Business of the House (Thursday)

– in the House of Commons at 7:36 pm on 8th December 2010.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons 7:36 pm, 8th December 2010

I beg to move,

That, at the sitting on Thursday 9 December, the Speaker shall put the Questions necessary to dispose of proceedings on the Motion in the name of Secretary Vince Cable relating to Higher Education Higher Amount and, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 16 (Proceedings under an Act or on European Union documents), on the Motion in the name of Secretary Vince Cable on the draft Higher Education (Basic Amount) (England) Regulations not later than five hours after the commencement of proceedings on the first motion, or at 5.30 pm, whichever is the earlier;
such Questions shall include the Questions on any Amendments selected by the Speaker which may then be moved;
proceedings may continue after the moment of interruption;
and Standing Order No. 41A (Deferred divisions) shall not apply.

The motion is sharply focused on the timing of tomorrow's debate. It allows for the motions in the name of the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills relating to higher education to be debated together and for the Questions to be put after five hours or at 5.30 pm, whichever is earlier.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

No, not at this stage. I will give way in a moment.

I expect to answer the business question tomorrow, but the Government have no plans for any other oral statements. We therefore expect the House to have a full day to debate and vote on the issues.

Photo of Chris Bryant Chris Bryant Shadow Minister (Justice) (Political and Constitutional Reform)

I tried to intervene at the precise moment when the Leader of the House referred to the precise words that I have trouble with: "whichever is the earlier". Why could it not be, "whichever is the later"?

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

If the hon. Gentleman had wanted, he could have tabled an amendment to the motion and we could have debated it. No such amendment was tabled by any Opposition Member and I therefore assume that they are entirely content to stop at 5.30 pm.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

I want to make a bit of progress and then I will give way.

When I announced the business for tomorrow at business questions last Thursday, no Member on the Opposition Benches raised objections to the timing or the process of the motions. The process that we are using for the debate tomorrow is set out in section 26 of the Higher Education Act 2004, under which the regulations are to be made. The Opposition will be familiar with that process, given that it is their Act that allows us to make these changes by secondary legislation.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

I am grateful to the Leader of the House for giving way. Why in the motion did he choose the time of 5.30 pm? It is clear that the House's intention is that the point of interruption on a Thursday should be 6 pm. Why is it 5.30 and not 6 pm?

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

No representations were made through the usual channels for an extension beyond 5.30. After 5.30, I anticipate that there will be votes, which will take us to 6 o'clock, when the House usually rises.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

I will make a bit more progress.

Our original business plan provided for a maximum of four and a half hours' debate.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

In a moment. The motion allows for the House to consider the statutory instrument and the resolution in a single debate, which removes the need for two sets of Front-Bench speeches and allows for more Back-Bench contributions.

Photo of David Hanson David Hanson Shadow Minister (Treasury)

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that in Wales, where my constituency is, there is a policy not to treble tuition fees. Does he think that five hours is sufficient time for more than 500 Members from English seats to look longingly at my country?

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

We had an Opposition day debate on the subject, when the right hon. Gentleman had an opportunity to debate the matter at some length. We are using the procedures set out in the legislation introduced by the Labour Government. We are following those procedures to the letter and allowing more time for the debate than was originally planned.

Several hon. Members:

rose -

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

I am going to make a bit more progress.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

No, I am going to make a bit more progress.

Photo of Paul Farrelly Paul Farrelly Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is simply not the case that no concerns have been raised about this procedure. I raised them in a point of order last week, if you remember, and they have been highlighted by Greg Mulholland in an early-day motion. How can the House correct the record?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

May I say to the hon. Gentleman, first, that as far as he is concerned, he has just done so. Secondly, I do indeed recall his point of order, which was in fact on Monday night. I would have serious problems with my short-term memory if I did not recall it, but I do.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

For the convenience of the House, the Divisions will be taken together at the end of the debate, as specified in the motion. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has set out previously, it is right that we bring forward the motions now, to give prospective students and universities certainty before the 2012-13 application round starts.

Photo of Pete Wishart Pete Wishart Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Culture and Sport), Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Constitution)

It has been reported in the press that Thursday was selected as the day for debating the motions because of the hope that Scottish and Northern Irish MPs might not be present. Is there any truth in that? The Leader of the House can take great comfort from the fact that we will be here, and we will be voting against the motions.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman will be here. I announced last Thursday that the debate would take place tomorrow, and no one objected once during business questions to the day that we chose for the debate.

A slower process would have been not only unfair to prospective students and their families but irresponsible, because of the need to tackle the fiscal crisis that the previous Government left behind. My intention in bringing forward this evening's motion was to allow adequate time for tomorrow's important debate. I hope that hon. Members in all parts of the House will support that intention, and I commend the motion to the House.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons 7:42 pm, 8th December 2010

I rise to oppose the motion. I must say to the Leader of the House that I had been expecting a better justification to the House of the thinking that lay behind this timetable motion. Perhaps he is embarrassed by the shambles of the past two days. Those who read The Guardian newspaper, as many of us do, will have read with great joy about the reference to the Liberal Democrats' hokey cokey when it comes to voting. Perhaps he did not want to be outdone and decided to have his own hokey cokey on this motion. The timetable motion was on the Order Paper for Monday and was objected to. It was on the Order Paper for Tuesday and the Government did not have the courage to move it, and it is back again tonight.

The Leader of the House says that he has not received any representations about the time that will be allocated. I have news for him: he is about to get a lot of representations, and the most important one of all will be when Labour Members all go through the Division Lobby to vote no to this motion.

The content of the motion is not surprising, even though it has changed a little since the version of yesterday and the day before. It is clear that the Government want one thing and one thing only: to spend as little time as possible on this matter, and to get it out of the way as quickly as possible.

Photo of Luciana Berger Luciana Berger Shadow Minister (Energy and Climate Change)

Does my right hon. Friend accept that if only half the Members of the House wanted to take part in the debate tomorrow, that would allow only 50 seconds per Member?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I do indeed, and that illustrates a point that I shall come to-the inadequacy of the time that the House is being given to debate the matter.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

Is not my right hon. Friend's point completely proved by the motion itself, in that the Government chose 5.30 pm as the time for the debate to end when the moment of interruption for a Thursday, voted for by this House, is 6 o'clock? Votes should take place after 6 o'clock on a Thursday, not before. That shows that the Government are not providing enough time.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree completely with my hon. Friend. That raises this question: what are the Government worried about in that extra half hour? The truth is that they do not want to listen to any more arguments. Given the problems that they have faced over their handling of tuition fees and their broken promises, that is not surprising. However, it is outrageous-I use that word deliberately-that the Government propose to allow the House of Commons only a few hours to discuss and consider the most fundamental change to student support and the funding of higher education that we have ever seen in this country. It is also breathtakingly disrespectful.

For proof of that, we need only to consider the fact that the debate on this business motion can continue until any hour. In other words, the Government are prepared to spend more time debating the allocation of time than they are prepared to give the House of Commons actually to debate, discuss and vote on their proposals.

Photo of Thomas Docherty Thomas Docherty Labour, Dunfermline and West Fife

My right hon. Friend might wish to know that I have been informed that the Government Chief Whip has told the dining room not to bother to put on any extra food tonight, because this debate will be over in an hour's time.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I do not presume to comment on the powers of the Chief Whip to see the future, except to say that clearly, in view of the problems we had on Monday evening, his powers are not all they are cracked up to be. The truth, as you will know, Mr Speaker, is that the debate will go on for as long as it takes-it depends on how many right hon. and hon. Members seek to catch your eye.

Photo of John Robertson John Robertson Labour, Glasgow North West

Further to the point that my right hon. Friend makes, the Leader of the House said that he is "using the procedures". What does my right hon. Friend think the Leader of the House meant by that?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

To be honest, I have no idea what the Leader of the House was talking about. It is for him to explain his words. The truth is that the procedure that the Government are proposing to use to give the House time to discuss their proposals is completely inadequate.

Photo of Angela Smith Angela Smith Opposition Assistant Whip (Commons)

Tomorrow, 45,000 students will visit London to make their views known. Does my right hon. Friend agree that giving the House only five hours of debate is an insult to them?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree with my hon. Friend. It shows what the Government think of all those students that they propose to give so little time to debate this matter.

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that not only 45,000 or 50,000 students will be coming down tomorrow? Their parents and grandparents-

Photo of Chris Ruane Chris Ruane Labour, Vale of Clwyd

And great-grandparents!

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

Indeed-in some cases the great-grandparents will be here, along with siblings, nieces and nephews, because hundreds of thousands of people object to the Government's disgraceful behaviour.

M

By disgraceful behaviour, does he mean trying to get the country in the "black" again? Hundreds of thousands (if true) are...

Submitted by Mike Johnson Continue reading (and 1 more annotation)

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

If great-grandparents are concerned, we must be talking about very young students indeed, but my hon. Friend makes a forceful point about the large number of people in this country who are profoundly concerned about the proposals that we are being asked to debate tomorrow. I am sure that they will share the concern that we are expressing at the lack of time that we are being given.

Photo of Steve McCabe Steve McCabe Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak

Was it not terribly unfair of the Leader of the House to imply that last week's Opposition debate revealed that there was ample time? Had he looked at that debate, he would have seen that far more people wanted to make a contribution than the time allowed. He is now making it impossible for hon. Members to represent their constituents.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is absolutely right, and I am sure that we will have the same problem tomorrow if the motion is passed.

Photo of David Lammy David Lammy Labour, Tottenham

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in 2004, when the House had before it a seven-part Bill, containing 15,000 words, 50 clauses and seven schedules, there were many, many hours for debate? Given that the Government's proposals are more profound-they introduce a market, which we have never had before in higher education, and the withdrawal of teaching-should we not have more time? Should our democracy not have more time to debate those changes?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My right hon. Friend makes a powerful point, and I shall remind the House later in my speech about the time that it had on previous occasions to discuss legislation to do with student support.

Photo of David Winnick David Winnick Labour, Walsall North

Is it not important that we have more time to illustrate the importance of the issue, support for which, as has already been pointed out, is not confined to students? We are proud of those students who are marching and demonstrating, but in tonight's Evening Standard reference is made to a 105-year-old person who has sent a letter to the Deputy Prime Minister to say that she wants to march with her 72-year-old daughter but is unable to do so because she is blind. Does not that illustrate that up and down the country adults are supporting the students because they know that the students are right?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Indeed they are. I could not have put it more eloquently than my hon. Friend.

