Hain: 'Holidays more important than Hutton'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Peter Hain, the Leader of the Commons, was accused yesterday of suggesting that the Hutton report was less important than MPs' holidays after he refused to grant extra time to a parliamentary debate.
In the Government's first detailed announcement on the issue, Mr Hain revealed that the debate would be held on 4 February, a week after the publication of the report.
Mr Hain left open the possibility of a vote on the debate, but he infuriated opposition MPs when he said that it would be restricted to five and a half hours and refused to allow MPs to sit beyond 7pm. Mr Hain said that such a move to extend the parliamentary day could occur only in "exceptional circumstances", such as when MPs sat late last summer to avoid ruining their holidays.
The minister also refused to grant a two-day debate, claiming a precedent had been set by the Tories when they granted only one day for discussion of the Scott report into the arms-to-Iraq affair.
MPs can vote to delay beyond 7pm, what is known as the "moment of interruption", the point at which the Commons adjourns until the next day.
Paul Tyler, the Liberal Democrat spokesman on the Commons, said MPs should at least be allowed to sit to 10pm on such a matter of national importance. "There is nothing to stop us doing that and the extra three hours would be very valuable," he said.
Mr Hain pointed out that previous extended sittings took place before the summer recess and just before the prorogation or end of the parliamentary session in November. "On the question of the length of the debate, I do not intend to go past the moment of interruption," he said.
"We have agreed sitting times, except in exceptional circumstances such as occurred just before prorogation and such as occurred just before the summer recess, when members would not have wanted us to go into the summer recess having booked their holidays."
Mr Tyler accused Mr Hain of "trivialising" parliamentary scrutiny of the issue. "Members of the public would be horrified to think that the Leader of the House of Commons was suggesting that the Hutton report was somehow less important than MPs' holidays."
When John Major allowed only one day for the Scott report debate, Tony Blair and a string of Labour MPs accused the Tory government of treating Parliament and the public with contempt.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments