The point is whether we can come up with a list of items that would be matters of confidence. We have such a list at present, informally. It's pretty clear that we are not in complete ambiguity. A government is defeated if a motion of no confidence is passed. The motion must say that the government is blamed or that the government does not enjoy the confidence. This is clear. If the House wants to get rid of the government, it can do so.
Secondly, it can do so by rejecting supply—not by voting against any financial measure, as some people say, because this is not correct. You can reject the whole taxation bill and the country can work nevertheless, because there is already a taxation bill in force. The state can work. If you reject supply, this is another issue, because you deprive the government of the money it needs to pay its civil servants.
And there is a third area. If a Prime Minister has said that something is a matter of confidence, that he leaves if he loses, then if he loses he will have to leave.
So these are clear, but if you try to specify which ones are matters of confidence, I'm struck by one thing. Is it the wisdom of nations? I don't know, but I know pretty much the practice in other parliamentary systems, and I still have yet to see the country where everything has been specified, that this is a vote of confidence and this is not. They all say that if the house passes a motion of censure against the government, then they are out, but they don't go further.
Try to imagine all the kinds of circumstances that can arise. In some contexts one issue is absolutely basic in the minds of some people, and in other circumstances it is not. For some members of this House, I suppose the definition of marriage is something that absolutely strikes at the heart of the human condition. Other people say that's an issue on which we may disagree, that it's not as basic as you say.
I would come back to that theme. Plenty of constitutional lawyers have tried before us to regulate the political dynamics in detail, as much as possible. The outcome has not been very satisfying. It's probably better to keep the flexibility.