← Back to House of Commons Debates
C. Supplementary provisions
21 April 2020
Lead MP
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
EmploymentParliamentary Procedure
Other Contributors: 21
At a Glance
Jacob Rees-Mogg raised concerns about c. supplementary provisions in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Leader of the House thanked Mr Speaker and House staff for their work during the Easter recess, acknowledging the Clerks' efforts despite additional burdens. He proposed motions to allow oral questions, statements, and urgent questions virtually from the next day onwards, emphasising that while these methods might not be perfect due to potential technical issues, they are necessary. Rees-Mogg also expressed gratitude towards the Procedure Committee for their rapid work during challenging times, committing to collaborate closely on future steps such as electronic voting, ensuring business unlikely to face divisions is prioritised.
William Wragg
Con
Hazel Grove
Wragg asked Rees-Mogg whether he intended to bring forward a motion on remote voting the next day.
Ian Paisley Jnr
DUP
North Antrim
Paisley inquired if controversial issues, such as extending abortion in Northern Ireland during this crisis period, would be avoided. He noted that when decisions are made about abortion, Members typically assert they will not proceed until the Northern Ireland Assembly is working.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Shannon sought assurance from Rees-Mogg regarding legislative changes concerning abortion in Northern Ireland. He highlighted that many Members are opposed to such changes, especially when the Northern Ireland Assembly can make these decisions.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
Baldwin thanked Rees-Mogg and joined him in recognising the hard work of staff. She raised concerns about Adjournment debates, urging for a swift solution to accommodate these sessions virtually.
Andrew Percy
Con
Brigg and Goole
Percy questioned whether Members will be subjected to the same rules as workers in paint and manufacturing factories who cannot maintain social distancing while performing their jobs. He emphasised the importance of consistency across different sectors.
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
Swayne pointed out that the House has never debated the rules it enforces on others, questioning if this situation is not shocking given their implementation under legislation passed in 1984.
Graham Brady
Con
Altrincham and Sale West
Welcomes the temporary nature of the measures but suggests that Parliament should move in step with the country's easing of restrictions as they become apparent.
Valerie Vaz
Lab
Walsall South
Acknowledges the extraordinary circumstances and praises the efforts to adapt parliamentary procedures. Highlights concerns about prescriptive time limits, points of order, and secure voting processes during virtual participation.
Nick Smith
Lab
Blaenau Gwent
Questions whether restrictions on points of order will hinder Members' ability to raise procedural issues or injustices that may arise during the new hybrid proceedings.
Chris Elmore
Lab
Bridgend
Agrees with Karen Bradley on the temporary nature of these measures and reiterates that all Members feel strongly about them being strictly time-limited. Highlights the consensus within the Procedure Committee meetings to ensure that these measures are short-term.
Charles Walker
Con
Thanked Karen Bradley for her work, commended the Clerk of the Procedure Committee, and emphasised that the best way to represent constituents is in person. He agrees with changes but underscores the importance of being here physically to ask questions publicly.
John Spellar
Lab
Meriden
Echoed the Chair of the Procedure Committee's view that although measures are not desirable, they are necessary. Emphasised the importance of asking questions to hold the Government accountable and ensure democratic scrutiny. He called for more direct and open questioning in Parliament, highlighting examples such as the situation with stranded citizens abroad during the crisis and issues related to personal protective equipment distribution.
Charles Walker
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Suggested that the usual order of departmental questions should be changed to give more opportunities to ask questions of key Departments such as the Treasury and the Department of Health and Social Care, which are on the frontline during a crisis.
Chris Elmore
Lab
Bridgend
Reassured John Spellar that the Procedure Committee would review issues related to written questions and named-day questions in response to his suggestion for more open questioning systems.
Karen Bradley
Con
Staffordshire Moorlands
Stressed the importance of scrutiny allowing Ministers to explain their work, both good and bad. She highlighted that it provides an opportunity for Ministers to set out what they are doing and not run away from it.
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
Raised concerns about the provisions in paragraph 6 of the motion, which allows exclusion of Members from the Chamber when numbers exceed a certain limit. He sought reassurance that elected Members would not be excluded from debates and legislative processes.
Ian Paisley Jnr
DUP
North Antrim
Compliments Mr Speaker and staff for their leadership during difficult times, emphasises the temporary nature of emergency measures, calls for a vision from the Government with timelines, expresses sadness over bereavements caused by the crisis, highlights the importance of broadband access to ensure all MPs can hold the Government accountable.
Liam Fox
Con
Wealden
Supports the comments made by Ian Paisley Jnr, stresses the need for maximal accountability and flexibility during public health emergencies, suggests regular statements from Departments as an alternative to written parliamentary questions, advocates for minimal legislation, and underscores the importance of continuity in Parliament to demonstrate resilience of democracy.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Laments the departure from traditional House procedures due to emergency measures, raises concerns about potential abortion legislation coming before a Delegated Legislation Committee and how other MPs can participate in such Committees despite not being part of them.
Theresa Villiers
Con
Chipping Barnet
Expressed disquiet about the decision to downgrade the importance of being physically present in the House, suggesting that changes should be temporary and require extensive debate.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Shared concerns over virtual proceedings, emphasised the importance of scrutiny and having an exit strategy. Highlighted specific issues such as funeral restrictions, economic impacts on agriculture, and regional collaboration.
Government Response
Acknowledged points raised about secure voting and capacity for remote participation. Emphasised the temporary nature of current measures to maintain safe social distancing while allowing representation.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.