Appendix: Letters to the Chairman from the Speaker and from the Chairman of Ways and Means
Letter from the Speaker to the Chairman of the Committee
I write on behalf of the occupants of the Chair to ask whether your Committee might look again into the issue of adding ‘injury time’ when colleagues take interventions during their speeches in debates in the Chamber.
With every new Parliament, more colleagues write seeking to catch the Chair’s eye to speak during debates in the Chamber. This has caused the Chair to apply time limits to speeches in almost every debate taking place. The current practice, recommended by the Procedure Committee, is to stop the clock when an intervention is made and then to add a minute to the time available for that colleague to make their contribution, with a maximum of two minutes being added. However, with the clock stopped for the intervention itself, this can mean that up to four minutes are added to that Member’s speaking time.
Therefore, after working with this change to Standing Order No. 47 for some time now, and given that more colleagues wish to speak in more debates, I wondered whether it was now time for the Procedure Committee to look again at time limits on speeches with particular reference to interventions.
January 2018
Letter from the Chairman of Ways and Means to the Chairman of the Committee
Interventions on time-limited backbench speeches—Standing Order No. 47
I am writing on behalf of the Deputy Speakers regarding the present regime around adding ‘injury time’ for interventions on time-limited backbench speeches.
As you are aware, the current practice is to stop the clock when an intervention is made and add a minute to the time available, with a maximum of two minutes being added. Including the time taken when the clock is stopped for the original intervention, this can sometimes result in a total of four minutes being added to that Member’s speaking time. As occupants of the Chair we strive to provide time enough for colleagues to deliver considered speeches, opportunity for challenge or support through interventions and the chance for as many colleagues as possible to participate in each debate. The potential of four additional minutes to every time-limited backbench speech makes speech lengths more difficult to control or predict.
Eleanor, Rosie and I found it very helpful to discuss this matter with you and members of the Procedure Committee recently. Thank you for your inquiry into this subject.
Following consideration of this interesting matter we would like to suggest that backbench speeches with a five-minute time limit or below should not be granted injury time if the Member speaking takes an intervention. This change would not prevent colleagues from taking interventions but would allow the Chair to better control total speech lengths when time is already tight.
Where injury time still applies we would recommend that the maximum number of interventions attracting injury time should be one, rather than two. We believe these changes would help the Chair to maintain the balance for Members outlined above.
I hope this summary is useful. Please do let me know if you have further specific questions or if I can be of any further assistance to your inquiry.
May 2018
Published: 18 September 2018