Relevance in debate

22.15A Member’s speech must be directed to the question under discussion or to the motion or amendment intended to be moved,1 or to a point of order. The precise relevance of an argument may not always be perceptible, but a Member who clearly wanders from the subject will be reminded by the Speaker to speak to the question. On a motion for the establishment of a select committee2 or for determining the number of its members,3 the merits of the matter referred to the committee have not been allowed to be debated. Nor, on a motion prescribing procedure for concluding the consideration of stages or carry-over of a bill or other business, should the bill or the business itself be discussed.4 The same principle applies to debate on a dilatory motion affecting that business—debate should be limited to the reasons for not deciding the question proposed.5

In debating delegated legislation, a wide debate is not possible within the terms of a motion to approve or annul an instrument with a single narrow purpose. For example, on a motion to approve an order granting immunities and privileges for members of a Council of Europe committee set up to examine the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty, the occupant of the Chair ruled that the debate should be confined to the granting of the privileges and should not extend to the citing of examples in different countries of the kind of practices which the committee might wish to investigate; a similar ruling was made relating to approval of an order relating to a single local authority.6

A remark which has been ruled to be out of order cannot be the subject of a debate.7

Under Standing Order No 42, the Chair has power to deal both with irrelevance and the tedious repetition of a Member’s own arguments or of those of other Members (see para 22.42 ).

Members have on occasion been permitted to read out sometimes lengthy lists of names if relevant to a debate. The Speaker has indicated that such instances are to be addressed on a case-by-case basis and that Members seeking to read out such a list should discuss the matter with the Chair in advance.8

Footnotes

  1. 1. Parl Deb (1902) 112, c 404; ibid (1906) 167, c 839; HC Deb (1915) 75, c 720; ibid (1916) 85, c 1510; ibid (22 March 2011) 525, c 906; ibid (16 May 2011) 528, c 52.
  2. 2. HC Deb (1937–38) 337, c 2157; ibid (20 July 2009) 496, c 712.
  3. 3. HC Deb (1909) 3, c 997.
  4. 4. HC Deb (23 October 2007) 465, c 206; ibid (25 February 2009) 488, c 328; ibid (15 June 2010) 511, c 768.
  5. 5. SO No 34; see the Speaker’s remarks, HC Deb (1935) 299, c 913; ibid (1938–39) 352, c 1127.
  6. 6. HC Deb (1987–88) 133, cc 567–71; HC Deb (9 July 2008) 478, c 1482.
  7. 7. Parl Deb (1886) 308, c 738.
  8. 8. HC Deb (15 March 2016) 607, c 807; see also ibid (17 September 2012) 550, c 675; ibid (8 March 2016) 607, cc 202–3; ibid (15 March 2016) 607, cc 923–25; ibid (14 May 2018) 641, cc 1WH–2WH; ibid (9 March 2023) 729, cc 440–42; ibid (29 February 2024) 746, cc 485–86.