Points of Order (Hansard, 11 March 1987)

Several Hon. Members
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
I will take Mr. Canavan first.

§ Mr. Dennis Canavan (Falkirk, West)
I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, which concerns an abuse of the procedure for tabling ten-minute Bills.
On Monday 23 February I went up to the Public Bill Office, and while waiting I discoverd that the hon. Member for Fife, East (Mr. Henderson ) was sitting there. He informed me that he was waiting with the intention of presenting a Bill the following day for presentation on 17 March. It will not have escaped the attention of the House that 17 March, as well as being St. Patrick's day, is Budget day. The hon. Gentleman is a PPS to a Treasury Minister.
On the following day, no motion appeared in the name of the hon. Gentleman, but a motion relating to the Airports (Discriminatory Charges) Bill appeared on the Order Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Stern), who, by coincidence, is also a PPS to a Treasury Minister.
If the events of last year are repeated, the motion will be withdrawn before Tuesday, thus allowing the Chancellor of the Exchequer a free run, and allowing him to kick off at 3.30 pm without interruption. It will then be too late for any hon. Members to fill the vacant slot.
What protection can you give, Mr. Speaker, to genuine Back Benchers against this abuse of the system, whereby Tory Cabinet Ministers are using their lackeys on a rota basis to outdo other hon. Members and put down bogus motions which they have no intentiont of moving? That is a dog-in-the-manger attitude, which deprives genuine Back Benchers of the limited time that is available for Private Members' business. I ask you to look into that.

§ Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Is it the same point?

§ Mr. Marlow
No, Sir—a different point of order.

§ Mr. Speaker
I shall deal with one point at a time.
The hon. Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Stern) has given notice of a motion under the ten-minute Bill procedure. I am informed that that is still on the Order Paper. The House will understand that I cannot look behind the notice of a motion and rule on the motives which may have caused the hon. Member to put it down.

§ Mr. Anthony Beaumont-Dark (Birmingham, Selly Oak)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The rules of the House must be obeyed. There are traditions in the House, which, with its long tradition, are of profound importance. There are certain areas in the House, are there not, Sir, where conversations that occur are meant to be private? Many of us were distressed t o hear yesterday that conversations, in which comrades grabbed each other warmly by the throat, became public knowledge. Is it not an outrage that these friendly chats, which take place in the private areas such as the Tea Room or Annie's Bar, become public knowledge? Will you stop this abuse from occurring?

§ Mr. Eric Forth (Mid-Worcestershire)
Further to the point of order—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I am not responsible for conversations in the tea rooms or outside this Chamber. I hope very much that the conventions and traditions of the House will be kept by hon. Members.

§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, arising out of questions. You will recollect that, about three weeks ago, a certain difficulty arose about a second Adjournment debate, for which I had applied, and there was a question of notice. On that occasion, Mr. Speaker, you said f hat you deprecated very much the fact that proper notice was not given.
Thinking that the bussiness of the House would collapse yesterday, as, indeed, the Whips said that it might, I applied for a second Adjournment debate to give the Solicitor-General an opportunity to explain in detail the legal background on which he based his—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I heard the hon. Gentleman say that he would seek to raise this matter in an Adjournment debate. I know about his application for a second Adjournment debate yesterday, to which I agreed. It would have come on had the business of the House allowed. As it happened, the hon. Gentleman knows that the Northern. Ireland order continued until 11.30 pm, which was its allotted time. There was nothing out of order in that. The hon. Gentleman must now try for another Adjournment debate, and he has already given notice that he will do so.

§ Mr. Dalyell
Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I do not think that I can help the hon. Gentleman. He correctly applied yesterday for an Adjournment debate, which was not reached. He says that he will apply again, and jolly good luck to him.

§ Mr. Forth
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Are you satisfied about the extent of confidentiality of meetings held in the Committee Rooms of this building? You will be aware that there was a crisis meeting of the parliamentary Labour party in Room 14 this morning. Are you fully satisfied that such matters as, for example, the reported threatened resignation of the Leader of the Opposition at that meeting this morning cannot possibly be leaked or overheard during the conduct of such meetings in Committee Rooms? Are you prepared to look into this, Mr. Speaker, so that when the Labour party, or any other party, holds such a crisis meeting, the matters conducted in the privacy of such rooms are kept absolutely secure?

