TABLE Sitting Proceedings Time for conclusion of proceedings 1st Clause 1 and Clauses 17 and 18 5 p.m. 2nd Clause 16 and Clauses 2 to 6 — 3rd Clause 16 and Clauses 2 to 6 (so far as not previously concluded) 10 p.m. 4th Clauses 19 to 28 — 5th Clauses 19 to 28 (so far as not previously concluded) 5 p.m. 6th Clauses 14 and 15, Clauses 7 and 8, Schedule 1, Clauses 9 to 13 — 7th Clauses 24 and 15, Clauses 7 and 8, Schedule 1, Clauses 9 to 13 (so far as not previously concluded) 10 p.m. 8th Clauses 29 and 30, Schedule 2, Clauses 31 to 40, Schedule 3, Clause 41, Clause 69, Clauses 42 to 44 — 9th Clauses 29 and 30, Schedule 2, Clauses 31 to 40, Schedule 3, Clause 41, Clause 60, Clauses 42 to 44 (so far as not previously concluded) 5 p.m. 10th Clauses 45 to 58 — 11th Clauses 45 to 58 (so far as not previously concluded) 10 p.m. 12th Clause 59, Clauses 61 to 66, Schedules 4 and 5, new Clauses and new Schedules — 13th Clause 59, Clauses 61 to 66, Schedules 4 and 5, new Clauses and new Schedules (so far as not previously concluded) 5 p.m.
Health and Social Care Bill
2:30 pm
Mr Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
I welcome the Minister's remarks and I shall make a few comments about them in a moment. I look forward to serving on the Committee under your chairmanship, Mr. Maxton, and, notwithstanding the constraints that the House has placed on our deliberations, I hope that we shall have an opportunity to scrutinise the Bill adequately.
At the outset, I draw the Committee's attention to my registered interest relating to property development, which may be relevant to clause 4. My right hon. and hon. Friends will speak to amendments to that clause; I shall take no part in that debate, but it is right that the Committee is aware of my interest.
We object in principle to the timetabling of the business of the House and the way in which the Government have imposed it upon us. I do not intend to rehearse the arguments that have already been made on the Floor of the House. However, I am disappointed. I have participated in constructive Committee proceedings with the Minister and the Government Whip who are leading on the Bill. My view is that the old system worked well. We managed our business in an informal and progressive way as the Bills went through consideration in Committee. We saw how the debate evolved and which issues needed further deliberation rather than commenced from the outset with a fixed programme. Perhaps we will lose something in our scrutiny of legislation if we are unable to allow further debate on the clauses that come to be seen as important or complex.
The Minister has already indicated that there will be Government amendments. At least I believe that that was what he said. They may be minor amendments, but nearly all hon. Members will have had experience of serving on Standing Committees where the Government have tabled substantial amendments during the course of the Bill. I think of the Care Standards Act 2000, during the progress of which the Government tabled substantial amendments relating to Wales. It is impossible for a Programming Sub-Committee, when setting out a rigid timetable at the outset of the Committee's deliberations, to take into account matters that are unknown to the Committee at the start. I hope that will not happen in this case. However, sooner or later, for perfectly legitimate reasons, the Government will table substantial amendments in Committee that will restrain debate on the clauses programmed for consideration at that point.
The Minister has indicated that he hopes in the next 24 hours to publish a paper on the traffic light system, which the Committee will debate on Tuesday. That is unacceptable. The House is not sitting tomorrow. If amendments for consideration on Tuesday are to be unstarred, they have to be tabled by the rise of the House tonight and yet the Government intend to publish a document that is highly relevant to the controversial matters that we will debate on Tuesday morning.