Points of Order (Hansard, 1 April 1993)

§ Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South)
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I entirely accepted your suggestion this afternoon that my tardy arrival at business questions meant that I had missed the statement and, therefore, would not be called. I accepted that without equivocation, as you know. However, it caused me concern when the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile), who speaks for the Liberal party, arrived halfway through the Welsh statement and was called. I hope that there is no discrimination between tinpot members of the Liberal party who reckon to be Front-Bench spokesmen and other Back Benchers. The same rules should apply to everyone.

§ Mr. Alex Carlile (Montgomery)
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. Do you accept that the reason why I was a little late for the statement was that you took the sensible decision not to call the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer), which meant that business questions lasted for considerably less time than I had anticipated?

§ Madam Speaker
Perhaps I might respond to the original point of order. I say seriously to the House that it is not my intention to call Members to question a statement when they have not heard that statement. I think that I have the support of the House on that, including the support of the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer).
It is true that the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile) was one minute late for the statement. He was kind enough to send his Whip post haste to my Chair to explain why he was late. I will not repeat that explanation to the House.