Points of Order (Hansard, 14 April 1993)

§ Mr. Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton)
I wish to raise with you. Madam Speaker, on a point of order, a matter which I submit affects the rights and privileges of the House.
I wrote in October 1992 to the Secretary of State for Social Security about a case that concerned a disabled child in my constituency. The right hon. Gentleman replied to me more than two months later, saying that the case was being dealt with. I wrote to him again in February because, after more than four months, the case had not been dealt with and settled. As he did not reply, I tabled a question for answer on 1 April in which I asked him when he intended to reply to my letter. There was a response from the Minister of State for Social Security and Disabled People. The Minister stated that he understood that I had already received from the Benefits Agency a reply both to my earlier letter and to my question. I had not received that reply, but a little later I did receive it. The letter came from a person called Ann Robinson, director of policy and planning. It began extremely ungrammatically by saying As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency it is the responsibility of Mr. Michael Bichard to answer questions on relevant operational matters. The letter continues: However, as Mr. Bichard is away at the moment: I am replying on his behalf to your recent Parliamentary Question. A non-Member was writing that she was replying to a question that I had tabled to a Minister and to which the Minister had not replied. I submit, Madam Speaker, that when hon. Members table questions to Ministers, they have a right to expect answers from Ministers. Furthermore, it is not open to someone who is not a Member to purport to reply to a question from a Member by saying: I am replying … to your recent Parliamentary Question. Ann Robinson ended her letter: I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report and a copy will also be placed in the Library.—[Official Report, 1 April 1993; Vol. 222, c. 421.] Here is a non-Member saying, purporting, claiming, that she can arrange for a reply to be published in the Official Report and for a copy to be placed in the Library when she herself has no right to enter the Library of the House of Commons.
The matter affects the right of every Member of Parliament to table a question to a Minister and to receive a Minister's reply. Also, someone who is not a Member of Parliament must not be permitted to state that she is replying to a parliamentary question or that she is arranging for a reply to appear in the Official Report and to be placed in the Library.
The matter IS for the House. It is a question not of my dispute with a Minister over policy or individual cases, but of whether Members of Parliament who table questions have the undeniable right to obtain answers from 852 Ministers and of ensuring that those outside the House are not permitted to usurp the rights of the House of Commons.

§ Mr. Martin Redmond (Don Valley)
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. I am also concerned about Ministers having all the power and the glory and no responsibility. As for writing to a Minister for information and being referred to a chief executive, you, Madam Speaker, rightly said that you are not responsible for what is said by a Minister in the House. However, could you rule on whether a Secretary of State or other Minister would be responsible for anything said by chief executives of all the quangos that the Government have created?

§ Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South)
rose——

§ Madam Speaker
Order. I intend to answer those two points of order, and the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) may be satisfied when he hears my response.
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) for giving me notice of his point of order, on an issue about which the right hon. Gentleman has previously expressed concern. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that Ministers remain fully accountable for the work of their Departments, including that of executive agencies. It is for the Minister concerned to decide whether or not to refer a question to the chief executive of an agency for a detailed answer.
Since last October, following a recommendation from the Administration Committee, such answers have been printed in the Official Report. The Benefits Agency operates in exactly the same way as other agencies. Right hon. and hon. Members are able to table questions about its work and to seek an Adjournment debate on particular issues—as did the right hon. Member for Gorton just before Easter. However, I will look further into the matter.

§ Mr. Cryer
On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

§ Madam Speaker
Order. There can be no further points of order. I gave a ruling and said that I would look further into the matter. We ought to leave it at that, unless the hon. Gentleman has a point of order on a different matter.

§ Mr. Cryer
It is, Madam Speaker. As you know, the Government are extending the system whereby chief executives reply to questions about the prison service. I ask you to consider whether it should be necessary for the House—not the Government—to agree to any extension by means, for example, of an affirmative resolution. Then at least the decision to extend that power would be in the hands of the House, not the Executive.

§ Madam Speaker
I have already made a statement, and I told the right hon. Gentleman that I was taking the matter no further at this stage.