§ Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I seek your guidance on the subject of answers to questions. If it is in order, as I understand that it is, for the Prime Minister to answer questions about the wages of ordinary workers who are struggling to make ends meet, why is it not possible for him to answer a question about Mr. Cahill, who is to receive a £10 million pay-off after selling the British Rover company to BMW? Is not the Prime Minister responsible for such matters?
§ Madam SpeakerAs the hon. Gentleman knows, Ministers, Back Benchers and Front Benchers are responsible for the comments they make in the House. it is not the responsibility of the Chair.
§ Mr. Bruce Grocott (The Wrekin)My point of order, Madam Speaker, arises directly from the events at today's Prime Minister's questions, which is increasingly becoming a farce—I think that viewers, of whom there are a million, would agree with that.
Was it in order that, during questions, the Prime Minister gave a detailed answer on the privatised British Telecom in response to a planted question from a Conservative Member, but that, when it came to the rather more difficult question about another privatised company, British Aerospace, he said that it was not a matter for him? We need to know which questions the Prime Minister is willing to answer and which he is not. As long as he continues to perform as he has been, he will bring this place into disrepute.
§ Madam SpeakerI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave a moment ago.