text_body: --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  <p>A <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2005-01-26.327.0"> long series of changes</a> were proposed to the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmstords/2/201.htm"> Standing Orders</a> of the House of Commons, related to the "sitting" hours of the House, to take effect after the General Election.  These were edits to Standing Orders numbered 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 24, 41A, 54, 83I, 88, 100, 108, 116. </p>
  
  <p>The Aye-voters failed to change this list of changes (amendment (m)) for: </p>
  
  <p class="italic">in line 64, at end insert:</p>
  
  <p class="indent">"Line 6, at beginning insert ''Subject to paragraph (2A) below,'.</p>
  
  <p class="indent">"Line 28, at end insert:</p>
  
  <p class="indent">"(2A) Sub-paragraphs (a), (c), (d) and (e) of paragraph (2) above shall not apply to sittings of the House on Thursdays.".'.</p>
  
  <p>The proposed set of changes to the Standing Orders, as amended by the last vote, but not this one, then passed without a further vote. </p>
  
  <p>It's probably a convention that motions about Parliamentary hours of business are not whipped</p>
  
  <p>(This was very confusing to piece together, and these changes now need explaining -julian)</p>
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  