Points of Order (Hansard, 6 March 1990)

§ Mr. Barry Jones (Alyn and Deeside)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You are the acknowledged champion of the House against the Executive. It is in that context that I seek your help. Bearing in mind both the integrity of the Secretary of State for Wales and the bizarre circumstances of his announcement, on Sunday, of his imminent retirement, we ask the Leader of the House and the Secretary of State for Wales come before the House with a statement. This is a very critical time for Wales and its economy, yet the Secretary of State for Wales is a lame duck. We believe that the best thing he could do would be to go now.

§ Mr. Speaker
rose——

§ Mr. Jones
Briefly, Sir.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is an Opposition day, and I have had no request at all for a statement on this matter.

§ Mr. Jones
Very briefly, Sir, may I ask you if you recollect that when Lord Joseph—formerly Sir Keith Joseph—made a similar statement of intent, the episode ended in tears and the hon. Gentleman left high office within weeks? May I ask you to use your best endeavours to bring both the Secretary of State for Wales and the Leader of the House before the House with a statement about the decision of the Secretary of State——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That has nothing at all to do with me.

§ Mr. Barry Porter (Wirral, South)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I refer back to Question Time, when, yet again, we had a series of mini-speeches from Members on both sides of the House? That spoils the point of Question Time. If you, Sir, chose to cut short these perorations, you would have the support of all moderate and sensible Members of the House—that is, myself.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his very helpful point of order. It is not fair to the House for Members to ask long questions. It tends to happen in the case of the first supplementary question to departmental Ministers, and very frequently at Prime Minister's Question Time. In future, I shall cut Members short if they ask more than one question, and I hope that, in doing so, I shall have the support of the House.

§ Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East)
Further to the point of order raised by my hon. Friend——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member knows that I cannot do anything about that matter. It has absolutely nothing to do with me.

§ Mr. Anderson
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. No. There are other ways of getting at things like this.

§ Mr. Graham Riddick (Colne Valley)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I hope that my point of order will be slightly more genuine than the one you have just heard.
You may be aware of newspaper reports over the weekend suggesting that the Football Association intends to bring a charge against my hon. Friend the Member for 730 Welwyn Hatfield (Mr. Evans) for bringing the game—presumably the game of football—into disrepute. It seems to me that my hon. Friend has said one or two very sensible things about the game of football, although—being so close to Manchester—I am not sure that I altogether agree with his comment about Manchester United being tripe.
It seems to me that the football authorities could well be seen as trying to gag my hon. Friend. He has quite often—justifiably, in my view—put the boot into the football establishment, and it seems that that establishment is now trying to shut him up. Do you, Mr. Speaker, have any——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Mr. Evans) is here, and he has not complained about the matter. If the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Riddick) is alleging that a contempt of the House has been committed, he must write to me in the usual way, and
I shall give the matter most careful consideration.

§ Mr. Riddick
Further——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. No, I have dealt with that matter.

§ Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday—as can be seen from column 591 of Hansard—you described a point of order raised by me as "bogus". May I respectfully suggest that those of us who represent Welsh constituencies are truly concerned at the fact that, at this stage, industries and others may not wish to negotiate with the person who represents Wales in the House of Commons and in the Government because of his intended resignation? I believe that it is within your ambit to be able to decide whether a Minister can be called on to give reasons for his resignation.

§ Mr. Speaker
If such a request were made to me, that would be a different matter. I am sorry if I offended the hon. Gentleman——

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman gave me the opportunity to use the word "bogus" by saying that he hoped that his point or order was not bogus. Perhaps he would have preferred me to use another word.

§ Mr. Nicholas Bennett (Pembroke)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask your advice on two matters concerning procedure and the possibility of a statement? I refer you to early-day motion 659, which concerns the National Union of Mineworkers and allegations about a £5 million payment from Libya.
First, Mr. Speaker, have you received an application for a statement from the Attorney-General from any Opposition Member? Secondly, is it in order to debate the matter, on the ground that it is not sub judice because the NUM has instituted no proceedings against the Daily Mirror or the BBC?

§ Mr. Speaker
I have had no request for a statement. Whether a debate should take place is a matter for the Leader of the House, and the hon. Gentleman's question should properly be directed to him during business questions on Thursday.

§ Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Today's announcement about lowland airports policy is the second major economic announcement in a week that affects Scotland and has 731 been made in the form of a written answer rather than an oral statement. What powers have you, Mr. Speaker—in relation to allowing private notice questions or applications under Standing Order No. 20—to grant Scottish Back Benchers the right to question Ministers on important matters of policy?

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman knows the limits of my power, which are set out in the Standing Orders. He need not have asked that question.

§ Mr. Andrew Faulds (Warley, East)
On a different point of order, Mr. Speaker. As you know, I rarely bother you, but over the past few weeks an important matter has arisen.
In the old days, when there was a hubbub in the House—as there is occasionally—we could hear what was being said through the speakers on the back of the benches. For some reason, the volume has now been lowered. Are you able to find out from the Chairman of the Committee on the Televising of the Proceedings of the House whether, to oblige outside listeners, the microphones have been turned down so that hon. Members can no longer hear? I am not the only hon. Member who has noticed the change. Will you make a statement to the House, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
The matter has been raised with me once or twice before, and it is under active consideration. I accept that there has been some problem with the amplifiers, but I do not know whether that has anything to do with the televising of the House. Let us face it: as the hon. Gentleman knows, the microphones are not exactly new, and should perhaps be replaced at an appropriate time.