4 Other changes
The Chairman of Ways and Means
27. Currently only Tuesday and Wednesday sittings
are under the control of the Chairman of Ways and Means. Thursday
sittings are provided for by paragraphs (4) and (15) of Standing
Order No. 10. Up to twenty sessions are allocated by the Liaison
Committee and any remaining sessions are determined by the Backbench
Business Committee. The Standing Order does not allow the Committees
to share any one sitting, although they have done so informally
by allocating business proposed by the other committee.
28. The then Clerk of the House's memorandum says
At present, the Standing Order places the Chairman
of Ways and Means explicitly in charge of the sittings in Westminster
Hall on Tuesday and Wednesdays, but since the Government ceded
any control of Thursday sittings it has left the authority for
those sittings somewhat unclear. The Standing Order might be amended
to make clear that all business at sittings in Westminster Hall
is under the general direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means,
while retaining the provisions for determining the business by
the Backbench Business and Liaison Committees.[26]
As the Chairman of Ways and Means notes,
this move would give a single point of authority
for all sittings, and would remove uncertainty about the oversight
of Thursday sittings […] The appointment of business for
each day would of course continue to reflect the
requirements set out in Standing Orders, protecting the nomination
of debates by the Liaison and Backbench Committees. One advantage
could be that, in the event that neither Committee
nominated a subject for debate on a Thursday afternoon, my
oversight might allow me to nominate a replacement subject.[27]
29. We recommend that the Chairman of Ways and
Means should be given overall responsibility for the business
at all sittings in Westminster Hall. Business on a Thursday would
continue to be allocated by the Liaison and Backbench Business
Committees as provided for in Standing Order No. 10, which we
recommend should also be amended to enable both those committees
to allocate business at a single sitting.
Powers of the Chair in Westminster
Hall
30. Standing Order No. 10 disapplies certain standing
orders which relate to the disciplinary powers of the Chair. It
has been the case, although infrequently, that a Member "behaves
poorly" in Westminster Hall, at which point the Chair only
has the power to ask them to withdraw.[28]
In his memorandum the then Clerk of the House noted that 'the
only weapon of last resort available to the Chair, in the case
of persistent defiance of its authority, is the implicit power
to suspend the sitting'.[29]
He suggested that "there is a case for giving a power to
the Chair in Westminster Hall to trigger the use of the relevant
standing orders in the House itself relating to conduct at a sitting
in Westminster Hall", adding, "Of course, the purpose
of giving the Chair such a power of last resort would be to make
it more likely that it need never be invoked."[30]
31. We agree that there should be mechanisms which
discourage Members from disorderly behaviour. However we do not
consider it appropriate to put the Speaker in a position where,
having received a report about the conduct of a Member from the
Chair in Westminster Hall, he must then exercise his powers under
the standing orders in respect of behaviour of which he has no
first-hand knowledge. The Chairman of Ways and Means said that
he did not have strong views on the matter but appreciated that
'a deterrent is always useful'.[31]
The power to suspend a sitting and report behaviour should be
made explicit but should not trigger the use of those standing
orders which suspend a Member. We recommend that the Chair
in Westminster Hall should have the power to order a disorderly
Member to withdraw from the sitting. If a disorderly Member refuses
to withdraw when ordered by the Chair, the Chair should have the
power to suspend the sitting and to report the conduct of the
Member to the House.
Rationalising Standing Order
No. 10
32. Paragraph (9) of the Standing Order provides
for legislative business to be taken in Westminster Hall. From
the outset the Government said that it did not intend to use Westminster
Hall for this purpose[32]
and "there has been no evidence over the 15 years that the
House wants to do that".[33]
Evidence we have received supports this view.[34]
We recommend that paragraph (9) of Standing Order No. 10 should
be repealed.
33. Paragraph (12) of the Standing Order provides
for business other than adjournment debates to be vetoed if 'not
fewer than six Members rise in their places and signify their
objection'. If our recommendation in paragraph 18 is accepted
then general debate motions would be open to veto. The purpose
of paragraph (12) was to provide protection for the minority against
the Government forcing legislative business through Westminster
Hall. As we recommend withdrawing that mechanism we recommend
that paragraph (12) should also be repealed. Repealing would
have the additional benefit of protecting general debate motions
from being vetoed.
34. Part two of paragraph (6) provides for the House
to appoint 'not more than four members of the Panel of Chairs
to sit in Westminster Hall as Deputy Speaker'. The system currently
used of sharing the responsibility of chairing Westminster Hall
around the Panel of Chairs works well and this provision "has
long fallen into disuse".[35]
We recommend that this provision of paragraph (6) should be
repealed.
26 Clerk of the House BWH 07 para 25 Back
27
Chairman of Ways and Means BWH 06 para 10 Back
28
Q33 Back
29
Clerk of the House BWH 07 para 40 Back
30
Clerk of the House BWH 07 para 41 Back
31
Chairman of Ways and Means BWH 06 para 14 Back
32
Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons, Second
Report of Session 1998-99, Sittings of the House in Westminster Hall,
HC 194, para 33 Back
33
Q1 Back
34
Mr Mark Harper MP BWH 03 para 2Sir Bob Russell MP BWH 08, para
1 Mr Simon Cramp BWH 02 para 3 Back
35
Chairman of Ways and Means BWH 06 para 13 Back
| 