Several Hon. Members
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I understand that crisis meetings are occasionally held in Room 14 on a Thursday. I read about them in the newspapers on Friday morning.

Mr. Dennis S kinner (Bolsover)
Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. I know that you have already said that what goes on in the Tea Room or anywhere else is not really a matter for you, but you have claimed to be a fair man and we have heard the reports from Conservative Members. Iris e in the into rests of party balance.
I happened to hear the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Beaumont-Dark) on the radio the other day—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman, who is becoming an important figure in the House on procedure, must know that he must not refer to a matter that happened several days ago unless it happened in the Chamber or other areas of the House over which I have control; I have no responsibility for what is said on the radio.

§ Mr. Skinner
The hon. Gentleman was repeating what he was alleged to have said in the precincts of the House—that he is fed up to the back teeth with his hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie)—

§ Mr. Beaumont-Dark
That was today.

§ Mr. Skinner
That is right.
—preaching to him and to other Tory Members about almost everything else under the sun. He said, "I am fed up to the back teeth with her telling me who I have got to take on holiday. I am fed up to the back teeth with her telling us about not smoking when she can't control her husband." Then he went on to attack the Prime Minister. That is an even better story. [Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. We have an important series of debates before us today and there is great pressure from hon. Members who want to speak in them. I cannot answer the hon. Gentleman's questions. On grounds of balance I have heard him, but I cannot hear any more.

§ Mr. Marlow
On a completely different point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will recall that on Monday night there was a particularly important debate about the regions which was shunted into a fairly short period. Three quarters of that time was taken up by Front Bench spokesmen. I was one of those who was fortunate enough to catch your eye, so I have no personal axe to grind. But my point is that the first speech, which came from the Liberal party, took something over 25 minutes. The second speech, which came from my right hon. and learned Friend the Paymaster General, took a similar period. Then there was another speech from the Labour Front Bench that took a similar period.
Mr. Speaker, we have a divided Opposition. We know that the Labour party is poised on a precipice of terminal decline. We are not quite sure as to the potential fortunes of the Liberal party and the Social Democratic party. Surely in these circumstances and with a split Opposition, it is sufficient for one opposition party to put the Opposition case and then for a Minister to put the Government case—[Interruption.]—and then allow Back Benchers a proper time to speak. I stress the point that only 25 per cent. of the time in that important debate was allowed to Back Benchers. I was one of the fortunate Back Benchers, but on behalf of other hon. Members, I wonder whether you can comment on that, Mr. Speaker.

Several Hon. Members
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has raised a chivalrous point of order. I can tell the hon. Gentleman and the whole House that I am concerned about the time that is left for Back Benchers. The average Back Bencher will not speak more than four times in a Session—in a major debate. Last Session, thanks to the operation of the ten-minute limit, that number rose to six. However, I am very concerned about the time allowed for Back Benchers. 299 I frequently appeal to hon. Members to keep their speeches brief, and that especially applies to the debates that we are to have later today.

§ Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Am I not right in thinking that you have a responsibility to defend the dignity of the House and the dignity of hon. Members? When there is an attack upon the Father of the House, as there has been by the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey)—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. We have already heard about things that happen in rooms over which I have no control. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Beaumont-Dark) quite rightly said that we have conventions in this place, that conversations in tea rooms and dining rooms do not become public. I agree with that.

§ Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough and Horncastle)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I refer you, to the strictures that you have often made in the House about the correct use of parliamentary language? I ask you to make a ruling on whether it is correct in parliamentary terms to talk about the ego and vanity of the Labour party as the leader of the Labour party did in a private Committee Room this morning. Is that parliamentary language?

§ Mr. Speaker
Ego and vanity have been perennial attributes in this place. Presentation of Bill.

§ Mr. Michael Brown (Brigg and Cleethorpes)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not want to raise—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Just let me deal with the Presentation of a Bill.