Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill (Second sitting)
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
Chair: Ms Karen Buck
† Argar, Edward (Charnwood) (Con)
Berger, Luciana (Liverpool, Wavertree) (Lab/Co-op)
† Doyle-Price, Jackie (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health)
† Foster, Kevin (Torbay) (Con)
† Hayes, Helen (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
Lucas, Caroline (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)
Mahmood, Shabana (Birmingham, Ladywood) (Lab)
† Pursglove, Tom (Corby) (Con)
† Quince, Will (Colchester) (Con)
† Reed, Mr Steve (Croydon North) (Lab/Co-op)
† Sherriff, Paula (Dewsbury) (Lab)
† Snell, Gareth (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
† Throup, Maggie (Erewash) (Con)
† Trevelyan, Mrs Anne-Marie (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (Con)
† Wood, Mike (Dudley South) (Con)
Wragg, Mr William (Hazel Grove) (Con)
Zeichner, Daniel (Cambridge) (Lab)
Colin Lee, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Public Bill Committee
Wednesday 18 April 2018
[Ms Karen Buck in the Chair]
Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill
Before we begin, can everybody have their electronic devices switched to silent, please?
As the Committee cannot consider the remaining clauses of the Bill until the House has agreed to a money resolution, I call Steve Reed, as the Member in charge of the Bill, to move that further consideration of the Bill be adjourned.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning, Ms Buck, however briefly. I thank Members for coming—I wish we were going to spend more time together, but it seems we are not.
I will just make a few points before I formally move the Adjournment. This is the fifth successive week the Committee has been unable to complete its work, and that is excluding the two weeks of recess. The reason is that the Government have not yet laid a money resolution, so we are not allowed to consider the remaining clauses. I have raised this directly with the Opposition Whips, who have raised it with the Government Whips. I have raised it in a direct question to the Leader of the House in business questions, and I pursued it in a letter to the Leader of the House, from whom I had a very charming reply that does not shed any further light on why the delays may be happening.
After five weeks, I am starting to feel that this is a little disrespectful to members of the Committee and to the Bill’s many supporters outside this House. I do not doubt for a moment the support of the Minister, or indeed the Government, who have consistently reiterated their support for the reform we are trying to get through, but it would be nice if the Government were able to let the Bill Committee get on with its work. With great respect, I would ask the Minister whether she has had any conversations with the Government Whips or Government business managers, what they may have said and when we might expect to have the money resolution.
I share the hon. Gentleman’s impatience with the current state of affairs, not least because I really do believe that this is a very important reform, and the sooner we get it on the statute book, the better. However, as he alluded to, such matters are for the Government business managers. I am pleased that he has kept the pressure up at his end and raised this with the Leader of the House, and I know that those discussions are continuing.
I would remind the Committee that we have just had two weeks of recess and a very intense few days in terms of other business, which has perhaps dominated the business managers’ thinking this week. However, I hear the hon. Gentleman’s message completely, and I completely understand where he is coming from. Following this meeting, I will resume my conversations with the Government business managers so that we can make very fast progress.
Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned.— (Mr Reed.)
Adjourned till Wednesday 25 April at half-past Nine o’clock.