§ Mr. Douglas-MannOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, On 21 February the Secretary of State for the Environment made a statement in the House concerning the allocations for the housing investment programme. In the course of questioning following that statement I received a reply from the Secretary of State which I considered to be incorrect and possibly misleading, but in view of the possibility of misunderstanding I thought it was more appropriate for me to pursue the matter by way of a written question to the Secretary of State to give him the opportunity of amplifying it.
I apologise for detaining the House, but I think it is essential that I should read the question that I tabled. I asked the Secretary of State for the Environment
whether he will publish a revised table on the lines of table 111.28 of the Technical Volume of the Housing Policy Review, (Cmnd. 6951) showing the current estimates of demand or need for public sector housing in the period 1980–86 and of the supply from standing stock; whether he will outline the changes in assumptions"—
Mr. Deputy SpeakerOrder. Will the hon. Gentleman come to his point of order? The content of questions and answers is not a matter for the Chair.
§ Mr. Douglas-MannI fully accept that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Nevertheless, to enable me to establish my point of order it is essential that I explain the point that I sought to elicit from the Secretary of State, as will be apparent from the reply and from the points that I wish to make by reference to "Erskine May". I ask the indulgence of the House to enable me to make my point of order, which I believe is of importance to the entire House.
I asked wether the Secretary of State would outline the changes in assumptions and
how many householders on current estimates who are in need of housing in the public sector would be deprived of the opportunity of obtaining such housing by the implementaton of the policies outlined in his statement on Thursday 21 Februaryand whether he wished to reconsider or amplify the reply which he had given to me on that occasion.The reply that I received was:
I will write to the hon Member shortly."[Official Report, 11 March 1980, Vol. 1980 c. 531]I considered raising a point of order at that time, but I tabled a further question immediately. I should state that I had given the Secretary of State 13 days in which to answer my first question. I put a further question to the Secretary of State asking him when he proposed to give an informative answer to the question about the demand for public sector housing—
Mr. Deputy SpeakerOrder. It really is an abuse of the House to quote questions in a point of order. I repeat that the Chair has no responsibility for answers or the failure by a Minister to give an answer to an hon. Member.
§ Mr. Douglas-MannI accept that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but my point will be apparent in one or two moments. The question that I asked the Secretary of State was whether he would now publish, so that the information would appear in the Official Report, the information requested and if he would state on what basis the housing investment programme allocations had been made. I received a further reply which said: 1174
I shall be writing to the hon. Member very soonand that the HIP allocations were made in accordance with a statement that was in the Library.At page 334 of "Erskine May" it is stated that:
If a Member does not distinguish his question by an asterisk—in other words, it is a written question—the Minister to whom it is addressed causes an answer to be printed in the Official Report of Debates.My point is that it is not an acceptable process to the House—I hope that right hon. and hon. Members will agree—for the Minister to say "I will write to the hon. Member" or to say that he will give the information requested in a form that will appear only in a letter. Replies to questions should appear in the Official Report. It is not sufficient or acceptable for the Minister to say that the reply will be contained in a letter.I fully accept that it is in order for a Minister to say that the information is not available, or could not be made available without expense, or even that it is not in the public interest that the information should be disclosed, but it is not permissible for a Minister to say that he will give an answer in a form that is not public, but is contained in a secret letter to a Member. I submit that this is a matter on which the House should rule.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerIn answer to the hon. Member I can only say that he has made his point. It really is not a matter for the Chair. It is a matter that the hon. Member should pursue with the Minister concerned, because the content of answers is not and has never been a matter for the Chair.
§ Later—
§ Mr. Douglas-MannOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerIf it is the same point of order, I believe that the right hon. Member has exhausted the question.
§ Mr. Douglas-MannMy right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Foot) raised a totally different point of order further to my point of order. I wish to pursue my original point of order 1175 and invite a ruling, not necessarily today but on another day if you prefer, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on the question whether in answer to a written question the words "I will write to the hon. Member" satisfy the requirements on page 334 of "Erskine May" that:
the Minister to whom it is addressed causes an answer to be printed in the Official Report".It is of concern to the House and should be decided on authoritatively.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerI have always understood that that was a form of answer. I can understand the concern and resentment of the hon. Member that he has not received a full answer. Every Back Bencher wants a full answer to his question. I shall certainly look into that matter.
§ Mr. S. C. SilkinFurther to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker I fully appreciate, and of course I accept, the ruling that you have given. In the light of the circumstances put before you by my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Mr. Douglas-Mann) would the position be that the letter subsequently written, if it is written, by the Minister to the hon. Member is incorporated by reference into the reply that he gave? Is there any machinery by which that letter can be published in Hansard in order to fulfil the purpose of the original question?