§ Mr. Richard Holt (Langbaurgh)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, of which I have given you notice. On page 2426 of the Order Paper today, you will see that the first question is in my name. This question has been transferred from the Department of which I originally asked the question to another. In the process, it has been rewritten, and as a consequence of that rewriting, nonsense has been made of the original question. I asked the question originally of the Attorney-General, and if he had answered my question I might have been enabled to put a supplementary question to him concerning the scandals on the Isle of Man and the way in which people have been defrauded by those who run that island.
By virtue of what has happened, I am once again denied that opportunity. If every time I table a question to the Attorney-General it is automatically transferred to the Home Secretary, I shall never get an answer to the question that I am tabling.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. What is the point of order?
§ Mr. HoltI am asking you, Sir, whether it is in order not merely to transfer questions but to rewrite them so that the consequential content of the question is changed. I asked the Attorney-General what contact he had had; I did not want to know what contact the Home Office has had. If I cannot ask that question, the people whom I represent will be denied the opportunity for justice.
§ Mr. SpeakerIn answer to the first question, it is in order to transfer questions. I refer the hon. Gentleman, as I have done before, to page 286 of "Erskine May", which says:
It is a long established principle that decisions on the transfer of questions rests with Ministers and it is not a matter in which the Chair seeks to intervene.I am afraid that I cannot help the hon. Gentleman on that.As to the question whether his question has suffered a material change, I shall look into the matter, but if it simply directs the question from the Attorney-General to another Minister, I am afraid that that would be covered by the ruling that I have already given.
§ Mr. SpeakerNow, Mr. Ewing.
§ Mr. Harry Ewing (Falkirk, East)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I apologise if you feel that this is boring. I accept that you are not responsible for ministerial answers, but surely the time has come to do something about the Minister of State, Scottish Office, the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth), who, not once but three times today—he must know this—deliberately distorted facts and deliberately misled the House.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I would allow "distorted", but not "misled". Will the hon. Member please withdraw that remark?
§ Mr. EwingThe Minister, unknowingly or accidentally, misled the House. Whatever approach he took, he is certainly guilty of leaving an impression with the House that is totally contrary to anything that the facts will bear out. This is becoming a regular feature of the Minister's approach to the House of Commons——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The whole House knows that no occupant of the Chair can be responsible for the answers given to questions. I thought that the matter had been put right for the Opposition by the point of order that was raised by the hon. Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Mr. Worthington).
§ Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask why, despite your earlier strictures, we continue to suffer lengthy exchanges between the Opposition and Government Front-Bench spokesmen during Scottish questions? May I ask why you continue to persist in calling English Members, which means that Scottish Members are ignored?
§ Mr. SpeakerAs the hon. Member knows, he is frequently called on questions about Scotland and England. This is a United Kingdom Parliament. I well understand the hon. Member's frustration at not being called——
§ Mr. Ron Brown (Edinburgh, Leith)rose——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I understand the frustration of the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) at not being called on Question 7, but I must seek a balance in calling Back Benchers who have questions on the Order Paper. It seems to me—I hope that the House agrees—that if an hon. Member has been fortunate enough in the shuffle to have a question on the Order Paper, he should be given some precedence. I have tried today to ensure that that happened.
§ Mr. Ron Brownrose——
§ Mr. SpeakerDoes the hon. Member wish to raise a point of order or something else?
§ Mr. BrownTrust me, Mr. Speaker. As a socialist and a Scot, I seek your guidance. Clearly the acoustics in this place are not good. Sometimes we do not hear what the Government say. As I understand it, the Government are offering, perhaps slightly hypocritically, to help the Iraqi people in their hour of need and are offering to send out medics and perhaps engineers and others. Are the Government really offering to do that? Whatever the politics of the situation, the Iraqi people suffered unnecessarily because of the Government's evil intentions——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Member must not use a point of order to make a political and debating point. That has nothing to do with me.