Speaker’s Statement

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Monday 21st October 2019

(4 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

I have known the right hon. Gentleman for 22 years. I like him so much that I do not want to ruin a burgeoning political career, as he is only probably a quarter of the way through his, but one of his great merits is that he is a model of consistency, principle and fair-mindedness.

Robert Syms Portrait Sir Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. The meaningful vote process is one which Parliament has insisted the Government adhere to. All the Government are trying to do is stick to a process set out by Parliament. The motion was amended on Saturday. Now we can have a clean vote, because I think there is an appetite among the country and this Parliament—these Benches are not exactly empty—to get a view on the Prime Minister’s deal. I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne): I think your ruling is probably right. But unlike most of “Erskine May”, we are prone to follow the EU constitution, which means at the moment that we will leave the EU at the end of this month. There is limited time, but we will be treated to the spectacle of empty Benches in this House when we go home, and we may be sitting late or at weekends to try to get Government legislation on the statute book. I am not sure that the British people will understand that.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

I just say to the hon. Gentleman—I genuinely apologise to him if I have misunderstood any part of his point, but I am reacting on the hoof—that whether or not there were the debate today, the Government require the passage of the requisite legislation. Therefore, in so far as the hon. Gentleman is concerned about the time required for the legislation, the programme motion for it, the sitting hours entailed by it and the inconvenience that might flow from it, those considerations would apply whether or not we had the debate today. The issue is whether we make a pragmatic judgment and allow for the breach of a long-standing convention or make a principled judgment, and I have made a principled judgment. There is every opportunity for the Government, with the support of the House, not only to have their say, but to get their way by the end of October, and I do not think I need to add anything to that. It is dependent on parliamentary opinion.

Speaker’s Statement

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Monday 18th March 2019

(5 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

If particular legislation was subject to carry-over, that would not apply, but in the expectation, let us say—or, to use a more neutral term, in the circumstance—that it was not subject to the carry-over procedure, manifestly and incontrovertibly it would fall. As for whether the Government are contemplating that, I have no way of knowing. No Minister has indicated that to me. I have no idea what is in their mind. It would be an unusual step, but look: I have been in this place a little over 20 years, and some quite unusual things have happened. I have no way of knowing whether this is being contemplated.

Robert Syms Portrait Sir Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In 1604 and in 1920, we were a sovereign Parliament, and we were not subject to the EU constitution, which this House voted for under the Lisbon treaty. This House has passed legislation under article 50 for us to leave the European Union, which is time-sensitive. Parliament could proceed in a rather stately manner in 1920, because it was not subject to such things, but we as a Parliament have voted to leave on a particular date; therefore there is a certain importance to making decisions prior to that date, and not in the next Session.

Secondly, the meaningful vote in itself is a constitutional innovation. It was this Parliament trying to impose on the Government greater parliamentary scrutiny. In that process, the Government have brought forward votes—more votes than most of us expected, and with more amendments than most of us expected. There was a degree of constitutional innovation in what you ruled during that process, Mr Speaker, in order to involve Parliament. Given the time-sensitive nature of the proposal, and given that this Parliament wanted to be involved, I can see no reason why we should not be put through the pain of perhaps another vote.

I stress that the article 50 legislation went through this House and the withdrawal Act went through this House. Every Member of this House expects to have a say on the type of Brexit that we will actually undertake. Sometimes, even if we are dealing with a matter that has been dealt with before, it is important that this House makes a decision or decides not to make a decision; but not considering the matter again could in itself have consequences.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Again, one has to reflect on the particulars. I say to the hon. Gentleman that the issue is not the pain of any vote, which is a subjective matter upon which I do not think I should pontificate—especially as I do not cast such, other than in the circumstance of a tie, which has not arisen since 1993 in this Chamber—but its propriety.

