In the Second Report of last Session of the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons, published in April 1999, it was recommended that for Session 1999-2000 there should be an experiment with a parallel Chamber, known as "Westminster Hall". Westminster Hall was envisaged as a forum for private members; select committees; and non-controversial business agreed through the usual channels which at present finds no place in the time of the House. The report concludes that Westminster Hall has not enabled the Government to expand its legislative programme. It was concluded that the business taken in Westminster Hall has been additional business, which would otherwise not have taken place at all. The report stresses that as a result of alterations made the Westminster Hall is now a meeting place of which the House can be proud. The report recommends that the experiment with sittings in Westminster Hall should be continued until the end of the first Session of the next Parliament.

The Committee's proposal of the introduction of an hour-long debating slot in Westminster Hall-in place of one of the current half-hour slots-is intended to provide a further timing option when applying for a debate and enable the participation of a larger number of Members. The Committee also recommends that the Monday e-petition debates and Thursday select committee and backbench business sittings be swapped to avoid the current clash of backbench business on a Thursday between the main chamber and Westminster Hall. The trial of allocation of one 90-minute debate slot by the Backbench Business Committee has come to an end. The Committee has also recommended the end of the use of adjournment motions and their replacement with 'general debate' motions. This change, which mirrors the change already made for equivalent debates in the main chamber, is designed to aid public understanding of House procedures. Finally the Committee has proposed some technical changes; that the Chairman of Ways and Means have overall responsibility for all sittings in Westminster Hall; that the Chair have the power to suspend a sitting and report disorderly conduct to the House; and that unused provisions of the standing order governing business in Westminster Hall be repealed

There has been a huge in increase in the constituency workload over the past few years adding to the pressure on Members of Parliament. Each Member has a different way of working which means in considering sitting hours there are no mainstream options which are necessarily right or wrong. The evidence suggests that the current balance of about 150 days over 34 weeks per year is broadly correct and should remain approximately as is. The Committee recommends that the House should be given the opportunity to vote on whether the House should continue to sit in September from 2013 onwards. There is widespread recognition that there is no scope for any diminution in the time available to the House for debate and scrutiny of legislation. The current pattern of 8 sitting hours on each sitting day between Monday and Thursday should therefore also continue, subject to future decisions concerning Friday sittings. Suggestions were heard that the House should sit normal working hours but that could be ill-suited to the transaction of other important Parliamentary business and needs of Members whose constituencies are some distance from Westminster. The House should be enabled to come to a decision in respect of each different day. The Committee is also currently considering whether consideration of private Members' bills should be moved from Fridays; and programming of legislation. The proposal of 'injury time' to compensate for time spent on oral statements was deemed undesirable but the Committee suggests that there should be a mechanism for backbenchers to question a Minister between 11.00 and 11.30 on Wednesdays