On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I raise my point of order under rule 8.5.6 of standing orders, which concerns the notice of amendments and gives the Presiding Officer discretion to examine which amendments shall be called. Implicit in that is an assumption of fairness and even-handedness on the part of the Presiding Officer. I believe that that has not happened on this occasion, and that the Presiding Officer has discriminated in favour of the larger parties against an independent such as me and against the smaller parties that are not present in the chamber—no, I see that one of those parties is present—in selecting their amendments, rather than mine, for debate. In doing so, the Presiding Officer has also displayed incompetence, in that he has narrowed—[Members: "Oh."] He has narrowed the range of options that are open to the members of the Parliament in disposing of one of the most important questions of principle to come before us as a Parliament.
I have said on many occasions that I do not need to expand on the reasons for the exercise of my discretion in the selection of amendments. I am not required to give reasons for why I select or otherwise. The chamber will be aware that we intend to discuss the matter this afternoon.
Further to that point of order, Presiding Officer. I give notice that I will consult colleagues and friends on the matter. Regretfully, I might find reason to move a vote of no confidence in the Presiding Officer.
Previous
Motion without Notice