Photo of Paul Farrelly Paul Farrelly Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there could not be a greater contrast between the way in which the coalition Government are handling this and the way in which the Labour Government handled it seven years ago, no matter on what side of the argument one stands? Then the 105-page White Paper was published a whole year before the debate and the changes were introduced only after a general election, so the British public had the opportunity to vote on them.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend anticipates the very point that I will come to a little later in my speech.

Photo of Roberta Blackman-Woods Roberta Blackman-Woods Shadow Minister (Cabinet Office)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that these are wide-ranging proposals that will completely restructure our university system and that five hours is simply not enough time to discuss these issues? Does this not also show that the opposition are running scared of a proper debate on this issue?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend of course refers to those Liberal Democrats who will vote against these proposals-but not enough will vote against them as far as the country is concerned.

Photo of Emma Reynolds Emma Reynolds Shadow Minister (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs)

Last week in business questions, the Leader of the House said that on Wednesday next week there would be a Second Reading of "a Bill", demonstrating some indecision on the part of the Government. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that shows that the excuse that the Leader of the House has just given to Members from Scotland and Northern Ireland about avoiding a Thursday is paltry, because the Government could have scheduled the debate for Wednesday next week?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

They could indeed have done so, but responsibility for that rests with the Leader of the House.

Photo of Alison Seabeck Alison Seabeck Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, given that students from Plymouth and the south-west have a 10-hour round trip to come up to London tomorrow, they deserve more than five hours for an explanation from the coalition of why a pledge to the electorate is worth less than a pledge to the Conservative party in the coalition agreement?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

They do indeed, and-given the inclement weather conditions-those students will probably spend more time travelling than they will having the chance to listen to the House of Commons debating the motion.

There are three principal reasons-to do with time-why the House should vote down this motion. The first is the importance and the consequence of the decision on tuition fees. When one compares the time allocated to the House when previous changes were proposed-and they were much less extensive changes to student support and the funding of higher education than those before us tomorrow-we can see just how inadequate the time that is being offered is. The second reason is the fact, referred to in a point of order earlier, that this debate and vote are being arranged before the promised White Paper on higher education is published and when a whole series of fundamental questions remain about how the new world that the Minister for Universities and Science and the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills propose will actually work. I shall come to some of those questions later.

Photo of Nadhim Zahawi Nadhim Zahawi Conservative, Stratford-on-Avon

The shadow Leader of the House waxes eloquent tonight. Would it not be more credible to be honest with the House and say that stopping free education is not a smaller issue than the one we will debate tomorrow? That is what his Government did.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I apologise to the hon. Gentleman and to you, Mr Speaker, but I am afraid I had some difficultly understanding the point he was seeking to make. He clearly had the same difficulty himself. I will happily give way again if he wants to have another go.

Photo of Nadhim Zahawi Nadhim Zahawi Conservative, Stratford-on-Avon

The shadow Leader has just told the House that what we are debating tomorrow is of greater consequence than the reneged promise that his Government delivered upon, which abolished free education altogether. That is a wrong thing to tell the House. Will he explain himself?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is in urgent need of a history lesson because I do not recognise what he is describing. There is a profound difference. [ Interruption. ]

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. We cannot have great eruptions of noise any time a Member chooses, for whatever reason, to leave the Chamber. Members will want to listen to Mr Hilary Benn.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The point is this: there is a profound difference between the previous system, which was a way of raising additional finance for our universities, and the enormous reduction in funding for our universities that this increase in fees is based upon. That is why it is completely different.

Photo of Emily Thornberry Emily Thornberry Shadow Minister (Health)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that five hours is hardly enough time for the Liberal Democrats to explain their four different positions?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend is, of course, absolutely right. She anticipates the point I will make later. Of all the issues facing the House at the moment, it is clear that on this issue-for the reasons she has just pointed out-lots and lots of time will be required, so that Members can explain their positions. In the case of the Liberal Democrats, four different positions, at the last count, will have to be explained. There is huge public interest in the matter and, in the light of that, the time proposed is wholly inadequate.

I want to quote what Lord Browne had to say in his foreword to the report, "Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education," which runs to 64 pages. Lord Browne wrote- [ Interruption. ] Hon. Members will see in a moment. I quote:

"In November 2009, I was asked to lead an independent Panel to review the funding of higher education and make recommendations to ensure that teaching"-

Photo of Charlie Elphicke Charlie Elphicke Conservative, Dover

On a point of order, Mr Speaker, the right hon. Gentleman's remarks do not refer to the timings or business of the House.

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his point of order. I am keenly attending to the debate, but I know that he-very distinguished man though he is-would not try to tell me how to do my job.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Lord Browne went on to state:

"Over the last year, we have consulted widely and intensively. Our recommendations are based on written and oral evidence drawn from students, teachers, academics, employers and regulators. We have looked...at every aspect of implementing them - financial, practical and educational - to ensure that the recommendations we are making are realistic for the long term."

The most important words in that quotation are these:

"Over the last year, we have consulted widely and intensively."

[Interruption.]

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

As I said, the quote from Lord Browne is:

"Over the last year, we have consulted widely and intensively."

[ Interruption. ] If hon. Members will be patient, they will see what this has got to do with the business motion before us tonight. Let us compare the length of time that Lord Browne took in preparing his proposals to what is before the House tonight. The Browne committee had a year to consider what it recommended; the House is to be given five hours to consider the recommendations and dispose of them. Everybody else was consulted at length, but MPs are to be given just five hours to express a view.

Photo of George Howarth George Howarth Labour, Knowsley

I wonder whether my right hon. Friend can help me. I have been pondering whether any measure of comparable controversy has ever gone through this House with so little debate and in such a short space of time. Can he help me? Is there any example of that?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

In preparing for the debate this evening, I, too, asked myself that, and I struggled to think of another example of when the House had so little time to consider something so profound.

Nobody can be under any misapprehension about the scale of the change that is being proposed. Lord Browne said:

"What we recommend is a radical departure from the existing way in which HEIs"- higher education institutions-

"are financed...Our recommendations will lead to a significant change".

The plain truth is that the Browne report, which is radical and significant in its implications, has not even been debated in the House yet. Since the report was published, on 12 October 2010, there has been one urgent question, when the Secretary of State was forced to come to the House and explain what was going on, and one ministerial statement, on 3 November. However, there has been no debate at all on the Browne report in Government time-none.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Browne seems to be turning into the hon. Member for Taunting. Is there anything that can be done to allow us to listen to the debate, rather than to his ranting?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

I had been watching and listening closely, and I was conscious-and I was about to comment on the fact-that a rather animated and protracted exchange seemed to be taking place between Ian Lavery and the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Mr Browne. Whether some sort of private salon was taking place I do not know, but it must not do so. We must listen to the debate, so no taunting should take place at all. Let us listen to Mr Hilary Benn.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I think I was in the process of giving way to Pete Wishart.

Photo of Pete Wishart Pete Wishart Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Culture and Sport), Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Constitution)

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman can take this opportunity to remind the House how many hours the Labour party made available to debate tuition fees on the Floor of the House when the previous Government attempted to hike them up.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I will gladly do that. If the hon. Gentleman is patient, I shall come to that point in a moment.

Photo of Huw Irranca-Davies Huw Irranca-Davies Shadow Minister (Energy and Climate Change)

Let me point out to my right hon. Friend that there is indeed a precedent for curtailing debate, and that is where a great deal of consensus exists across the Chamber. Perhaps he can illuminate for me whether there has been some magic movement on the Government Benches in the past few hours, and whether Government Members now agree with us-and with Wales and Scotland-because then we can indeed have a shortened debate.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It would be very nice if that were the case, but I fear that on this occasion the amount of time that the Government want to allocate is in inverse proportion to the consensus. That is the difficulty that we have. The truth is that if the Government could get away with it, they would much prefer the House of Commons not to debate and discuss the proposal at all, so that they could try to get it through on the nod. I can think of no other change in student support that has been put before the House with so little scrutiny or debate.

Photo of Penny Mordaunt Penny Mordaunt Conservative, Portsmouth North

I have to say that I find it deeply ironic that so many Members opposite are now raising concerns about the amount of time for debate. I remember that when I was president of Reading university students' union and was raising concerns with the National Union of Students about the value for money of our affiliation fees, many Members opposite would set the fire alarms off.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I can be held responsible for many things, but I am afraid that the use of fire alarms at the university of Reading is not one of them. [ Interruption. ]

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. There are people chuntering from a sedentary position and urging Penny Mordaunt to name the people who set off the fire alarms. That would be entirely disorderly and we are not going to have it.

Photo of Clive Efford Clive Efford Labour, Eltham

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. You are ahead of me, because I was given the impression that the culprits were present tonight. If that was the case, I was going to ask you to give them the opportunity to stand up and own up to that heinous crime.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. When I was at university, the ones letting off the fire extinguishers were in the Bullingdon club.

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I do not know about fire alarms, but people are certainly letting off steam. They have now done so, and we must return to the important subject of the debate on this relatively narrow motion.

Photo of Jim Fitzpatrick Jim Fitzpatrick Shadow Minister (Transport)

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Sadly, I did not go to university, but during my time in the fire service, setting off fire alarms was considered to be a very irresponsible act.

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

We are all grateful to have the benefit of the hon. Gentleman's experience, and for that recitation of his curriculum vitae, but we must now return to the debate.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

The sense of outrage that is certainly felt on this side of the Chamber is of course shared by those on the Liberal Democrat Benches. Greg Mulholland is not in his place tonight, but he has tabled an early-day motion, which many Members have signed, that makes an eloquent plea for more time.

Photo of Fiona O'Donnell Fiona O'Donnell Labour, East Lothian

Can my right hon. Friend seek some reassurance? Should a fire alarm be set off during the debate tomorrow, would the debate be extended?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I do not think that that is the kind of injury time that the Standing Orders would cover. I am beginning to think that my time at university was somewhat sheltered in comparison to the revelations being made on the Floor of the House this evening. The hon. Member for Leeds North West is making the point that he does not think there has been enough time. He thinks that the proposal should be put to one side so that it can be properly considered.

