Arrangement of Business
Debate between Lord Kennedy of Southwark and Baroness Hayman
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)
My Lords, before we move on to the fourth day of Committee, I will make a statement about proceedings, as I did on the previous three sitting Fridays. I hope again that this will help planning and is in line with how business has proceeded previously.
First, it is important to thank the staff of the House—those on duty today in their various roles and those who have been working in preparation for today’s proceedings. The whole House greatly values their work and we thank them for what they do.
The Government Whips’ Office has circulated the updated groupings list. As previously, my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton has set a proposed target for today’s debate. As was the case in previous weeks, I expect the House to rise at a convenient point around 3 pm. In line with usual procedures and the Companion, we maintain the typical flexibility to rise slightly before or beyond that point to include the group we are debating. As we have considered only six groups of amendments in three days of Committee, we should be looking to make considerably more progress today. Ultimately, this remains in the hands of the House and not in mine, in my role as Government Chief Whip. I expect to return to the Dispatch Box this afternoon, between 2.30 pm and 3 pm, to advise the House further.
I want to make a few other points before we again begin Committee stage of the Bill. In doing so, I fully accept that not everything I say is accepted by the whole House, but I ask noble Lords to accept that my intentions are good—it is to show the House in the best light and enable the House to deliver effective scrutiny of the important issues before us.
Many times, before this Dispatch Box as Government Chief Whip and from the Dispatch Box opposite, as Opposition Chief Whip, I have made reference to the Companion. Following its guidance is of great assistance to the House and to all noble Lords in undertaking our important work every day. I make that same point today. Following the advice of the Companion would help us all to have a better debate and proceedings today. In that light, it is important to remind ourselves that this is Committee. Noble Lords should address their remarks to the amendments under consideration and not make long, Second Reading speeches, going way beyond the substance of the amendment that is being debated. This is all set out in the Companion on page 143, 8.81.
Also, we do not accept interventions on interventions. That is not the House of Lords way. Please refrain from attempting to do this. I have asked the Government Whip on the Bench to intervene to stop this practice if it begins. If any noble Lord makes an intervention, I refer them to the Companion, specifically page 60, 4.29, which makes it clear that interventions should be a brief question of clarification only and not another speech.
When pressing or withdrawing amendments, noble Lords should be brief. This is set out in the Companion on page 143, 8.82. I expect, as I believe all noble Lords do, that despite sincerely held views and differences of opinion, we will always conduct ourselves with courtesy and respect for one another and show the public watching our debate the House of Lords in the best possible light. So, as I have said before, please refrain from doing anything that would bring that into question.
As I have said previously, the acoustics are excellent in this Chamber and the microphones are very sensitive. Noble Lords should not be holding conversations in the Chamber or making remarks that they would not like to be broadcast live. If you wish to speak to another noble Lord, please retire to the Prince’s Chamber, the Royal Gallery, the Peers’ Lobby, the Long Room or the Peers’ Guest Room and then return when your conversation has ended. These are good places to have conversations and I regularly use them on other days.
After every sitting Friday’s debate on the Bill, I have noble Lords with very different views contacting me in the proceeding days, expressing their frustration with other noble Lords sitting near them who seem to talk constantly, to the annoyance and inconvenience of others. I ask noble Lords to please bear this in mind. As I have said, noble Lords should have their conversations outside the Chamber.
This is a Private Member’s Bill. The noble Lord in charge of the Bill is my noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton. It is not a government Bill and the Ministers on the Front Bench are not in charge of the Bill. It is not a government Bill and it will not become a government Bill. The Government remain neutral. That position is not going to change. I have said it time and time again; this will not change.
Having made those remarks, which are said to assist the House, we should now move on to debate the issues of substance before us.
Baroness Hayman (CB)
My Lords, very briefly, I am extremely grateful to the Chief Whip for what he has said. Enforcing the Companion is obviously a prime responsibility of the Whip, the Front Bench and the Government Whips, but it extends further. Would he confirm that any of the Whips can intervene and point out when the Companion is not being adhered to and that that applies to any Member of the House as well?
Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)
When the noble Baroness spoke, I remembered the Countess of Mar, who would regularly get up and correct noble Lords when they were getting things wrong. The noble Baroness is absolutely right. We should all follow the Companion. We are all responsible. We are a self-regulating House and we should do that to ensure that we have good and seamless debates and make good progress.
Education in Prisons
Debate between Lord Kennedy of Southwark and Baroness Hayman(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman (CB)
I am grateful to the noble Lord.
Does the Minister accept that the damage done in individual institutions by cuts in education and skills training is compounded by the effect of the churn going on in the prison population at the moment, meaning that many prisoners are in individual institutions for short periods of time before they are moved to another institution? That is very damaging to the effect, which the Minister was talking about, of having the encouragement to change.