HC Deb 15 January 1980 vol 976 cc1434-5
Mr. Freud

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should welcome your advice. As a result of the Wisbech air disaster on 21 September, the Minister responsible gave the public to understand that following yesterday's inquest he would make a full statement in the House. When I telephoned the Minister's office yesterday, I was told that because yesterday's business contained a full complement of ministerial statements his statement would be held over until today.

The Minister did not keep his promise. The House is unable to question him about why it took 16 weeks for the inquest to be held, why the names of the pilots were not disclosed and why there was miserable haggling about compensation to the relatives of the deceased. The people of Wisbech were afforded the additional insult—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member for Isle of Ely (Mr. Freud) is very experienced. Perhaps he will come to the point of order that he wishes me to answer.

Mr. Freud

The people of Wisbech were afforded the additional insult of a question being planted by the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Walker) so that the Minister could give a written answer. Will you, Mr. Speaker, call the responsible Minister so that he can make a statement and answer questions?

Mr. Speaker

I have never yet said "No" to a Minister who wished to make a statement. Any Speaker with an eye to peace in the House is unlikely to do so. If such a request comes my way, the hon. Member for Isle of Ely may anticipate my answer.

Mr. David Steel

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. A few moments ago you uttered some admonitions about the courtesies and conventions of the House on points of order. I suggest that where a Minister decides that a written answer is appropriate, as opposed to a statement—presumably because of the crowded nature of the business—it is grossly discourteous and offensive to an hon. Member and his constituency to arrange for that question to be planted by another hon. Member, who has no connection with the incident. I should have thought that the constituency, as well as the hon. Member, was entitled to feel aggrieved about it.

Mr. Speaker

I note that I gave the House a clear indication of my feelings when I replied to the hon. Member representing the constituency concerned. I have had no request for a statement. All that I can say to both sides of the House is that we abandon our normal courtesies at our peril.