposed arrangements for the formation of a new administration
after the election. Thank you for indicating in outline how a
reconvening like this might be achieved.
I should be grateful if you would submit to the Committee
a note setting out a scheme under which Parliament would meet
on Monday 11 May to enable the House to hold an initial debate
of this nature. It would be helpful if you could indicate the
requirements and agreements which would in your view be necessary
for such a scheme to be proceeded with. I realise that you cannot
speak for all those involved, and I am therefore also seeking
advice from the Cabinet Office, the Clerk of the Parliaments and
the Private Secretary to HM the Queen.
Such a scheme would inevitably require changes to
current procedure and practice, and I would be grateful for any
advice you could give the Committee on the changes which would
be required for effective implementation. It would be helpful
to receive the note by Wednesday 18 March for circulation to the
Committee.
Note from David Natzler, Acting Clerk of the House,
18 March 2015
Date and time of meeting
1. Parliament could be summoned by proclamation to
meet on Monday 11 May. This should give sufficient time for preparation
of the White Book of returns to the writs. The time of meeting
is not normally set out in the proclamation. The normal meeting
time of the House on a Monday is 1430, but a morning start at
no later than 0930 would be advisable if all the preliminaries
are to be disposed of in one day so as to enable the House to
hold a debate in the afternoon and evening. In the absence
of any authority for meeting at 0930, it would be necessary to
regulate the meeting time in advance of Dissolution either by
a new Standing Order designed for this circumstance or by a one-off
Order.
First visit to Lords
2. Time could be saved by dispensing with the first
of the conventional three visits to the Lords. This was recommended
by the Procedure Committee in its 1995-96 Report on Proceedings
at the start of a Parliament, but not implemented. Rather than
the Commissioners in the Lords sending Black Rod to fetch the
Commons to the Lords, the permission to elect a Speaker could
be conveyed orally by a senior Privy Counsellor [PC]. That is
how permission is conveyed when the election of a Speaker is required
in the course of a Parliament. Since the prerogative is engaged,
and given the role of the Commissioners, I presume that the assent
of the Monarch would be required for this change.
Election of Speaker
3. The House then proceeds to the election of a Speaker.
If the returning Speaker is elected without a division, proceedings
should be complete by around 0950. If a division is called and
the returning Speaker is elected, proceedings should be complete
by 1005. If the returning Speaker is defeated, Standing Orders
require the House to be adjourned to the next day for a ballot.
Approbation of Speaker-elect and confirmation
of rights and privileges
4. Time could also be saved by dispensing with the
second visit to the Lords. Royal approbation of the Speaker elect
could be conveyed by the same PC, presumably subject to some decent
interval to enable it to be established that the individual concerned
was indeed approved. The Speaker elect could then make the claim
to the ancient and undoubted rights and privileges of the Commons
and the PC could confirm them on behalf of the Monarch. As
for para 2 above, this significant change in practice would require
the Monarch's assent in advance.
Swearing-in
5. By around 1015 the Speaker would be able to take
the oath and begin swearing-in. If it was important to save time
there could conceivably be two "streams" either side
of the "table in the middle of the said House" [Parliamentary
Oaths Act 1866] rather than the conventional single stream. On
that basis and given vigorous stage management swearing could
probably be concluded by around 1215. Arrangements for swearing-in
are for the Speaker: if forewarned the necessary detailed arrangements
for an accelerated process could be in place.
Assembly prior to Queen's speech
6. To ensure co-ordination with proceedings in the
Lords there could be a short suspension until a pre-arranged time,
say 1230, so that the House was assembled to be bidden to the
Lords for the Queen's Speech.
Queen's Speech
7. The Speech, which could be given by Commissioners
rather than the Monarch, could be short and limited to telling
the Commons that they will be invited to debate and vote on, for
example, the formation of a government or on whom to recommend
to the Queen should be appointed as Prime Minister. The content
of the Queen's Speech is the responsibility of the incumbent Prime
Minister.
Alternative
8. An alternative to paras 4-7 above might be for
the Speaker elect to lead the [unsworn] House at around 1015 to
the Lords to seek Royal approbation, and make the rights and privileges
claim: and for the Commissioners not only to convey approbation
and confirm the privileges, but also to convey to the Commons
the message in para 7 above. The Speaker would then lead the House
back and carry out swearing-in, which would be completed by around
1300. This is effect elides stages and still preserves one visit
to the Lords.
Debate and vote
9. The House could reassemble at the conventional
time of 1415. If it was intended to debate a Motion other than
the conventional humble Address, or to allow for debate on a substantive
amendment to the Address, informal notice of the Motion or proposed
amendment should be given earlier in the day, so as to be widely
circulated and made publicly available on the internet. There
is a twentieth century precedent for a "substantive"
Address to be moved. In the one week December 1921 session, the
humble Address as moved included substantial reference to confirmation
and ratification of the Articles of Agreement on Ireland, which
was the sole purpose of calling this mini-Session. Until session
1890-91 it had indeed been the practice for the Address to reflect
the Speech article by article. But the practice has now been firmly
settled for over a century on a simple Motion for a humble Address
of thanks. The Speaker's agreement would be required for a
Motion to be moved other than the standard Motion for an Address,
or for selecting an amendment on the first day.
10. Being a Monday, proceedings would normally be
interrupted at 2200, if necessary by a closure to force a decision.
The House would then presumably be adjourned by motion until a
later date.
Prorogation
11. If the Government so wished, Parliament could
then or soon thereafter be prorogued and a new session begun,
with a substantive Queen's Speech. Alternatively the existing
session could proceed as normal, without a legislative programme
set out in a Queen's Speech, but if so desired with an eventual
debate and vote on an equivalent document.
| 