Photo of Thomas Docherty Thomas Docherty Labour, Dunfermline and West Fife

Earlier, the Leader of the House made the claim-I think it was simply a mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead the House-that Members on this side of the House had had the opportunity to table amendments to the proceedings. Given that the motion was not taken last night, and appeared on the Order Paper only this morning, am I right in thinking that there has been no opportunity for us to table amendments?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

What happened last night was certainly extremely unusual, and the Leader of the House did not seek to enlighten us this evening as to why the Government pulled the plug on their own proposal. Perhaps he anticipated the debate that we were going to have this evening, and the opposition to the motion that was going to be expressed on this side of the Chamber.

Photo of Clive Betts Clive Betts Chair, Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

I am sure that my right hon. Friend really wants to help the Leader of the House to find some additional time, so I refer back to the point made by my hon. Friend Emma Reynolds. We were given an indication last week that an unspecified Bill was going to come before the House next Wednesday. The rumour is that it is the long-awaited and much-heralded localism Bill. There is a further rumour, however, that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is more enthusiastic about that Bill than some of his Cabinet colleagues. If that is the case, can my right hon. Friend give us any more information about whether the Bill has been lost in the fog of Whitehall, and whether there might after all be time to debate this business next Wednesday?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. That is at the very least extremely tangential to the matter that we are supposed to be discussing, and I know that the shadow Leader of the House would not for one moment seek to dilate on the subject of the localism Bill. I know that he is going to proceed with his speech in an orderly way.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. As far as the identity of that Bill is concerned, I was going to observe only that it is a mystery. No doubt all will be revealed to us in due course.

Photo of Gavin Shuker Gavin Shuker Labour, Luton South

As one of the new Members of this House, I am uniquely placed to offer my experience of student debt, as one of the people in the House who still carries such a debt. How many people are likely to be able to speak in a five-hour debate? Newer Members are more likely to be carrying student debt, and they would like to offer their own perspectives on the matter.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a powerful case for us to have more time, precisely so that the experiences of all Members can be brought to bear on this important question, which will affect future generations of students.

Photo of Tom Harris Tom Harris Labour, Glasgow South

The fundamental issue at stake here is that there are genuine arguments for and against tuition fees and for and against the level at which the Government want to set them. I accept that there are arguments on both sides. It is not only Members who should have an opportunity to debate the details that genuinely concern us all; the public have the right to see their legislators spending a decent amount of time doing so. This is not a partisan point. On an issue as important as this, why must we restrict the time for debate? Why can we not have, purely and simply, more time to debate an issue that Members of all parties and the public are both fascinated and worried by?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It seems to me that my hon. Friend makes a powerful case. I would gladly give way to the Leader of the House for an explanation. He did not explain in his speech why so little time has been allocated, so perhaps he would like to explain that now. No, he is not inclined to take that- [Interruption.] Oh, well.

Photo of George Young George Young The Leader of the House of Commons

If the amount of time allocated for this debate is insufficient, why did the right hon. Gentleman not draw the House's attention to it last Thursday? When I announced today's debate on exactly these regulations, he said nothing at all.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It has been very clear for a long time that Labour Members want adequate time to debate this. The way to deal with it is to consider the proposal before us; we will vote against it tonight because inadequate time has been allotted.

Photo of Charlie Elphicke Charlie Elphicke Conservative, Dover

Is it not the case that the shadow Minister failed to spot this last Thursday, failed to move an amendment and has been asleep at the wheel?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

No, I do not accept that. The hon. Gentleman will discover how awake we are on this side when he has to troop through the Lobby to try to vote in favour of this wholly inadequate allocation of time. The really telling comparison is between how this change is being dealt with and how the two previous changes were dealt with. That is why I shall move on to deal with points raised by Members of all parties about how these matters were handled in the past.

The National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, the Dearing review, was set up in May 1996 by the last Conservative Government. It deliberated for 15 months and published its report "Higher education in the learning society" in July 1997. There was then a Government statement and a White Paper "Higher Education in the 21st Century", followed by the publication of the Teaching and Higher Education Bill. That became an Act in 1998 having been debated at proper length. Six hours were allotted to Second Reading alone-an hour more than we are to be allocated tomorrow. There were seven Committee sittings and two days on Report. There is the first comparison.

The second comparison is with the Higher Education Act 2004, which the orders that we will discuss tomorrow are designed to amend. It, too, had six hours on Second Reading-an hour more than we will get tomorrow-and there were 15 sittings in Committee, plus a Report stage.

Photo of Tristram Hunt Tristram Hunt Labour, Stoke-on-Trent Central

Are not the proposed changes as significant as the Robbins report and the transformation of universities during the second half of the 20th century? To put through the marketisation of our entire university structure within five hours is absolutely shameful.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I completely agree with my hon. Friend, who makes an extremely powerful point.

Photo of Alan Whitehead Alan Whitehead Labour, Southampton, Test

My right hon. Friend refers to the orders under the previous legislation, which had to be debated by both Houses on the affirmative basis, following a review, before any decision could be made on future levels of tuition fees. The Leader of the House has sought to suggest that the reason for this debate is entirely encapsulated in that particular piece of legislation. Incidentally, I was involved in assisting with the drafting at the time, so I remember it well. Does my right hon. Friend accept that the intention behind the drafting of those clauses at the time was wholly different from what is being put forward this evening, in terms of what should come up first for discussion, what evidence should be placed before Members to debate before any decision is taken, and when any decision should be taken according to the two resolutions?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The usual order is that we have a committee of inquiry; the Government make a statement; they publish a White Paper, then a Bill; the Bill is considered and then regulations are made. In this case, the process has been reversed. We are being asked to approve the statutory instruments tomorrow in just five hours, before we even know the framework for the future of higher education, because the White Paper will not be published, we are told, until the new year. The cart has truly been put before the horse.

Photo of Albert Owen Albert Owen Labour, Ynys Môn

As my right hon. Friend knows, I have been consistently against tuition fees, and voted against them the last time they were debated in the House of Commons. More importantly, I have signed a pledge with the students union that I will not vote for them to be raised, and I will honour that pledge. Surely we need the kind of debate that we had previously for a Second Reading, so that all those Liberal Democrats who will be breaking their pledge will have the opportunity to explain to students across the country why they are doing so.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend is entirely right. It will be interesting to see how many Liberal Democrats wish to participate in the debate tomorrow.

Photo of Alison McGovern Alison McGovern Labour, Wirral South

My right hon. Friend has explained the normal Bill process, but is he aware that, as a new MP, I have not seen my postbag filled on any other issue as it has been with concerns about tuition fees? I am concerned to raise those points, so that people in Wirral can have their voice heard. Is he aware of the level of concern in Wirral?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing that to my attention. No Member can be unaware of the huge concern expressed through our postbags, emails and other means, about the nature of the proposals.

Photo of Mark Tami Mark Tami Opposition Whip (Commons)

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the media have reported tonight that, despite the Deputy Prime Minister saying that all Lib Dem Ministers will support the proposals, two of them will not be present for the vote? Apparently, however, it is all right, because they will be paired-

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. The trouble with that intervention is that it has nothing to do with the allocation of time. The hon. Gentleman has put his point on the record, and he was very cheeky.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The point made by my hon. Friend Mark Tami may have something to do with the length of time that it would take some of those Ministers to return to cast their vote.

Photo of Chuka Umunna Chuka Umunna Labour, Streatham

Has my right hon. Friend noticed, as I have, the large number of Liberal Democrat Members who are prevaricating and indicating that they may abstain on the issue? Is there not a danger that abstention could be perceived as voting for the motion? Is that not a good argument for extending the time for debate, so that they can come to a decision?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is a powerful point. Last week, I observed that, throughout the ages, Liberal Democrats who have been faced with a tough decision have sat on the fence. I suspect that we will see that tomorrow.

Photo of Angela Smith Angela Smith Opposition Assistant Whip (Commons)

Is it not the case that the proposals before the House tomorrow radically redraw the relationship between the state and the individual? Are they not predicated on an 80% reduction in funding for teaching? Is it not appalling that an SI should be used for such a radical shift in Government policy?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It certainly is. The 80% reduction is implicit in the statutory instruments that we will consider tomorrow, and it is the cause of those statutory instruments, but we will not have a proper opportunity to debate that.

Photo of Emily Thornberry Emily Thornberry Shadow Minister (Health)

What is a member of the public switching on the Parliament channel to make of this? We could spend more time tonight debating how much time we should be allocated than we will spend debating the proposals tomorrow. How ironic is that? By making petty points about how we should have tabled an amendment here or there to extend the time, Government Members show how out of touch they are. Mothers watching television tonight, desperately worried about their children's future, will feel that we should be ashamed. Why do we not spend tonight debating this matter, and tomorrow as well?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree with my hon. Friend, but the answer lies in the hands of the Leader of the House, who has shown a willingness tonight to devote more time to debating the allocation of time than he is prepared to give to debating the proposals themselves.

Photo of Jim Cunningham Jim Cunningham Labour, Coventry South

Some of us have universities in our constituencies, and many students will be coming down here tomorrow. It is no wonder that students are adopting an angry attitude in the streets when they find out we will have only five hours for the debate. When the Government were in opposition, they used to complain about our guillotines, and we always gave way on time. I am surprised that the Leader of the House, who is usually a reasonable man, has taken us down this road.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree. I have a great deal of respect for the Leader of the House, but I must say that I do not think he has done his job properly on this occasion.

Photo of Grahame Morris Grahame Morris Labour, Easington

Will we have an opportunity, in such a limited time, to raise issues that constituents have raised with us, particularly the withdrawal of funds in July next year from the excellent Aimhigher programme, which will pull up the ladder of opportunity? [Interruption.] Perhaps the hon. Member for Tipton, who is shouting derisory comments-[Hon. Members: "Taunton."] I mean Mr Browne, but perhaps he will be tipped on tomorrow. Anyway, given the limited time allotted to tomorrow's debate, I do not believe that we will have an opportunity to raise valid concerns, such as the fact that children from disadvantaged backgrounds such as those in the area that I represent will be disadvantaged further.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend has made a powerful point. Judging by the attendance in the Chamber tonight, and because so little time has been allotted, I fear that there will not be time for all the Members who will want to participate in tomorrow's debate to have a chance to express their views to the House.

