🗣️ Points of Order

• City of London Markets Bill: Sir Roger Gale raised a concern about the City of London’s attempt to sell and redevelop the historic Smithfield and Billingsgate markets through a private Bill. He mentioned that a petition against this Bill was denied hearing because the petitioners were deemed not to have a direct interest. Gale argued that these markets serve the whole country and thus should be of interest to all UK citizens. Madam Deputy Speaker clarified that the decision to allow a petition hearing is not within her authority, but noted that the issue was on record and could be raised again when the Bill reaches its Report stage.

• Anniversary of the Ukraine War and Member’s Absence: Perran Moon pointed out that it was the third anniversary of the war in Ukraine, and during a related statement in the House, questions were raised about the absence of certain Members. He specifically mentioned that Nigel Farage, the MP for Clacton, was holding a rally in his (Moon’s) constituency of Camborne and Redruth, without prior notification. Madam Deputy Speaker acknowledged that Farage should have informed Moon of his visit, as per House rules which state that such actions are considered discourteous if not done.

The session primarily consists of procedural points of order, and there is no explicit disagreement or contention visible within the transcript. The first point of order by Sir Roger Gale addresses a concern about the City of London (Markets) Bill, but it is framed as an inquiry about the procedural correctness of handling a petition, rather than a dispute. The response from Madam Deputy Speaker is procedural, stating that the issue of petitions is not under the Chair’s jurisdiction but does provide information on when opposition can be expressed.

The second point of order by Perran Moon mentions the absence of another Member during a Ukraine statement and his presence in Moon’s constituency without prior notice. While this could suggest a mild form of disagreement regarding etiquette and courtesy, it does not rise to a level of overt disagreement. The response from Madam Deputy Speaker again addresses procedural matters by referring to the House’s guidelines on constituency visits and emphasizes the discourteous nature of not notifying the relevant Member, but it does not generate further debate or visible conflict.

There are no recorded exchanges or dialogues indicative of disagreements or arguments, and the session flows as a series of informational and procedural clarifications. Therefore, the session is rated as 1 for disagreement due to the absence of any substantive or heated disputes.