However, Commons spokesman Sir Lindsay Hoyle has previously said he would “not mind” a mother splitting up to breastfeed the chamber.
Following the protest over Mrs Creasy’s treatment, she suggested there may be times when the president could exercise discretion and commissioned a review of the rules.
The proceedings committee on Thursday released its report in which it concluded that it was a “long-standing practice of the House” that babies “should not be present” in the House and Westminster Hall and concluded that this guidance should remain in place.
Committee MPs noted that there had been “several occasions” when MPs had brought babies to the debates “without interruption”. But they said this had “contributed to some confusion and a gap” between practice and rules.
Alicia Kearns, the Conservative MP for Rutland and Melton, told the committee that there is a “relatively high level of choice” for MPs with babies who need to balance their work and family responsibilities.
He also noted that babies run the risk of distracting their fellow parliamentarians and may also give the public the impression that politicians are being distracted from official affairs.
The report noted that Ms. Kearns “contrasted the role of a member in the courtroom with that of a lawyer in court, arguing that the presence of a cared for baby undermines the confidence that full attention was being paid to the proceedings.”
Karen Bradley, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, said: “On the balance of the evidence received, the committee also recommends that the current rules be maintained and members should not bring babies to the House of Commons. or Westminster Hall proceedings “.
But they added that there should be a “degree of de facto discretion” on the part of the chairs that “should be exercised in moderation.”
The committee also examined the issue of delegation voting and supported the “overwhelming balance of evidence” extension of the representation vote for “serious long-term illness.”