Children Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No.2)

House of Commons, 2 November 2004.

Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)

The Opposition do not want to hold up the Chamber's work this afternoon because we have a lot of business to get on with, which is why we cannot agree to this programme motion. We are about to discuss no fewer than 43 amendments and 16 new clauses; to tackle the important subject of new clause 2, which was completely emasculated in Committee, new developments on fostering, which have appeared since Committee, and serious outstanding problems on databases in clause 12; and we want to give a proper airing to parental access, and the whole subject, which we were fortunate enough to avoid in Committee, of smacking. The time allocated, as we have suggested all along, is really not sufficient to tackle these substantial issues. For that reason we cannot accept the programme motion.

Annette Brooke (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset and North Poole)

Liberal Democrats find the programme motion unacceptable because we have some important issues to consider and, unlike the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton), I do think that we need to discuss the issue of reasonable chastisement in great detail today. We would not seek to divide the House because we would prefer to spend the time on debate, but in the event of a Division we could not support the motion.