Photo of Naomi Long Naomi Long Alliance, Belfast East

Although on the face of it the issue at stake is tuition fees in England, the proposal will have profound effects on students from Northern Ireland-and, indeed, those in Northern Ireland. Given the restricted time that we will have in which to debate it, it is unlikely that those of us who represent those students will be able to make our case fully tomorrow. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be wise to allow us to do so, in the light of the profound implications both for students from Northern Ireland and for those who study there?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree. The proposal does indeed have profound ramifications and implications for students not only in England but in other parts of the United Kingdom, which is why we need more time.

Photo of Huw Irranca-Davies Huw Irranca-Davies Shadow Minister (Energy and Climate Change)

In view of the anomalies that the Bill will throw up west of Offa's dyke, north of Hadrian's wall and so on, does my right hon. Friend think that there will be enough time for us to deal with the subject of the potential migration flows as students and their families-who know that there have always been cross-border issues over health-suddenly realise that there will also be cross-border issues over tuition fees, and that whereas Scotland and Wales are doing the right thing, the tripling of tuition fees will be rammed down the throats of students in England because of the unholy alliance on the Government Benches?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend has made a powerful point, which I am sure that he and other Members will seek to put to the Minister tomorrow. As he says, time is required for us to be able to consider all the ramifications of the proposals, and the plain fact is that we are not being given enough time to do that.

Photo of Geraint Davies Geraint Davies Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (Substitute Member)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that members of all generations up and down the land will think that giving the House five hours in which to discuss the denial of access of whole generations, from whole communities, to the higher education that could change the life chances of millions of people is a complete disgrace? Should we not hasten the electrification of the railway line to Wales, so that people can have a proper opportunity to benefit from higher education?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I think that you would rule me out of order if I commented on the electrification of the railway line to Wales, Mr Speaker.

Photo of Robert Halfon Robert Halfon Conservative, Harlow

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Would you kindly give the House-and me, as a new Member-guidance on how many important debates were curtailed to five hours by the last Government, so that we can introduce some balance to this evening's debate?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

The short answer is that if the question is of interest to the hon. Gentleman, he can always undertake the necessary research. I am afraid that it is not the responsibility of the Chair to provide the answer to it tonight.

Photo of Adrian Bailey Adrian Bailey Chair, Business, Innovation and Skills Committee

I believe that I heard a Labour Member refer to a Member on the Government Benches as "the hon. Member for Tipton". Just in case there is any confusion among my electors, may I make it clear that I represent the beautiful town of Tipton, and that I will be supporting my right hon. Friend Hilary Benn and the Opposition tomorrow?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am sure my hon. Friend's constituents will be very glad to have heard that clarification.

Photo of David Lammy David Lammy Labour, Tottenham

Is my right hon. Friend aware that just as this House is being denied a full debate, the Minister responsible for universities, who is on the Front Bench now, has been invited to sit-ins at the London School of Economics and the School of Oriental and African Studies but has not attended? Is it my right hon. Friend's expectation that the Minister will go and talk to the students who will be gathering in this House and outside before the debate and after it tomorrow-

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think that the very least the architect of the policy could do, particularly in view of the pledge he signed before the election, is go and talk to students and explain why he has changed his mind.

Photo of Kerry McCarthy Kerry McCarthy Shadow Minister (Treasury)

Many Members have tonight mentioned the fact that constituents of theirs-students and potential students-will be coming down tomorrow to lobby their MPs. Is my right hon. Friend aware that under the "#" tag "name and shame" on Twitter there is a growing list of names of MPs from the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties who have refused to meet the students coming down tomorrow? I suspect they are refusing to meet them tomorrow because they will be too busy attending tomorrow's debate. Does that not suggest that we ought to postpone tomorrow's debate so that they have time to meet their constituents who are coming down tomorrow?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. There is mounting evidence that Members are referring to matters outside the Chamber as a not very subtle ruse to try to get their point across in the House, but unfortunately they are then almost always outwith the terms of the motion. We have had a few examples of that, but I hope we will not have any more. Mr Hilary Benn.

Photo of Vernon Coaker Vernon Coaker Shadow Minister (Home Affairs)

As my right hon. Friend knows, thousands of students from places throughout the country, including Nottingham, will be arriving in London tomorrow. As we shall debate this issue for only five hours, which I think most of those students and their families will find simply incredible, has my right hon. Friend had any discussions with the Leader of the House about informing all those students how this House arrived at that five-hour limit? Have any special arrangements been made to inform them about the decision that has been made to curtail the debate, so that they are properly informed?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I had hoped that in moving the motion this evening the Leader of the House would have enlightened us on that very point, but I am afraid no elucidation at all was offered as to the amount of time given to us.

I want to come on to one of the problems that we may face tomorrow. Although what is on offer now-

Photo of Michael McCann Michael McCann Labour, East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow

Will my right hon. Friend give way? I have an important point to make.

Photo of Michael McCann Michael McCann Labour, East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow

I have a specific point I want to make about time. In three minutes' time, constituents in the frozen Lanarkshire district, which includes my constituency, will be donning several layers of clothing and getting their ice picks and shovels out to dig their way out of their homes, so that they can meet up at their selected departure points and travel down for tomorrow's debate. They will be leaving Lanarkshire on the M74 at about 9 pm-if they get there in time, given the horrendous weather conditions. They will be travelling overnight to get here, and they will arrive to find that, having spent over 21 hours getting here and knowing that they are going to face the same journey back, this subject will be debated for only five hours. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is an outrage to our democracy?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, to whom I listened courteously, but there must be no further dilation on the subject of the motorway network. I do not think that that will aid our debate. I know that the shadow Leader of the House will respond to the hon. Gentleman's point briefly, and then develop his further arguments.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree with my hon. Friend. It is an outrage, as I indicated earlier.

I wanted to say something about the amount of time that we may actually get tomorrow to debate this subject. Although the five hours that we have been offered is a 30-minute improvement on the previous period allocated, it is not absolutely guaranteed. That is because although the Leader of the House has just told us that the Government do not intend to make any statements tomorrow, it is possible that some matter may arise. You, Mr Speaker, may receive a request for an urgent question, and if that is granted we would lose time, as we will if Government Back Benchers suddenly decide they want to raise numerous lengthy points of order. If either of those eventualities arose, the British public and Members of the House would be denied even the paltry five hours being offered by the Leader of the House.

Photo of Fiona Mactaggart Fiona Mactaggart Shadow Minister (Equalities Office)

We have all noted the restraint that the Speaker has exercised as people have strayed beyond the terms of this motion. But does he not share the concern that my constituents, and I believe his, will feel when they see the House debating what they see as a technical matter and not debating what they wish us to debate, which is the principle of whether education should be the business of the state or a purely private matter, which it will become as a result of the debate tomorrow?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point; indeed, she anticipates something that I am going to refer to a little later in my speech. It is about the nature of the debate that we may find that we are allowed, or not allowed, to have because we will be debating a statutory instrument rather the White Paper, which has not been published.

Photo of Karen Buck Karen Buck Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)

Many of the students who have been in touch with me recently have expressed their concern about the fact that the withdrawal of the state from education is directed particularly at people studying the arts, social sciences and related subjects. Does my right hon. Friend believe that there will be time tomorrow to discuss not only the impact of tuition fees, but the very nature of the kind of higher education that we as a society want to value?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. To answer her very direct question, I fear that we will not have enough time to examine that, and many other aspects.

Photo of Andrew Slaughter Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

Notwithstanding the fact that the Deputy Prime Minister has just said on Channel 4 that his conscience is clear-so he would presumably like to debate this subject at length-does my right hon. Friend agree that the reason why this debate is being curtailed is to protect the Liberal Democrats? The clue to that lies in what Chris Davies MEP says in his blog:

"Splits weaken parties, and sometimes destroy them. The reputation of the Liberal Democrat brand is being undermined with each passing hour as the impression grows stronger that on the issue of tuition fees we are not only divided but clueless...In short, we are creating the impression not just of being weak, but of being a joke."

We should share that joke with this House, if we had sufficient time to debate this issue properly.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The point that my hon. Friend has just made illustrates clearly why we need more time tomorrow to examine the position of the Liberal Democrats, in all their splendour.

Photo of Nick Raynsford Nick Raynsford Labour, Greenwich and Woolwich

Is there not a wider and more profound issue at stake here? It relates to legislation, or changes in the law, that are railroaded through this House without adequate time for debate, and what happens when the public outside do not believe that this House has been doing its job properly and scrutinising those changes in the law. When such legislation-the classic example of which was the poll tax-is carried, it will never command the support of the public and the public will never believe that it is being instituted for the right reasons. Are the Government not in real danger of repeating the disaster of the poll tax with this ill-conceived, railroaded piece of legislation on tuition fees?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My right hon. Friend speaks with unique authority and force on that subject. He is giving the House a very clear warning, because if people do not feel that the House of Commons-their elected representatives-has been given adequate time to debate this very profound change, they will be even more angry than they are already.

Photo of Nicholas Dakin Nicholas Dakin Labour, Scunthorpe

I was the principal of a sixth-form college until recently, and I have spent my lifetime working with young people-16 to 19-year-olds. The message being given to young people about how decisions about their future are made in this House disturbs me. What does it say if we cannot give the right amount of time to this, and cannot give them the right message that this really matters, that we care about them-and care enough to share our views in full fashion, over as much time as it takes to make the right decision?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a good point: the House would be setting a very bad example to young people if it passed the motion tonight.

Photo of Clive Efford Clive Efford Labour, Eltham

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one reason why it is dangerous for Back Benchers on both sides of the House, and particularly on the Government side, to allow the Executive to truncate debate or the consideration of a Bill is that it limits the scope of Back Benchers to influence Front Benchers? He will recall that when we were setting the cap that we will discuss in the debate tomorrow, which we are now debating, it was Labour Back Benchers who threatened not to support their Government, and made them set it lower. We are not hearing anything of that sort from the Government Benches tonight. If the desire is there to make a change, it is up to Government Back Benchers, especially Liberal Democrat MPs.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Tomorrow the eyes of the House will be on Liberal Democrat Members in particular. Everybody knows that how they choose to vote will determine whether this proposal goes through or not.

