§ Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Four years ago the House—or certain members of it—voted by a majority for the Single European Act, which surrendered certain powers to European institutions. At the time the House did not believe that it had surrendered powers over immigration policy or the working week. Those powers are being hijacked and the European Community is cheating over the way in which it is trying to use such powers.
There will shortly be a debate about the ratification of the Maastricht treaty and various papers have been deposited. You will have seen from a letter in The Times yesterday from Lord Bruce that the papers which have been deposited—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. I insist on points of order relating to me and all hon. Members must come directly to the point. We will have no letters to The Times. Hon. Members must refer to the Chair and to my responsibilities.
§ Mr. MarlowIndeed, Madam Speaker, and it is an important responsibility. The implication is that the document placed before the House is complex and full of annotations. The issues involved are massive, but it will be difficult for hon. Members to understand the gravity of those issues from reading that piece of paper. The paper could be attached to the European Communities (Amendment) Bill as one paper, so that hon. Members would know what was involved in the new treaty from one reading. Will you use your offices to ensure that anything that comes before the House, before legislation, is clear because I can assure you that at the moment it is not?
§ Madam SpeakerOf course that is a matter for the Government, but I shall certainly use my good offices if I am able to do so.
§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry to have distressed you during Prime Minister's questions by causing you to intervene in what I was saying. Would you advise me and the House? The sub judice rule exists to ensure that nothing is said in the House which would prejudice someone's fair trial in court. I was not aware that an inquest was in the same category as a normal court of law hearing where someone was on trial. Will you clarify the position so that I do not make any further mistakes?
§ Madam SpeakerI would not want to mislead the hon. Gentleman and the House. I took a great deal of advice on the matter before coming to the Chair. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the matter was sub judice, otherwise I would not have interrupted.
§ Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Port Glasgow)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Twice this afternoon the Prime Minister mentioned the concept of subsidiarity. Given the importance of that concept and the sovereignty of this place, will it be possible to allow the House to examine the concept of subsidiarity within the context of the United Kingdom Parliament in advance of the Maastricht debate?
§ Madam SpeakerThat is a matter not for me but for business questions on Thursday, if the hon. Gentleman is lucky enough to catch my eye.
§ Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray)Further to the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), may I, as a Member of Parliament who knows a family who lost a young man during the friendly fire incident, ask whether it will be possible for there to be a full debate on the issue in the House after the inquest, because the families are desperately keen to know the exact truth?
§ Madam SpeakerI understand the hon. Lady's anxiety, but as a long-standing Member she knows that that is a matter to raise with the Leader of the House at business questions.
§ Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Will you confirm that, if you so determine it, hon. Members can ask questions on any subject, whether or not it is before a court or an inquest, and that the sub judice rule is used only as a guide and a convenience? Will you confirm that this House has the right at all times, if it so determines and if the matter is of importance, to comment although the issue may be before a court?
§ Madam SpeakerThe Speaker has a degree of discretion. The question arising concerned which witnesses were to be called, and that is where the sub judice rule comes in.
§ Mr. Nigel Griffiths (Edinburgh, South)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. As today a convicted killer escaped from Saughton prison in Edinburgh, and as yesterday a convicted killer escaped from Saughton prison, is it in order to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton), to make a statement to the House?
§ Madam SpeakerThat may well have been in order before noon, but it is certainly not in order at this time of day.
§ Mr. Tim Devlin (Stockton, South)rose—
§ Madam SpeakerIs the hon. Gentleman sure that he has a point of order that I can deal with?
§ Mr. DevlinYes. I do not want to take up the House's valuable time, Madam Speaker, but will you confirm for the guidance of all Members of the House that Ministers are responsible for the conduct of the Government but not for the conduct of extra-parliamentary bodies, whether they be political parties or other organisations with which they may be associated?
§ Madam SpeakerI cannot see why the hon. Gentleman wishes me to confirm that. I do not know what the point of order is for the Chair. Perhaps he will elucidate, and then I shall know what he is talking about.
§ Mr. DevlinDuring Question Time the Leader of the Opposition asked the Prime Minister a question about the conduct of the Conservative party, for which my right hon. Friend is not answerable in this House. Will you confirm that, Madam Speaker?
§ Madam SpeakerIn the cut and thrust of Question Time and debate there is often six of one and half a dozen of the other, and sometimes I have to turn a judicial deaf ear to what I hear coming from many quarters of the House.
§ Mr. Bruce Grocott (The Wrekin)rose—
§ Madam SpeakerWe have had enough points of order to deal with today and we should now proceed with the business. Has the point of order just occurred to the hon. Gentleman or has he been rising?
§ Mr. GrocottIt is further to the point of order of the hon. Member for Stockton, South (Mr. Devlin).
§ Madam SpeakerNo; I have dealt with that