Business of the House (Hansard, 4 February 1986)

§ The Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Biffen)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should like to make a brief announcement about the business for tomorrow.
In place of the debate previously announced, the business will now be as follows:
Until about seven o'clock there will be a debate on British Leyland. Afterwards there will be a debate entitled "The failure of the Government to provide cancer screening for all women at risk". Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.

§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether you can help us. Since when has it been the doctrine of Parliament or the British constitution that Ministers, however exhausted, have no knowledge of reprimands within their own Departments? Is this the way that we work?

§ Mr. Speaker
That genuinely is not a matter for me.

§ Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether you can give some guidance. Yesterday we had a statement from the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in relation to British Leyland. Today we have had a series of answers by the Prime Minister. At no stage has any indication been given to the House of a major defence implication which is of profound importance in that there is a subsidiary of Land Rover called Self-Changing Gear which not only supplies components to the British main battle tank but also is in contention for a £200 million contract in relation to the American battle tank, and its main competitor is General Motors, to whom it is considering selling.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have no doubt that that may arise tomorrow.

§ Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, arising out of what the Leader of the House has said. I understood that, when there is a change of business, any Member of the House can raise questions on the business statement. Therefore, I should like to raise a question on the business statement.

§ Mr. Speaker
Since the Leader of the House made his announcement on a point of order, I will take one point of order relating to it.

Mr. Heifer
The point of order I should like to raise, Mr. Chairman—[Laughter.] I understood the Speaker of the House to be also Chairman of the House.
I ask that the Government also find time tomorrow for a short debate on the letter which has been reproduced in today's Morning Star from the solicitors of News International to Mr. Bruce Matthews, dated 20 December, which clearly shows that Mr. Murdock and his friends had already decided some long time ago that action should be taken to provoke a strike and to sack the workers in Fleet street. The Leader of the House should be prepared to consider a short debate on that important issue after 10 pm.

§ Mr. Biffen
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The business for tomorrow that I have announced relates to an Opposition day. Although I realise that the point raised by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) is of general interest, I cannot offer any Government time after 10 pm.

§ Mr. John Butterfill (Bournemouth, West)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order for an hon. Member to mislead the House? Surely, the article in the Morning Star was saying that the newspaper involved was taking legal advice as to what—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I think that we have disposed of that matter. It is not one for me.

§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Genuine?

§ Mr. Skinner
Yes. It is as genuine as the series of misunderstandings that the Government have —[Interruption.]
Today, we have had business changed on a point of order. That practice is not greatly welcomed by those hon. Members, in particular Opposition Members, who like to use the rare opportunity to ask questions about the change of business. My hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) would have been within his rights to ask the Leader of the House about the business to which he wished to refer. I may well have done the same. In future, it would be as well to follow the well-worn practice of a business statement with business questions, and not a point of order when there is a change of business, from whichever side and for whatever reason.

§ Mr. Speaker
Entirely genuine. It is an unusual way of doing it, but it has been done.