Photo of Clive Efford Clive Efford Labour, Eltham

And whether they make that change.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Indeed. Back Benchers have the opportunity tonight to decide whether the motion will be passed. That is why I hope that as many as possible will join us in the Lobby to vote it down.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. As the Leader of the House has ignored the moment of interruption in his motion, by setting 5.30 as the time for the end of the debate tomorrow, is there any procedure by which a manuscript amendment could be tabled during the course of this debate, to extend tomorrow's debate up until the normal moment of interruption, when any debate on a Thursday should end?

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

The short answer to the hon. Gentleman is that it is open to any Member to table a manuscript amendment. Whether the amendment is selected is a matter for the Chair. The Chair would consider a manuscript amendment if and when it were submitted. That is the situation.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am sure that the House is extremely grateful for that guidance, Mr Speaker.

Photo of Hazel Blears Hazel Blears Labour, Salford and Eccles

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. Does he agree that one of the greatest achievements in recent years has been extending participation to young people from disadvantaged communities? Salford university takes 45% of its students from the local area, and that includes many young people who otherwise would not have the chance to go to university. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the curtailment of the debate tomorrow will mean that the voices of those particularly disadvantaged young people will not be heard?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is the case. With five hours, there will be an opportunity for only a relatively small number of Members to participate in the debate. The number of Members who have sought to intervene in this debate tonight is a pretty good indication of the number who will want to speak tomorrow.

Photo of Richard Fuller Richard Fuller Conservative, Bedford

I am new to this House, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it is therefore difficult for me to differentiate between posturing and principle, but I think I am getting a lesson in it tonight from the right hon. Gentleman. The idea of debate is not only to make one's own point but to listen. Too frequently in debates, right hon. and hon. Members make their points and then leave the Chamber. Will the shadow Leader of the House assure us that the Opposition speakers in tomorrow's debate will be in their places for the entire five hours of the debate? Or will there be a lot of popping in and then popping out when they have made their posturing points?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Order. Even interventions must be relevant to the debate that we are having this evening. The subject of who will attend tomorrow is not a matter for Mr Benn.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The point was indeed irrelevant and, I think, inconsequential.

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

I am grateful yet again to my right hon. Friend for giving way, and for the generosity that he has shown in doing so. I am following his speech with great interest. I look forward to taking part in the debate tomorrow, if I should catch the eye of Mr Speaker or of one of the Deputy Speakers-and, indeed, if there is time. Does my right hon. Friend wish to comment, however, given the short amount of time that will be available, on how much time-should I be able to catch the eye of the occupant of the Chair and make my point, along with other colleagues-the occupants of the Government Front Bench will have to respond to the points made by Opposition Members? How will the Government be able to answer the points that we raise, given that there is such a short time for the debate?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. The large number of matters that Members will undoubtedly wish to raise tomorrow will only add to the pressure on time, if Ministers are even to begin to attempt to answer them all.

Photo of Emma Reynolds Emma Reynolds Shadow Minister (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs)

I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. I agree entirely with my right hon. Friend Hazel Blears, who expressed the concern that she has many potentially disadvantaged students in her constituency; I do too, and I should like to have the time to represent their concerns tomorrow. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Leader of the House was disingenuous in suggesting that we had sufficient time-

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Order. I do not think that the hon. Lady should accuse the Leader of the House of being disingenuous. I am sure she would like to rephrase that.

Photo of Emma Reynolds Emma Reynolds Shadow Minister (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs)

I apologise to the Leader of the House. He said only moments ago that we had sufficient time to debate these issues in the Opposition day debate, but does my right hon. Friend agree that, as the Government made a statement on that day, tomorrow will be the second time they have tried to curtail the time allowed to debate this issue?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is indeed the case. The Leader of the House's idea of sufficient time is not our idea of sufficient time.

Photo of Tom Harris Tom Harris Labour, Glasgow South

In my right hon. Friend's considered opinion, what would have been the chances of the Deputy Leader of the House supporting this programme motion had it been moved by a Labour Government? Should not this Damascene conversion to the value of the programme motion at least be counted in the top-10 Liberal Democrat U-turns of 2010?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

There are many U-turns fighting to get into that top-10 list, but my hon. Friend makes a good point. Had the roles been reversed, the Deputy Leader of the House would have been fulminating from the Dispatch Box about how outrageous it was. He could have the opportunity to do so now, but I see that he simply wants to remain in his place.

I should like to make a suggestion about how we could guarantee even the inadequate amount of time given so far. We have just had very helpful guidance from the Speaker about making manuscript amendments, and the Leader of the House could amend his own motion to ensure that there would be injury time if an urgent question were to be granted or if extensive time were taken up with points of order. I know that the right hon. Gentleman is not a fan of injury time and I suspect that is because the coalition Government are not terribly keen on having a full and open debate on the matter in hand.

There is another reason why more time is required. The measures we are being asked to vote on tomorrow cannot be described as the original proposals of Lord Browne. That is why my earlier quotation was relevant. When Lord Browne produced his report, he said that his proposals had to be considered together, but we now know that the Government's plans differ from those of Lord Browne. That is very pertinent to the argument about why more time is required, especially when one bears in mind that the Government have had no debate in their own time on Lord Browne's proposals.

Photo of Meg Munn Meg Munn Labour, Sheffield, Heeley

Further to the point that my hon. Friend Clive Efford made, would not a greater amount of time and a longer process allow Back Benchers on both sides and the official Opposition to make alternative proposals so that at the end of the process there would be much greater consensus, as there was in 2004?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is indeed the case. Hon. Members are being denied that opportunity because the Government have chosen to put the cart before the horse.

Photo of Roberta Blackman-Woods Roberta Blackman-Woods Shadow Minister (Cabinet Office)

Does my right hon. Friend share my frustration that the Deputy Prime Minister came to my constituency the day before the election to reinforce his pledge not to raise tuition fees, but that because of the lack of time tomorrow I will not have the opportunity to challenge Liberal Democrat Members on why they are breaking that pledge?

Photo of John Robertson John Robertson Labour, Glasgow North West

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. There seems to be a lot of chuntering from a Government Whip, making remarks about my hon. Friend Roberta Blackman-Woods. Is that in order, and is he allowed to do it?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

I did not hear any remarks myself, and there is quite a lot of noise in the Chamber, which makes it difficult for all Members of the House to hear. It would be best at this time if we could proceed. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for drawing this matter to my attention, but I do not think that it is a point of order.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was about to give way-

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you please clarify something for me? Are Government Whips entitled to take part in debate? My understanding is that they are not. If they are not entitled to take part in debate, why is that happening?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

As I understand it, any Member is entitled to speak in a debate in the House. There may be conventions that are normally followed, but remarks, comments or shouting across the Chamber from a sedentary position in order to disrupt the debate are not permitted. I am sure that nobody will do that.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was about to respond to the intervention made by my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham. Yes, many people in the country have watched the video that the Deputy Prime Minister made in which he uttered the pledge. [Interruption.] It has to do with the time because we need to hear from Liberal Democrats-perhaps we will be lucky and hear from the Deputy Prime Minister in tomorrow's debate, but who knows?-and we need time for an explanation of what exactly happened between the making of that pledge and the U-turn that he has performed in introducing these proposals tonight.

Photo of Sheila Gilmore Sheila Gilmore Labour, Edinburgh East

Does my right hon. Friend agree that we need more time to get the information about the various proposals that have been trailed through the press this week, which the Government suggest would justify to the House and to the public an increase in fees? Tomorrow's debate would enable that if there were time. A number of suggestions have been made-for example, on those students who might get financial assistance. Do we not need time to hear the details of that before the House is asked to vote?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

We do indeed. One of the big problems that Members will face tomorrow is that we do not yet have a lot of the information, and a lot of the questions that have been asked have not yet been answered. How on earth is the House meant to make up its mind on a fundamental part of these proposals in the absence of all that?

Photo of Jim McGovern Jim McGovern Labour, Dundee West

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Liberal Democrats will never be knowingly understood? If we locked two Lib Dems in a room, we would get three political opinions coming out. Five hours is not nearly enough time to try to work out what the Lib Dems think.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I fear that even five days may leave us none the wiser as to the position of the Liberal Democrats, but we live in hope.

Photo of Huw Irranca-Davies Huw Irranca-Davies Shadow Minister (Energy and Climate Change)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Pursuant to the point of order made by my hon. Friend Kevin Brennan, may I ask you to explain the tabling of a manuscript amendment? There are many new Members here in the House, and people will be watching and listening to the proceedings. Not everyone will be familiar with the tabling of a manuscript amendment, so it would be of great benefit to the House to know how difficult or how simple it is.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

I am grateful for that point of order, but rather than take up time in the debate I suggest that any Member who needs clarification on how to table a manuscript amendment should go to the Clerk to ask for guidance. Perhaps we can return to the debate.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I also recommend "Erskine May", which is lying on the Table and explains fully how to lay manuscript amendments-

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Thank you- [ Interruption. ] Thank you very much, Mr Brennan. I am eternally grateful. I would like us to focus now on the debate.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I happen to have a copy of "Erskine May" and am very happy to lend it to my hon. Friend, as long as he gives it back to me, because I intend to quote from it a little later.

Photo of Thomas Docherty Thomas Docherty Labour, Dunfermline and West Fife

I think I heard the Leader of the House correctly when he appeared to indicate earlier that the Government Front Bench might be prepared to restrict the amount of time they take when opening tomorrow's debate. The concern that many Opposition Members will have, however, is not only that the Business Secretary will not have time to use his fancy footwork to explain exactly how he has made such a U-turn, but that Opposition Members will not have the opportunity to tease out of the Government exactly what their policies mean. It is simply unacceptable to use that substitute in order to avoid difficult questions.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend is, indeed, right. The Leader of the House could indicate now what self-denying ordinance or otherwise Ministers will adopt in order to give Members as much time as possible for debate. There is a fundamental problem, however, because Ministers want to say a lot on the matter, and they should rightly have that opportunity, but Members want to raise a lot of points, too, and we cannot fit it all into the five hours for which the motion provides.

