Ideally, in our current system, the House leaders do meet on a weekly basis. If everything were functioning as it ought to be, it could be using the current system where an agreement could be reached that on this bill we'd like to see two days. It could be back and forth. The opposition may want five days. The government may want two days. Let's settle on three days and make one of those days a Tuesday or a Thursday, which are the longer days, and compromise in that way.
There are mechanisms that could be explored or a better use of where we stand in terms of using the tools. In Standing Order 78, there are methods that can be used. Very briefly, and I don't want to stray too far, you'd mentioned the Scottish Parliament. Westminster has a Backbench Business Committee. That was a relatively new invention. That would be an exciting dialogue to have in terms of exploring that mechanism as well.
One of the things that it looks at is the question of time. Time is limited, so there is the second chamber, and the Backbench Business Committee will often look at what's brought forward to that committee for debate where you can have a certain length of time for debate. I don't know the exact time frames. It could be one hour, two hours, or three hours of debate, or more. In fact, forcing the government to hold the referendum on leaving the European Union was actually done through that Backbench Business Committee. The vote was forced by debates that were conducted through that committee. It turned out to be an exceptionally powerful committee, which ended up ousting a prime minister in the end, so a powerful mechanism that gave a significant amount of power to individual members. Certainly, for the benefit of this committee, that would be something that would be exceptionally worthwhile to discuss as well.