§ Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Today, 122 questions were put down for the Prime Minister and there were two specific questions requiring specific answers that were not general or constituency questions. Those questions appeared in the top four of the ballot. Statistically, that sort of thing is likely to happen once every 20 years. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether there is any bias in the ballot in favour of specific questions or, if not, whether you yourself think that there should be some bias.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow) knows that it is a ballot. I would welcome his attendance at the shuffle that takes place at five minutes past four every day. Many hon. Members have been to witness this phenomenon and I suggest that he does exactly the same. He will then see how fair it is.
§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is true that two specific questions came out of the list today. However, the significant thing is that those questions are put down a fortnight in advance. I make no point about the ballot; I assume that it is straight and above board.
The second specific question had been down for a fortnight and therefore the Prime Minister had a fortnight in which to consider what her answer would be. The key thing was that, after that fortnight's deliberation, she refused to answer. What is the point of putting down such detailed questions to the Prime Minister—previously she bragged about being able to answer any questions that were thrown at her, unlike previous Prime Ministers— when, after a fortnight's deliberation, she cannot come up with a decent answer? She is frightened of giving one.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) knows that that is not a question of order in the House. Every right hon. and hon. Member must take responsibility for what he or she says provided that it is in order.
§ Mr. Harry Ewing (Falkirk, East)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise a point of order about the conduct of hon. Members in the House and about which there has been some concern. May I apologise straightaway for raising this matter in the absence of the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow), but if hon. Members ask a question during a statement I assume that they do what I do and sit in the Chamber for the remainder of the proceedings on that statement.
It was noticeable today that the hon. Member for Eastbourne launched a fairly scathing, personal attack on the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath). Is not the procedure and custom of the House that, if an hon. Member intends to refer in such terms to another right hon. or hon. Member, it is good manners and customary to give that person notice? I wonder whether you, Mr. Speaker, will remind hon. Members of that practice?
It was noticeable that the Prime Minister sat right through the private notice question and right through the statement on the steel industry until the attack was made. As soon as it had been made and dealt with, she immediately left. I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that there is an obligation on you to stop this House being used as 1139 some sort of backyard in which the Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow) and other Conservative Members can hang out the Tory party's dirty washing.
§ Mr. SpeakerI shall certainly reiterate what the hon. Gentleman has said. It is a convention in the House that we do not refer to each other in terms of an attack without giving due notice. I hope that hon. Members would never attack other hon. Members anyway, without good reason for doing so—and certainly not in order to make cheap points.