It is absolutely true that the House has legislated in respect of article 50—I believe it did so in March 2017 in the last Parliament—and that that has created a strong expectation, but whether Parliament chooses to legislate on this matter or, as the Government have signalled in recent days, depending on circumstance, to request a particular extension, is a matter for the House. I do not think that the issue of pain really comes into it; it is just a question of what is proper.

I know that the hon. Gentleman, whom I have known since we competed with each other in Bristol South in June 1989, is a stickler for propriety. [Interruption.] I am asked who won. It would not be seemly to say, but I think the hon. Gentleman’s result at the 1992 election was rather better than mine.

Points of Order

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Tuesday 12th June 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

There are a lot of Members wanting to raise points of order. I think I will come to a Dorset knight first.

Robert Syms Portrait Sir Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Many of us on the Government Benches are disappointed that the matters of devolution did not have more debate. That was a consequence of the Opposition calling so many Divisions, thereby reducing the amount of time. What additional help can the House authorities give in time management training for the official Opposition so that, on future occasions when we have a clearly defined time for debate, they can decide when they are going to vote and when they can allow free-standing debate?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

I hope the hon. Gentleman, who entered the House with me in 1997—I have known him a very long time—will not mind if I say that I think his point of order was delivered with a puckish grin and was of what I call a rhetorical character.

Business of the House

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Thursday 18th January 2018

(6 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. As usual, a great many hon. and right hon. Members are seeking to catch my eye, and I am keen to accommodate the level of interest. However, it might be useful for the House to know that there is a Select Committee statement to follow, and that approximately 50 hon. Members are seeking to contribute to the two debates to take place under the auspices of the Backbench Business Committee later today. Therefore, if I am to accommodate the level of interest, or to get anywhere near to doing so, there is a premium on brevity from Back and Front Benchers alike.

Robert Syms Portrait Sir Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I welcome the debate on restoration and renewal. I also welcome what the Leader of the House said about there being a genuine choice in that debate. It is important to do emergency repairs, but it is also quite right to reflect before we set up a delivery authority, because a lot of public money would be involved and we have to justify to our constituents that this is the right thing to do. May I therefore commend the Leader of the House on her approach?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Wednesday 10th January 2018

(6 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. Let us have a bit of order for a Dorset knight: Sir Robert Syms.

Robert Syms Portrait Sir Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T2. One of the Minister’s new responsibilities is the important negotiations with the devolved Assemblies and Parliament. When will my right hon. Friend undertake meetings for those important discussions on the future of our country?

Business without Debate

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Monday 7th January 2013

(11 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

The question is that the Bill be now read a Second time—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

I am not sure why the hon. Gentleman was hovering, although I am sure his hover was well intentioned. We shall move to the vote.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 58), That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Question agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith, That the Bill be not committed.—(Mr Syms.)

Question agreed to.

Commission Work Programme 2013

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Monday 7th January 2013

(11 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

We come now to the motion on the Commission work programme for 2013—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

We are obliged to the Whip for his enthusiasm, but it would be useful to hear the reasons for considering the question. I call the Minister to move the motion.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Wednesday 16th May 2012

(11 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. I ask the Minister to shorten his answers, as other Members wish to participate in the debate.

Robert Syms Portrait Mr Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

13. Further to the question on air passenger duty, should the Government not be doing much more to expand Belfast airport, particularly the air links, especially if we are to promote more public sector jobs in Northern Ireland?

Hinchingbrooke Hospital

Debate between John Bercow and Robert Syms
Thursday 10th November 2011

(12 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. The Minister of State is a resilient man. Considering that he was rendered speechless, his recovery has been both quick and complete. The House will be aware that the terms of this urgent question are narrow. I appreciate that Members may want to refer to other cases, but they must do so with reference to the specifics of the issue that has been aired from the Opposition Front Bench and by the Minister of State.

Robert Syms Portrait Mr Robert Syms (Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Is not the key point that the deal will lead to better NHS services for people who live in the area of the hospital? The Minister has reassured us today that if it does not, there will be changes.