Photo of Emily Thornberry Emily Thornberry Shadow Minister (Health)

On the issue of time, and for the 10,000 students who live in halls of residence and attend university in my constituency, I should like to put it on the record that I sat all the way through the previous Opposition day debate, hoping to be called, and would very much like to be called tomorrow.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am sure that the occupant of the Chair will have noticed that advance bid, but I fear that tomorrow many Members will end up disappointed because not enough time has been allocated for the debate.

Photo of Paul Farrelly Paul Farrelly Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme

Is my right hon. Friend aware of all the details of the business due to come forth tomorrow? Can he satisfy himself that we will actually get five hours and not fewer?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is the point I advanced a moment ago, because whether we get the full five hours depends very much on what happens before the debate. I fear that we might not, which shows just how inadequate the motion is.

Photo of Jim Sheridan Jim Sheridan Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North

My right hon. Friend will recall that before the election the then Opposition objected very strongly to non-English MPs voting on matters such as tuition fees. Has he had any indication or representation from the Government on whether they still hold the same position?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am afraid I cannot give my hon. Friend any guidance on that at all. Perhaps a Minister on the Treasury Bench would like to answer his question. I would very happily give way if they wanted to inform the House.

Photo of Madeleine Moon Madeleine Moon Labour, Bridgend

Perhaps one reason why there is no objection to Welsh and Scottish Back Benchers debating the issue is that we in Wales, through the Assembly Government, have not only ensured that students do not suffer the draconian decrease in university course funding, but very importantly decided to cut the teaching grant not by 80%, but by only a very small 38%, improving Welsh universities and providing opportunities at them for higher degrees and research.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a very powerful point about why we need the time to debate at length the impact that the change will have.

Photo of Steve McCabe Steve McCabe Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The clock in the Chamber is not working properly. Is that another device to con us out of more hours for debate?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

The clock seems to me to be working fine. If the hon. Gentleman has a problem, perhaps he will come to the Chair. I am sure that Members are riveted by the debate and time will fly by.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing my attention to that clock. I fancied that I had been speaking for slightly longer than four minutes, but who knows?

Photo of Huw Irranca-Davies Huw Irranca-Davies Shadow Minister (Energy and Climate Change)

Time is indeed flying. I think that I have worked out how we will have enough time. My hon. Friend Luciana Berger said earlier that if all hon. Members were to speak, we would have roughly 50 seconds each. From the showing tonight, there is no indication that Government Members want to take part in the debate. We will therefore have about one and a half or two minutes each. Does my right hon. Friend consider two minutes to be adequate to reflect the postbags of Opposition Members?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It is completely inadequate. We have, however, found a solution for tomorrow, because if we could ensure that that is the clock by which the debate is timed, all right hon. and hon. Members might have the opportunity to participate.

Photo of Tom Harris Tom Harris Labour, Glasgow South

Further to the points of order made earlier by my hon. Friend Kevin Brennan and my hon. Friend Huw Irranca-Davies, Madam Deputy Speaker. If the Chair were to accept a manuscript amendment, how much time would be allocated to debating that change, and would that time be added on to the time that we already have for tomorrow's debate?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

That is a hypothetical question. We should wait to see whether there is a manuscript amendment, and for Mr Speaker's subsequent decision.

Photo of Kerry McCarthy Kerry McCarthy Shadow Minister (Treasury)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wonder whether it is in order for you to reveal to the House how many people have applied to speak tomorrow? That is pertinent to how long we need for tomorrow's debate.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

That would not be in order. I therefore suggest that we return to Mr Hilary Benn's comments from the Dispatch Box.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you clarify-this point is pertinent and not hypothetical-whether a manuscript amendment that is tabled tonight will be discussed tonight or tomorrow?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

If a manuscript amendment were tabled and it was selected for tonight's debate, it would be debated tonight. As one has not been tabled, the hon. Gentleman is still asking a hypothetical question.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

A moment ago, I was pointing out that the proposals that the Government have decided to adopt are different from those that Lord Browne proposed. He said that student numbers should rise by 10% over the next three years, that there should be clawback to deter unnecessarily high fees and that there should be the right to go to university, determined by academic qualifications. We need more time to discuss the report, precisely because the Government have not adopted all its recommendations. We have not had a chance to debate that matter.

Photo of William Bain William Bain Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Is it my right hon. Friend's view that five hours is enough time to address the points that have been put to me by staff and students at the university of Glasgow, which is in the constituency of my hon. Friend Ann McKechin? Indeed, I believe that the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills was a lecturer at that institution some years ago. I am not sure that he would get a very warm welcome if he went there tomorrow. The staff and students put important points to me, such as the cut of £400 million in the Scottish block grant, the increase in the number of EU students and the hugely damaging effects that there will be on social mobility for a generation of Scottish students. Does my right hon. Friend think that five hours is enough time to discuss those important points?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Undoubtedly, it is not enough time. My hon. Friend makes an extremely powerful point.

Photo of Julie Hilling Julie Hilling Labour, Bolton West

Will my right hon. Friend enlighten me on whether we will discuss student bursaries in tomorrow's debate? I believe that should be the subject of its own debate and not be crammed into the five hours that we will have tomorrow. If bursaries are paid for by universities, universities that draw from the poorest people in the population, such as the university of Bolton, will be badly disadvantaged. There will be no similar effect on universities such as Oxford and Cambridge.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Order. Whether that would be in order is a matter for the Chair. Mr Benn is addressing today's debate, so perhaps we can get on with it.

Photo of Gavin Shuker Gavin Shuker Labour, Luton South

Will my right hon. Friend give way?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I will respond to the point made by my hon. Friend Julie Hilling before I take any further interventions. She raises precisely the type of matter that needs to be explored properly and fully in the debate tomorrow. The fact that we will have inadequate time means that we run the risk of its not being addressed.

Photo of Angela Smith Angela Smith Opposition Assistant Whip (Commons)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. As most of us do not have the benefit of having the time to look at "Erskine May" during the debate, may I ask for your guidance on whether a manuscript amendment would have any impact on any attempt by the Government to move the closure of the debate?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

I have already explained to Members that if they want specific advice on the tabling or effects of a manuscript amendment, they should speak to the Clerks. Then they will get the answers to their questions about how such an amendment may or may not affect the debate.

Photo of Andrew Slaughter Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

As the debate goes on, does it not become obvious how grotesquely short five hours is? It took the Liberal Democrats an hour and a half in Committee Room 11 yesterday to narrow down their voting options to four. It will take five hours for the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills to explain the different positions that he has taken in interviews over the past week. My constituents want us to get on to the real issue, which will not happen in a five-hour debate.

Photo of Paul Farrelly Paul Farrelly Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are now only 21 hours, give or take a minute, from now until the moment of interruption tomorrow? Depending on how long the debate goes on tonight, Members may need some time to recover so that they are in full possession of their wits for tomorrow's debate. Would it not be better to delay tomorrow's debate until next week at least?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

A very powerful case has been made this evening for providing more time, and given where we are now, the only way in which more time could be provided would indeed be for the matter to be put off until another occasion.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The hon. Gentleman is going to have another go.

Photo of Nadhim Zahawi Nadhim Zahawi Conservative, Stratford-on-Avon

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that ending the debate tomorrow at 5.30 pm will provide ample time for the Leader of the Opposition to join the protestors outside?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The Leader of the Opposition needs no lectures from the hon. Gentleman about talking to students and, more importantly, listening to what students have to say-a problem from which Members on the Government Benches are suffering.

Photo of Kerry McCarthy Kerry McCarthy Shadow Minister (Treasury)

I happen to have in my hand a piece of paper that has miraculously appeared. According to the Speaker's office, 26 Labour Members have so far applied to speak tomorrow and, we are told, a lot more from the Government side of the House have done so too. Is that not a clear indication that five hours will not be enough time for people to have their say?

Photo of Jim Sheridan Jim Sheridan Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Following on from the comment of Nadhim Zahawi, tomorrow thousands of students will be coming to the capital of the UK from all over the country, wishing to get access to their MPs, because many MPs have temporary notices up in their constituency offices. Can you assure us that those responsible students who come to the House tomorrow seeking access to their MPs will be given access, and that those MPs will be notified that people are looking for them?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

I am assured that proper arrangements will be made, as always on these occasions, by the Speaker and the House authorities.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am not in the least bit surprised that so many Members have put in to participate in the debate tomorrow. The information that my hon. Friend Kerry McCarthy has just given the House demonstrates the complete inadequacy of the time that we are being offered, because it is very hard to see how all those Members will be able to participate in the debate.

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for his continued generosity and his superb speech. Will he give some thought to the fact that we are expecting unprecedented levels of security tomorrow in and around the Palace of Westminster? Right hon. and hon. Members may have difficulty getting to the Chamber to take part in the debate, and some Members who have a burning desire to be here to represent their constituents might take considerable time to get here. Five hours therefore might not be adequate.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It is very important that Members of whatever party have full and ready access to the House, particularly tomorrow, given the importance of the subject of the debate and the significance of the vote that we will cast-if the business motion is passed-at about 5.30 pm tomorrow.

Photo of Michael McCann Michael McCann Labour, East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow

My constituents will be making their way down for tomorrow's debate from the frozen north, but may I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to an article in The Daily Telegraph last Thursday on the constitutional implications of having such vastly different tuition fee arrangements in the different parts of the UK, and the difficulties that that will create? Does he think that five hours is enough to discuss those issues?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Undoubtedly, that is not enough time. If the number of Members who have already indicated that they want to speak is anything to go by, they could have, depending on the length of speeches by Front Benchers, about four minutes each or even less. How can any Member advance a reasonable argument in that inadequate amount of time?

Photo of Geraint Davies Geraint Davies Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (Substitute Member)

My right hon. Friend will know that the Government's proposals will deter poorer students from going to university, but allow less able students from public schools to do so because of their financial means. Does he agree that Government Members who have not-very-able children in public schools should declare an interest? Will there be time in five hours to make all those declarations of interest?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am not sure that the current Register of Members' Financial Interests extends that far. Hon. Members will want to make a lot of points in tomorrow's debate. Indeed, as this evening progresses, we will hear from other hon. Members who will want to speak tomorrow. That reinforces the point that the Leader of the House has now perhaps taken on board; namely, that it would have been much more sensible to have given us enough time to debate the proposals than to debate the problems tonight.

