Ministerial Statements

HC Deb 02 April 1984 vol 57 cc642-4

34. Mr. Winnick

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will propose a Standing Order regulating the circumstances in which Ministers may make statements in the House.

The Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Biffen)

No, Sir. I believe that the present arrangements for Ministers to make statements after questions serve the general convenience of the House.

Mr. Winnick

Will the Leader of the House bear in mind that there is some difficulty in that when there is a wish for a statement to be made, say by the Prime Minister about the Oman affair, it is not possible to get such a statement? Is there not, therefore, a need to change the Standing Order so that when matters of great public interest arise, which undoubtedly the matter to which I referred is, we can get a statement from the Prime Minister?

Mr. Biffen

I see no necessity for changing the Standing Order and think that it would be quite impossible to provide some procedural definition which required a statement. I believe that present arrangements work tolerably well.

Mr. Beith

Has the Leader of the House noticed that, nowadays, statements by Ministers tend to be followed by even longer statements from the Opposition Front Bench, members of which then complain if anyone from the alliance Benches, who represents a similar number of voters, asks more than a brief question? Is that not a matter that the Procedure Committee could properly look into?

Mr. Biffen

The hon. Gentleman is a sensitive soul, but mercifully a very experienced politician; and I do not think that he suffers as much as he protests.

Mr. Marlow

Would it be possible to change the rules on ministerial statements so that it would be possible for the Leader of the Opposition to make a statement about whether he believes it would be right or wrong for there to be a ballot in the coal mines?

Mr. Biffen

It would be impolite and impolitic for me to comment on that question.

Mr. Campbell-Savours

Would not such regulation substantially help Parliament to check the Executive? Surely the only way in which we can establish the truth about Oman is to get the Prime Minister at the Dispatch Box to answer Parliament, as she should have done 10 weeks ago.

Mr. Biffen

For the reasons that I have given, I do not believe that what is proposed would be an appropriate way in which to secure greater discipline over the Executive and I do not look to the hon. Gentleman as an authority on truth with regard to Oman.

Mr. Michael Morris

Will my right hon. Friend accept that on a Monday, such as today, when there are three statements, colleagues who do not live as conveniently near to the House as I do, in the midlands, but perhaps come from the north or Scotland, do not know until 12 o'clock that there is to be a statement? Presumably they have to leave home extremely early in the morning. Will he look into that?

Mr. Biffen

I am sure that my hon. Friend appreciates that there are only two statements today, the third item being a private notice question. There are real difficulties associated with trying to put statements into the discipline of a greater time notice than that which we now require, as they often arise from last-minute occurrences.

Mr. Skinner

Is the Leader of the House aware that one of his hon. Friends said that there was not much interest in the Oman affair? Has he noticed that more than 400 Members of Parliament from all parts of the House have signed motions on the matter, which is one of the highest numbers ever recorded, so there must be much interest in the affair? Following what the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith), the Chief Whip of the Liberal party, said, does the right hon. Gentleman not find it strange that when there are statements in the House by Ministers, the Liberals and Social Democrats sometimes contradict themselves, which hardly fits into the pattern put forward outside of being one party, because in the House they are two parties?

Mr. Biffen

I did not hear the sedentary remark by an hon. Friend concerning the interest or otherwise in the Oman affair. If I am to be referred to the Order Paper and the signatories of the motions, I should like to say that I judge that the Ayes have it. I must conclude that there is no one more adept that the hon. Gentleman—may I call him my hon. Friend?—in demonstrating the multi-party facet of the Labour party.

Mr. Foulkes

Is the Leader of the House aware that when parallel statements are made on exactly the same subject relating first to England and Wales and secondly to Scotland, invariably the English and Welsh statement is made orally in the House, where hon. Members can subject the Minister to questioning, but the statement on Scotland is made either as a written answer or by the Secretary of State at a press conference in Edinburgh? Will the Leader of the House arrange parity for Scots Members so that they can put the Secretary of State for Scotland under the same scrutiny as other United Kingdom Ministers?

Mr. Biffen

I was not aware that the situation was precisely as described by the hon. Gentleman. Perhaps he will permit me to hide in a cowardly fashion behind the skirts of the usual channels as a way of resolving the matter.