EXACTLY one week ago today, MPs debated a Bill which could have finally ended the fox hunting row.

It died an anonymous death, "talked out" by the handful of members who took the time to attend.

The Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) Bill wasn't a great piece of legislation and was never likely to be accepted by Labour MPs because it allowed hunting to continue - albeit under licence.

But the scenes in the chamber were still a far cry from the packed benches and bad tempers we have grown used to when the issue has raised its head during the past six years.

The explanation is that it is was a Private Member's Bill and MPs hardly ever stick around until a Friday, when these are debated.

I do not blame the politicians - they have busy constituency lives and tend to spend the day visiting schools or hosting surgeries. Indeed, their constituents would probably be less than amused if they cancelled these commitments to have yet another spat about foxes.

But an interesting test beckons.

The Gangmaster Licensing Bill, to regulate unscrupulous providers of casual labour, will be debated on Friday, February 27.

On Monday, during an emergency statement on the deaths of 19 cockle pickers at Morecambe Bay, the house was full of both MPs and remorse.

But will they be willing to pack the green benches in two weeks' time?

A quorum of 40 MPs is required in case a division is called and 100 must be present to force a closure motion.

If 100 do not turn up, there is no way of stopping MPs who do not like the idea from talking for hours on end.

And if they do this until the end of the sitting - 2.30pm on a Friday - the Bill fails.

This may sound a ridiculous waste of a person's time. But there is a hardcore of MPs who make it their mission to sink all Private Member's Bills on the grounds new laws should be introduced by the Government, not by the back door.

Around 140 MPs have signed a Commons motion supporting licensing to stop "unscrupulous rogue gangmasters exploiting and intimidating workers".

The gangmasters are accused of "breaching human rights, illegal deductions from wages, failure to pay the minimum wage or sickness pay, tax fraud, human trafficking, smuggling and the supply of drugs".

So, if the MPs who have signed the motion do attend, Jim Sheridan's Bill will at least complete its Second Reading - the first significant hurdle in the Commons.

It will then be up to the Government to give backing to the Bill, along with time for it to pass its remaining stages in Parliament.

The early indications are this will happen. On Monday, rural affairs minister Alan Michael said "maybe", while Home Secretary David Blunkett - in typical grandstanding style - muddied the waters by saying "yes".

But if they don't, the whole system of Private Member's Bills will be thrown under the spotlight.

Many MPs are unhappy with the new Tuesday to Thursday sitting hours at Westminster, which see business finish at 7pm.

This leaves Northern MPs, unable to go home to their families, twiddling their thumbs.

Wouldn't it make more sense to abandon Friday's session officially and shift Private Member's Bills to late-night sittings earlier in the week?

The MPs would be kept out of mischief and decent backbench legislation would have at least a fighting chance of success.

Updated: 10:47 Friday, February 13, 2004