With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a short statement to provide an update on this week’s business. The business for tomorrow is now: Tuesday 14 July—Remaining stages of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill. Members who are considering tabling amendments to the Public Office (Accountability) Bill should consult the Public Bill Office as soon as possible. The Government will ensure that the text of our new amendments is made available to members in the Vote Office straightaway. The business for the remainder of the week is unchanged: Wednesday 15 July—Opposition day, third allotted day. Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced, followed by a motion to approve a statutory instrument relating to national security. Thursday 16 July—The Sir David Amess summer Adjournment debate. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee. The House will rise for the summer recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 16 July and return on Tuesday 1 September. I will make a further business statement on Thursday.

I cannot come to the Dispatch Box without registering my sadness, and I am sure that of everyone across this House, at the dreadful news about Ann Widdecombe. I am sure that we will talk about this later, but I just wanted to start with that. The Leader of the House is a good and honourable man, and he will be deeply embarrassed by this fiasco of a procedure today. It is a gross breach of parliamentary protocol and timing to bring a Bill, let alone a Bill of this sensitivity and magnitude, to the House on this very abbreviated notice. Of course, there is concern across the House about the victims of the Hillsborough disaster and their families, but these matters must be properly debated in due season. To do so, with new amendments that have not even yet been published, on no notice and without the ability of Members to amend those amendments or to comment until now, is a further breach. Why has this happened? It is because the outgoing Prime Minister is desperate to preserve what he sees as a legacy. It is a tragedy that he should be so focused solely on his own political future, such as it is, and I think it is a pity that he has taken this opportunity to sideswipe the incoming Prime Minister, a man who arrives with no scrutiny and no accountability to this House. I want to raise a few key points. Of course, it is understood that this legislation was being discussed in the Intelligence and Security Committee. It is also understood that this legislation and its implications were being discussed with our Five Eyes allies, with our armed forces, and with the USA in particular. I know that this abbreviation of protocol will attract the attention of the Lords when it arrives in their House. Why has this Bill been brought forward now, on such an expedited basis? What has changed, and what of substance has caused the Government to want to abbreviate the consideration of these very delicate matters on such a timetable? Have our international partners been consulted on this change in procedure? Have the agencies been consulted? Above all, why, after seven months of grieving families being concerned about its passage, is the Bill suddenly now—as it may appear, with little or no change—being brought before this House?

I agree with the shadow Leader of the House about the tragedy of Ann Widdecombe and I echo his words. I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman’s description of the run-up to this change of business and the fact that the Bill will come before us tomorrow. This is an important Bill and we have been signalling for some time that it is coming—as he knows, because we have had a dialogue about it. But only today have I been able to confirm it, as this has been the earliest opportunity, Mr Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman talks about amendments. A number of amendments to the Bill have been laid for a long time. The Government have brought forward further amendments and they are in the Vote Office. I regret that there is not a greater length of time for colleagues to scrutinise them, but they are available and I am sure there will be a way of facilitating a full debate tomorrow. There has been no abbreviation of the process—it is a sitting programme motion, as was agreed by the House after Second Reading. I want to assure the House that, as will no doubt come out in the debate, the agencies and the families have been central to the process, and that is why we have taken time to get it right. That is why it has been delayed, but it is an important Bill that colleagues on both sides of the House will want to see before the summer recess. That is what we are facilitating.

I thank the Leader of the House for updating us on tomorrow’s business, and for the fact that this really important Bill is coming back to the House, but it does raise questions about the Representation of the People Bill, which has been delayed. This is a big Bill that includes key major reforms: enfranchising so many young people when trust in politics is at an all-time low; and provisions on tightening financial donations—it is fair to say that donations have been in the news for the past few weeks. Will he please ensure that the Bill will come back swiftly after the summer recess?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the Representation of the People Bill is an important Bill. I will announce in due course when it will return to this House, but it will be returning to this House.

I thank the Leader of the House for taking this action. I appreciate that these are not ideal circumstances, but much about the passage of the Bill has been less than ideal. Does he share my hope that tomorrow’s debate will be about the substance of the Bill and the important amendments, rather than the process?

I share my hon. Friend’s hope. This is an important Bill and an important matter. It is, of course, about the victims of Hillsborough and their families, and the campaign that they have needed to wage for far too long, but it is also of profound importance to public service and how we do business in our country. That is why the Bill is of such importance.

Will the Leader of the House confirm that, given that the other place is sitting next week, there is nothing to stop him tabling a business statement to enable this House to sit next week? Given the enormity of the events happening in the Government next week, does he not think that would be a good idea?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just announced the recess dates. There are no plans to change the dates on which the House is sitting. As you have alluded to, Mr Speaker, recess dates are agreed by the House in advance to give colleagues certainty about parliamentary business. Just to reassure the House, the work of the Government will continue through the recess.