At the start of the sitting on Tuesday 20 November, Mr Storey sought a ruling on the issue of a Deputy Speaker having voted on a motion after being in the Chair for part of the debate on that motion. I agreed to come back to the House with a ruling on that matter.

In the case to which Mr Storey referred, I have established that the Deputy Speaker was in the Chair for three minutes, or slightly less. In that time he gave advice to the House on a petition of concern and on the time that had been allocated to the debate.

The Deputy Speaker heard only a very small portion of the opening speech in the debate, and was not required to intervene during that time.

The Deputy Speaker was in the Chair for that short time through no fault of his own. He was due to leave the Chair before the debate commenced. There was an unfortunate delay in my arrival to relieve him, and the Deputy Speaker, quite rightly, continued with business when the previous item on the Order Paper had concluded.

In this instance, the Deputy Speaker’s voting — or not voting — would not have altered the overall result.

Nevertheless, our convention has been that Deputy Speakers do not participate in debates during which they have occupied the Chair. That is clear from page 13 of ‘The Assembly Companion’ and, in my view, voting on a motion or an amendment clearly qualifies as participation in a debate. With hindsight — despite the very brief time that the Deputy Speaker spent in the Chair — I should have advised Deputy Speakers not to involve themselves in a vote at the conclusion of a debate during which they have been in the Chair.

I shall ensure that, in future, that convention is adhered to, and I thank Mr Storey for this example of what I described last week as a valid and helpful point of order.

I have made my ruling, and the matter is closed.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I hear what you have said, and I draw your attention to Standing Order 25(2). I understand that not only did the Deputy Speaker preside and vote but had signed the petition of concern that had been presented on the motion that was being debated.

I thank Lord Morrow for that helpful point of order. I can assure him that it is has been noted.

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Will you accept that it is entirely inappropriate for a Deputy Speaker of this House to sign a petition of concern and then to sit in the Chair, albeit for a brief period, during the debate on the motion on which he has signed a petition of concern? Will you rule that that is inappropriate and should not happen in the future?

I thank the Member for his point of order. I have ruled that no Deputy Speaker who has been in the Chair during a debate should be involved in the voting on that motion. I am absolutely clear on that.

On a further point of order, Mr Speaker. Will you also make a ruling on the issue of the validity of the petition of concern? If the Deputy Speaker had signed the petition of concern and had given advice regarding it when in the Chair, surely the petition of concern is brought into question and rather than having the required 30 signatures would have only 29?

My advice is absolutely clear: the petition of concern was valid — very much so.

On a further point of order, Mr Speaker. The Deputy Speaker to whom you refer seems to court some controversy. I ask the Speaker to rule on allegations that have been made in the House of Commons about a story in regard —

Order. I ask the Member to take his seat. I advise him not to stray into that particular area. He should not do that.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Will you advise the House on what should happen in future? Clearly, the Deputy Speaker was in a situation that was unprecedented and unintended. Following your ruling today, in future, should the Deputy Speaker suspend the sitting until someone else can take the Chair or is he trapped in a situation that was not planned?

That situation will not arise again. I can assure the Member of that.