Homes Bill
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
Good morning. Before we move on, I believe that there is a point of order.
Mr Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne, Conservative)
On a point of order, Mr. Gale. It has started, by which I mean that Government amendments have started seeping on to the amendment paper. On more than one occasion, both in Committee and on the Floor of the House, I have mentioned my apprehension that the tabling of Government amendments may undermine the programme resolution. The Government have had an entire Parliament and—18 years before that—to think about the Bill. We have started the Committee stage, yet a raft of amendments appeared yesterday. I accept that a couple of them are drafting amendments, but some are more substantive and one or two are wholly incomprehensible to us, and bodies such as the Law Society.
I am putting down a marker. More amendments may be seen and, as we gauge the size of debate that they will generate, we reserve our right to raise the issue of reconvening the Programming Sub-Committee.
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
The Committee heard what the hon. Gentleman has to say. I restate what I said at the start of proceedings on Tuesday. I shall consider reconvening the Sub-Committee, as its Chairman, if it becomes apparent to me that that is necessary. That will become only apparent when I have heard representations through the usual channels, in the normal courteous manner.
Mr Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham, Conservative)
On a point of order, Mr. Gale. Would you make an announcement on jackets to avoid any confusion about secret deals?
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
I thought that I had made it clear at the start of the previous sitting that, as far as I am concerned, hon. Members have blanket consent to remove jackets as they wish. I cannot speak for Mr. Stevenson, who must make his own judgment. Clause 2 Responsibility for marketing a property which is on the market