Photo of Gavin Shuker Gavin Shuker Labour, Luton South

My hon. Friend Kerry McCarthy advanced the point that 26 Labour Members have placed a note with Mr Speaker, but it occurs to me that that may not reflect the true number of those who want to speak in that five-hour period. Both Government and Opposition Members may want to indicate their wish to speak tomorrow as we discuss the provision of time tonight.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Indeed-that may well be the case. As the evening wears on and as the sense of anger grows among Opposition Members at the inadequacy of the time, more Members will probably be encouraged to go to Mr Speaker's office to indicate that they wish to take part in tomorrow's debate.

Photo of Owen Smith Owen Smith Shadow Minister (Wales)

Is it not instructive and illustrative that we will have just five hours tomorrow to debate the Government's proposals? Does that not tell us, as we heard from the Leader of the Opposition today, just how extraordinarily out of touch the Government are with ordinary working people in this country? The measures will be a strong disincentive to those people to go to our universities. That is why the debate deserves far more than five hours. It is not us who deserves more than five hours, but those students.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I could not put it better myself.

Several hon. Members:

rose -

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I shall make a little progress and give way later.

The Government of the day would normally have published a White Paper before asking us to vote on such proposals. I have inquired at the Vote Office, but it does not have a White Paper, because the Business, Innovation and Skills Secretary has not yet published one. On reflection, that is quite extraordinary. We will be asked in a few hours-less than 21 hours-to take a decision that will pre-empt the whole of the Government's policy on higher education without our having a chance to find out what that is. It is interesting that the explanatory memorandum that accompanies the Higher Education (Basic Amount) (England) Regulations 2010 states:

"The Regulations raising the basic and higher amounts are the first elements in the reform package to be presented for Parliamentary approval. Without prejudice to their subsequent proper Parliamentary consideration, the Government believes it is appropriate to refer in this Memorandum to the other elements of the funding and finance package in the context of which the new basic and higher amounts are made."

These are not the first elements: these statutory instruments are the consequences of other decisions that the Government have already made.

Photo of Tristram Hunt Tristram Hunt Labour, Stoke-on-Trent Central

Is not that very much the point, because what we face tomorrow is a bridgehead for an extraordinary revolution in higher education on which we deserve a full debate about the consequences? Five and a half hours will not begin to do justice to the issue.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It certainly will not, which is why we need more time.

Photo of Pete Wishart Pete Wishart Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Culture and Sport), Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Constitution)

The right hon. Gentleman has now been speaking for an hour and a half. Does he feel like stopping? As we have only five and a half hours tomorrow, will he promise not to make another speech like this one?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

That is a trifle ungenerous, because I am trying to assist the House so that it will have enough time tomorrow to debate this.

Paragraph 8.1 of the explanatory memorandum on the consultation outcome is germane, because it states:

"These Regulations are informed by Lord Browne's review which took evidence from students, teachers, academics, employers and regulators over a period of almost a year. The need to provide clarity for students and universities about the contributions they can expect to make and receive means that the timetable for laying the Regulations has been highly compressed, and this has prevented a separate external consultation exercise on the Government's proposals."

Highly compressed? It is more like "cut and run", because that is what we are dealing with tonight.

Photo of Stella Creasy Stella Creasy Labour, Walthamstow

May I just put on record how important it is for me that this motion is opposed and we have proper time to debate? Like my hon. Friend Emily Thornberry, I put my name down for the Opposition day debate on higher education because of the hundreds of families in Walthamstow who have contacted me because they are deeply concerned about the increases in tuition fees. I am serving on the Public Bill Committee considering the National Insurance Contributions Bill tomorrow and so will not be able to participate during the meagre five-hour debate. If we do not have proper time to debate this issue, I fear that I will not be able to raise the concerns of the people of Walthamstow, so I hope that my right hon. Friend is successful.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's support. I am sure that her constituents, like those of other hon. Members, would wish their representative to have the opportunity to participate in the debate tomorrow.

Photo of Chris Williamson Chris Williamson Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

My right hon. Friend may not be aware that the number of Labour Members wishing to speak in the debate tomorrow has now swelled to at least 28. I am one of those Members who sought to speak in the debate last week, but I was unable to catch Mr Speaker's eye because of the lack of time. In view of the importance that my constituents place on this issue, does my right hon. Friend agree that allocating only five hours is totally inadequate to allow me and my right hon. and hon. Friends an opportunity to articulate the concerns of our constituents so that they feel that their views are adequately taken into account?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I certainly do. I hope that the force and the number of interventions that I have taken this evening will have some impact on Government Front Benchers and, even at this late stage, they will think again about the time that they have allocated.

Photo of Steve McCabe Steve McCabe Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak

I am another of those who have been denied the opportunity to represent their constituents by the Leader of the House. Should it not be abundantly clear to him now that his motion does not reflect the mood of the House? Will not the watching public suspect that a fix has been attempted because the Government cannot defend the policy that they are about to impose on young people?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. The number and strength of the interventions that we have heard this evening are for a specific purpose-to try to win for this House enough time to debate this issue. The fact is that the number of Members who are in their places, especially on the Opposition Benches, is a sign of the anger and outrage that is felt about the amount of time that has been allocated. It is in the Government's hands to bring this particular debate to an end by saying that they will go away and think again. I hope that the Minister will do so.

Photo of Joan Walley Joan Walley Chair, Environmental Audit Committee

Many constituents have contacted me because they want me, as their MP, to put forward their views about the future of higher education. Given that so many hon. Members will want to speak in tomorrow's debate and will not be able to do so, is such a compression not bringing Parliament into disrepute? If the people of this country cannot have their Members of Parliament raising their concerns on an issue of such importance, there are much wider implications.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I agree with my hon. Friend. People look to the House of Commons to speak for them and they look to us as Members to represent their views. They want us to consider in appropriate depth and with adequate care the proposals that come before us. The number of people who are concerned about what we will be asked to consider tomorrow should find expression in the number of voices that are heard in this Chamber. We will be denied that opportunity because of the inadequacy of the time that is being offered.

Photo of Kevin Brennan Kevin Brennan Shadow Minister (Education)

Is my right hon. Friend aware that journalists in the Committee corridor last night were reporting that the Lib Dems had as much time as they liked in their meeting and could speak for as long as they wanted on the matter without any timetabling of it in private? However, in public and in this Chamber, they are seeking to limit the debate to a mere five hours. Is that not a very telling point?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It is. If such an approach is good enough for Liberal Democrats in private, it ought to be good enough for the House of Commons in public. We are the voice of the nation.

Photo of Nicholas Dakin Nicholas Dakin Labour, Scunthorpe

My right hon. Friend is being most generous tonight in giving way. The fact that the Government are not listening to people's voices-we are hearing about that and reflecting that in our contributions tonight-and want to constrain a debate to just five hours or less completely flies in the face of the new politics that the country asked for and the fresh approach that it welcomed.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It certainly does. As my hon. Friend says, there is a serious issue here. If the public do not think that we have properly considered the matter, it will not build their trust and confidence in Parliament, and it certainly will not build their trust and confidence in the Government-it will damage it.

Photo of Andrew Slaughter Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

Does my right hon. Friend know that the Deputy Prime Minister is now on Sky News saying that he would love to get rid of university tuition fees, but that he lives in an imperfect world? He says that he hopes that tuition fees will go in the future and blames the Labour party for not supporting him in the past. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Labour party would be happy to vote with him tomorrow against the motion? Should the Deputy Prime Minister not be-

Photo of Anne Main Anne Main Conservative, St Albans

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have listened very patiently to this entire debate. I seek your guidance on whether we can hear repeated any more outbursts on what is happening in corridors and on Sky News, which has nothing to do with the timetabling of the debate.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

I am sure that the hon. Lady appreciates that I am following the debate very closely. If contributions are not in order, I will say so.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The Deputy Prime Minister will have to explain his imperfections and I hope very much that he will participate in tomorrow's debate, because many hon. Members will want to intervene on him.

Photo of Andrew Slaughter Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

I am sorry that Mrs Main had the discourtesy to interrupt me in that way. The point I wished to make is that it is a discourtesy to the House for the Deputy Prime Minister to be on television doing a mea culpa and trying pathetically to justify himself, rather than being here and explaining why we have only five hours to debate the matter.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Indeed. Given the number of things that the Deputy Prime Minister has had to say about the tuition fee increase that he intends to vote for tomorrow, the very least he could do is to come into the debate. I hope that he might be able to participate, because many people would like to hear how he explains the change in attitude-the 180° turn-that he has performed in a very short space of time.

Photo of Paul Farrelly Paul Farrelly Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the ground keeps shifting from day to day? The coalition Government have now admitted that deterrence because of debt is an issue, and they have announced a national scholarship fund. Does he consider five hours to be sufficient time in which to debate all the details of the proposals and to examine whether the Government are, in effect, just making policy up on the hoof?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

It is clearly not sufficient time to debate those matters, which brings me to the second reason why more time needs to be found, which is the nature of the change that the Government wish to make. The proposals on fees that we are being asked to consider tomorrow cannot really be seen in isolation from the wider Browne proposals or the Government's spending review. The truth is that they are intimately bound up, one with another, which is why the House needs proper time to consider both. As we know, the huge fee increase is a result of the Government's decision in the spending review to impose on universities not the average cut that they have been applying-a cut of 11%-but an unprecedented 80% reduction in university teaching budgets.

Photo of Diana R. Johnson Diana R. Johnson Shadow Minister (Home Affairs)

Does my right hon. Friend consider five hours to be enough time in which to debate the £50 million that I understand will come out of the economy in Hull, owing to the changes that will be introduced tomorrow afternoon if the proposal goes through? My constituency, which is a disadvantaged community, relies heavily on the university of Hull. I am concerned that five hours will be insufficient to debate fully the impact on the local economy in my constituency.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I share my hon. Friend's frustration, because one of the things that we need time to debate tomorrow is the consequence of the fee increase, which is the result of the 80% reduction. What will that mean for some universities? That is a perfectly legitimate question that Members may wish to ask tomorrow.

Photo of Charlie Elphicke Charlie Elphicke Conservative, Dover

In the spirit of assisting the House, let me point out that the right hon. Gentleman has been on his feet for an hour and a half. That is fine, but I invite him to consider allowing Back Benchers to make speeches as well.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Because of the generosity of the Leader of the House, who has said that debate can continue until any hour, there will be plenty of time for Back Benchers to contribute to this debate.

