Mr President, I want to draw your attention to and seek a ruling from you on Rule 47 concerning urgency. Specifically, I want briefly to explain why I believe that the chapter which deals with social policy and employment questions, as one of the items of urgency to be dealt with tomorrow, should be ruled inadmissible by you, and I would ask you for a ruling. The urgency procedure requires that two criteria be met, one being that there is genuine urgency and, moreover, that the subject is not already covered by the agenda for the part-session.

Today, we have a question and answer session with Commissioner Flynn, which offers Members a wide-ranging opportunity to raise concerns they may have about issues of social policy, as regards legislation or various shortcomings that people perceive. Tomorrow we have an oral question with debate on poverty and social exclusion, which will again permit a very wide-ranging debate. Yesterday we had a long debate on the budget with plenty of opportunity, as is usual with the budget, to discuss issues of social policy. Next week, in the Temporary Committee on Employment, we will be considering the Coates report, with over 200 amendments, giving colleagues in this House an opportunity to discuss employment and unemployment issues in great detail. When all this is considered, it seems ridiculous to me to suggest that there is no alternative but to raise these issues as matters of urgency. I would therefore suggest that, in accordance with the third paragraph of the interpretation of Rule 47, which reads: A motion f

or resolution tabled in accordance with paragraph 1 cannot be included on the agenda for a debate on topical and urgent subjects...

(The President cut the speaker off)