Clause 16 - Membership etc. of the Consumer panel
Communications Bill
Public Bill Committees, 12 December 2002, 4:45 pm
Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 8, in
clause 16, page 17, line 41, leave out from 'by' to end of line 44 and insert 'the Secretary of State, acting with the advice of OFCOM, and shall comprise a Chairman and such other members as the Secretary of State may determine.'
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
With this will be convenient to take the following Amendment No. 181, in
clause 16, page 17, line 41, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 182, in
clause 16, page 17, line 42, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 183, in
clause 16, page 17, line 43, leave out subsection (2).
Amendment No. 10, in
clause 16, page 17, line 45, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 11, in
clause 16, page 18, line 6, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 12, in
clause 16, page 18, line 16, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 185, in
clause 16, page 18, line 29, leave out 'OFCOM with the approval of'.
Amendment No. 187, in
clause 16, page 18, line 30, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Amendment No. 188, in
clause 16, page 18, line 31, leave out 'OFCOM' and insert 'the Secretary of State'.
Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
I will be brief. The purpose of the amendment is to secure the independence of the consumer panel by making the Secretary of State, acting with the advice of Ofcom, responsible for appointments to it, rather than giving simply a back-stop power to the Secretary of State to block appointments made by Ofcom. The initiative would be with the Secretary of State and the independence of the consumer panel would be better secured.
Dr Kim Howells (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Pontypridd, Labour)
I put it to the Committee that the amendment should not be made.
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
Order.
It being Five o'clock, The Chairman, proceeded, pursuant to Sessional Order D relating to Programming [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002] and the Order of the Committee [10 December 2002], as amended [this day], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.
Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
On a point of order, Mr. Gale. Perhaps you could advise me on the procedure. It is my wish, and it might be the wish of other members of the Committee, to vote against clause 18. Will we be able to do that?
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
Let me dispose of the immediate business first. I am required to put the amendment that
has been moved. The Committee must vote on it; it cannot be withdrawn.
Question put, That the amendment be made:—
The Committee divided: Ayes 9, Noes 11.
Division number 5 - 9 yes, 11 no
Voting yes: Richard Allan, Michael Fabricant, John Greenway, Nick Harvey, Mark Hoban, Andrew Lansley, Andrew Robathan, Simon Thomas, John Whittingdale
Voting no: Chris Bryant, Vernon Coaker, Kim Howells, Eric Joyce, Anne McGuire, Andrew Miller, Jim Murphy, Nick Palmer, Anne Picking, John Robertson, Brian White
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
I will now return to the hon. Gentleman's point of order. Under Sessional Order D of 28 June 2001, as renewed on 29 October 2002, I am required to put all remaining Questions forthwith. That does not permit separate Divisions on individual clauses. Hon. Members who wish to vote against any particular clause, now grouped together, between clauses 16 to 26, schedule 2 and clause 27 have two choices: either to vote against the entire package, or to let the entire package go through. I appreciate that that is a matter of concern to hon. Members on both sides of the House and I will report that fact to the Chairman of Ways and Means, but, as the Standing Orders of the House currently are, I have no other choice.
The Chairman then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded at that time.
Clauses 16 to 26 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)
Before I call Mr. Murphy to move the Adjournment, I should like to place one other issue on the record. The Chairman has a number of duties: to protect the interests of the Back Bench; to ensure that the business of the House is properly debated; and of course to implement the votes of the House as determined after Second Reading.
The inevitable consequence of the decisions that were taken by the Programming Sub-Committee this morning are that, on Tuesday next week, 50 amendments and 40 clauses must be debated within two and a half hours. Members of the Committee may consider that to be satisfactory and that the matters for consideration are such that no more time will be needed. However, I am disposed to recall the Programming Sub-Committee at 10 o'clock on Tuesday morning in this Room immediately prior to our sitting to consider the matter, once the usual channels have had the opportunity to discuss it. I shall leave it to the Government Chief Whip to inform me whether he wishes the Programming Sub-Committee to sit again.
That being so, I should like to say to members of the Committee, because it may have another knock-on effect, that I have already said to Mr. Atkinson that I am willing to take the Chair between 8 and 10 pm on Tuesday evening to progress business and to bring the running order back on schedule. However, that must initially be a matter for discussion by the usual channels.
Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Jim Murphy.]
Adjourned accordingly at five minutes past Five o'clock till Tuesday 17 December at half-past Ten o'clock.