Several hon. Members:

rose -

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

And judging by the number of Members who wish to intervene, this is probably just a prelude to the speeches that they will make.

Photo of Clive Efford Clive Efford Labour, Eltham

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I hope that you were listening intently to the intervention from Charlie Elphicke, who called for more time to allow Back Benchers to participate in this debate.

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

That is not a point of order. I am sure that everybody heard exactly what Charlie Elphicke said.

Photo of Tom Harris Tom Harris Labour, Glasgow South

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Two amendments have now been submitted-the first from my hon. Friend Kevin Brennan, asking for the debate to be continued until 6 o'clock tomorrow, and the second from me, in an attempt to be popular with my Scottish colleagues, asking for the debate to be continued until 10 o'clock tomorrow evening. Can you tell the House when Mr Speaker will make a decision on whether those amendments will be accepted and say how that decision will be communicated to the House?

Photo of Dawn Primarolo Dawn Primarolo Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

The hon. Gentleman is quite right: Mr Speaker will make a decision on those manuscript amendments in due course, and I am sure that he will ensure that the House knows when he has decided. I call Mr Hilary Benn.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was giving way to my hon. Friend Barbara Keeley.

Photo of Barbara Keeley Barbara Keeley Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

My right hon. Friend has been very generous in giving way this evening. Let me touch on the point that he made about the impact on universities. We have already heard a little about Salford university this evening, and about how many local young people attend it. Indeed, there are two Salford graduates on the Labour Benches listening to this debate, and we are very concerned indeed about the possibility of our course-politics and contemporary history, which we both did at Salford university-disappearing. Will there be time in five hours to consider not just the future of social science courses such as the politics and contemporary history course at Salford-which was an excellent course, as I am sure my hon. Friend Andrew Gwynne will agree-but the future of this House? Where are the future Labour and other candidates going to come from if these politics and contemporary history courses disappear?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The importance and the power of a university education is indeed to give people the chance to understand where we come from. If we do not understand where we come from, it is difficult to work out where we should be going.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Speaking of an understanding of history, I shall gladly give way to my hon. Friend.

Photo of Rob Flello Rob Flello Shadow Minister (Justice)

Further to the previous point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Two manuscript amendments have been tabled and are currently with Mr Speaker. Is there a way for the House to convey to Mr Speaker just how strongly we feel that the suggestion of continuing the debate until 10 o'clock would be the better of the two?

Photo of Tristram Hunt Tristram Hunt Labour, Stoke-on-Trent Central

As a new Member of the House, I am finding the speech by my right hon. Friend Hilary Benn a complete tour de force. We are learning a great deal from him tonight, and it would ill behove him to rush. On the broader point of the time limit for tomorrow's debate, is he aware of the numerous protestations that I have received from academics, students and postgraduates in the humanities community, who are worried not only about the situation facing history and modern politics but about what could happen to classics, divinity, theology, social anthropology, archaeology, anthropology and many other subjects? We could not possibly deal with all those concerns in five hours.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I bow to my hon. Friend's expertise in these matters. He illustrates the point that many people are interested in all those subjects, as well as others that he did not have the opportunity to mention. They want us to have the chance to debate these matters tomorrow.

Photo of William Bain William Bain Shadow Minister (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, since he began his speech, it has been reported that the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change might not be in the House tomorrow to attend the debate or to vote? Does not that reinforce the argument that five hours will not give him enough time to explain whether he is abstaining or simply hiding in Cancun?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I have followed with interest the various reports of the movements and non-movements of the Climate Change Secretary who, in fairness, is doing very important work in Cancun because we need a global climate deal. Having seen some of the newspaper reports that we should have offered him a pair, however, it seems to me that the easiest thing would be for him to pair with one of his colleagues who is going to vote on the other side. There is no need for him to come and seek our assistance.

Photo of Sandra Osborne Sandra Osborne Labour, Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock

Does my right hon. Friend recall the debates on the national minimum wage, when we sat up all night because the Conservatives were determined to oppose the proposals and fought them every inch of the way? Does he agree that we should be equally willing to fight this legislation, and that we should stay up all night if necessary?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

The determination of Opposition Members to do everything we can to ensure that we get a proper amount of time to debate the issues and the chance to vote the proposals down is evident . My hon. Friend makes a powerful point.

Photo of Emily Thornberry Emily Thornberry Shadow Minister (Health)

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Perhaps you can help me on this point. Is the reason that we can have only a five-hour debate tomorrow the fact that the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, finds it difficult to stay awake? I can see him sleeping on the Front Bench-

Photo of Ian Paisley Jnr Ian Paisley Jnr Shadow DUP Spokesperson (Work and Pensions), Shadow DUP Spokesperson (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. As he will know, these measures will also have a considerable impact on the devolved region of Northern Ireland. One in every three students from Northern Ireland attends a university here in England, and if the Government push through a change in the legislation, the Assembly in Northern Ireland will have to pick up the tab for the increase in fees for those who study outside Northern Ireland. The figures indicate that, on top of the current spend of about £90 million on students travelling from Northern Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom, an increase of between £30 million and £60 million will have to be found to cover the fee increase. Where is that money going to be found, given that the Government are already asking the Assembly to cut back in other areas? We do not-

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. First, my strong impression is that the hon. Gentleman's intervention is beyond the scope of the debate. Secondly, it is longer than is desirable or acceptable. Interventions need to be shorter from now on.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I wish I could help the hon. Gentleman by answering his question, but I cannot. One of the people who could help him is sitting on the Government Bench, but I do not know whether he will want to intervene on me to give the hon. Gentleman the information he seeks. This provides another powerful reason to have more time tomorrow to answer the hon. Gentleman's question and many other questions that right hon. and hon. Members will want to ask.

I shall make a little more progress. One issue that the House will need more time to debate tomorrow is the potential financial consequence of the fee increase, which is presaged on an 80% reduction in funding for institutions that right hon. and hon. Members have the honour to represent in their constituencies. We still do not know for certain by how much each university is going to be affected by the introduction of the near-trebling of fees, particularly when universities are also going to be affected by other changes. For example, we know that the regional development agencies are being abolished, that the funds for regional development, some of which have been used in partnership with institutions of higher education, are being reduced and that the local economic partnerships have not been properly established in many places because of the state of chaos. Universities do not know how much they might have to find in the current financial year, never mind the impact that these tuition fee changes will have. This could affect students this year and in subsequent years as the transition from the current to the new system is managed. These are all questions that we need time to debate.

Photo of Yasmin Qureshi Yasmin Qureshi Labour, Bolton South East

My right hon. Friend is discussing fees, and the university in my constituency of Bolton South East is one of 20 widening participation universities. As a result of the Browne review and tuition fee changes, it is expected that those 20 universities will collapse and will be unable to carry on serving the needs of the most vulnerable students in our society. Is five hours enough time to discuss the fate of the 20 universities that are likely to collapse?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a very powerful point-one that I am addressing at the moment: the potential financial impact of these changes on a number of universities. That is precisely one of the points that we need to debate tomorrow, but we have been denied sufficient time to do so on the current arrangements.

Photo of Chris Williamson Chris Williamson Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

My right hon. Friend has been extremely generous in giving way this evening and I am very grateful to him for his kindness in giving way to me on this occasion. Does he agree that restricting the debate to five hours will give scant time for me to raise the concerns that I know exist in Derby in respect of Derby university? It has been calculated that, as a result of the 80% reduction to which he referred, that university will find a black hole of about £30 million. It will find it extremely difficult to increase tuition fees to the level that would be necessary-

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. First, there is the issue of scope. Secondly, I know that the hon. Gentleman, who is a very well-behaved man, would not seek to make a speech when he is supposed to be making an intervention. [Interruption.] Order. He has registered his point, to which I know the shadow Leader of the House will want to respond.

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I believe that my hon. Friend should have the opportunity tomorrow precisely to put that question to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills.

Photo of Angela Smith Angela Smith Opposition Assistant Whip (Commons)

I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way; he is being very generous with his time. Sheffield Hallam university could lose about £70 million because of this decision. Is it not imperative that Members such as my hon. Friend Paul Blomfield and myself make a contribution tomorrow, especially given that the Deputy Prime Minister has refused to meet the local student union to discuss the matter?

Photo of Hilary Benn Hilary Benn Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

I am surprised and concerned to hear that news. It seems from what my hon. Friend says that the right hon. Gentleman is willing to spend more time in the television studios, describing the changing positions of his party, than he is prepared to spend talking to students who are going to feel the consequences of what he is proposing

I turn to a difficulty that might arise for all Members tomorrow, because all we are discussing-I say "all" in a contextual sense-is two statutory instruments. Here I seek guidance from the Leader of the House and possibly from you, Mr Speaker. The House will be aware of the rules governing the scope of debate on statutory instruments. A little while ago, I promised that I would quote from "Erskine May", and page 681 states:

"Debate on any statutory instrument, whether subject to the affirmative or the negative procedure, is confined to the contents of the instrument, and discussion of alternative methods of achieving its object is not in order. Where the effects of an instrument are confined to a particular geographical area or areas, discussion of other areas is out of order. Nor is criticism of the provisions of the parent Act permitted."

Mr Speaker, does that mean that Members will be restricted tomorrow in what they can discuss and what they can say? Does it mean, for example, that Opposition Members who would wish to argue the case for a graduate tax cannot raise it in the debate? Could they be ruled out of order? If right hon. and hon. Members want to refer to the implications of the proposals for other parts of the United Kingdom, will they be ruled out of order? Were that to be the case, it would show how improper is the Government's decision to bring the statutory instrument before the House tomorrow. If that interpretation of "Erskine May" is applied-

Photo of John Bercow John Bercow Chair, Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Chair, Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, Speaker of the House of Commons, Speaker of the House of Commons

Order. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will resume his seat. I am not sure whether his inquiry was a genuine one or a rhetorical one, but he has referred to the fact of the motion and the narrow terms of the statutory instrument, and he raises the concern about how much scope there will be for Members fully to develop their points. It might help him and the House if I point out that the two-the motion and the SI tomorrow-have been conflated for the purposes of the consideration, and the intention of the Chair would be to adopt a broad and generous interpretation of what could legitimately be said in the debate. I hope that that is helpful to Members in all parts of the House.