On Thursday, the House held a debate,  initated by Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, on the constitutional and parliamentary effects of coalition government.  It was a useful, and a notably timely, debate.   It was what is known as a set-piece debate: that is, one for which there is a speaker’s list.  If you wish to speak, you sign up in advance (you can do it electronically) and about an hour before the House sits a speakers’ list is published, showing the order in which peers will be speaking.  It lacks spontaneity but it works reasonably well.  It avoids the sort of behaviour than can occur at Question Time. 

I was scheduled to speak mid-way in the debate following Lord Plant of Highfield.  The debate was interrupted by a statement, about three speakers before I was due to get to my feet.  I took the opportunity to nip back to my room to work on my notes.   The statement finished earlier than expected and the debate resumed.  I then saw on screen the name of a peer not due to speak at that point.  Then, much to my horror, the name of Lord Plant appeared.   Although it was a five-hour debate, the number of speakers meant that each backbench speech was limited to ten minutes.  I grabbed my notes and dashed down to the chamber.  Fortunately, I arrived while Lord Plant was still on his feet.  

This sequence of events explains my opening comments:  ‘My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow – although it is a bit of a surprise to do it so quickly – the noble Lord, Lord Plant of Highfield…’

Not only did the statement occupy only 16 minutes, but two or three peers who were on the speakers’ list to precede Lord Plant ‘scratched’ (that is, decided not to speak) – a fairly exceptional event – and a peer who was on the list at the end of the debate had switched with the peer who was due to speak after the statement ended (another exceptional event), hence the unexpected name on the screen.  It was one of those weeks.

At least the speech was covered in Today in Parliament.