§ Sir Anthony Grant (Cambridgeshire, South-West)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In my question to the Leader of the House, I wrongly referred to the Opposition deputy Chief Whip as having signed an early-day motion. I had confused him with another Don, who is a Liberal. I would never accuse the hon. Member for Jarrow (Mr. Dixon) of being a Liberal. May I correct the record and unreservedly apologise to the hon. Gentleman?
§ Madam SpeakerIt is refreshing to hear an apology across the Floor of the House these days.
§ Mr. Peter Bottomley (Eltham)On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
§ Madam SpeakerI have dealt with that point of order.
§ Mr. BottomleyOn a point of order, Madam Speaker.
§ Madam SpeakerI am sorry. I thought that the hon. Member said that it was further to that point of order.
§ Mr. BottomleyOn a point of order, Madam Speaker. You made a statement about the way in which questions and answers should be given. There was a time when Members who had tabled a question were able, on occasion, to be called for a second supplementary question. May I direct your attention to that, not so that you make a statement, but to consider that there may be times when that would be appropriate again in the future?
§ Madam SpeakerI was attempting—I think I had the support of the House—to implement a decision of the House. I want to see Question Time improved, and I want Back Benchers to be able to put their questions and more questions that are tabled to be reached. I tried to be helpful to the House. Of course I shall consider what the hon. Gentleman says. I am always open to suggestions.
§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry to press the matter, but, as you know because you have been in the House for many years, some Members assiduously attend all Question Times, and they are not numerous.
I hope that, in the way in which you intend to manage the House, you will take into account those regular attenders, and recognise that some of us are concerned that, if the House became no more than a place where one came to table questions in the hope that one of them would come up in a ballot, the very character of Question Time, which has been built up over many decades, would change. I am sure that you would have grave reservations about that.
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. I am taking no further points of order on that subject. I have made a very important statement today, and I hope that hon. Members will reflect on it.
In answer, I would simply say that I am also concerned about Members who assiduously table questions but who, because of the luck of the draw, do not get a place high on the Order Paper. I notice them; I spend a whole morning doing research on the subject, and I am concerned about those Members, too. But of course—
§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
§ Madam SpeakerNo, wait. I very seldom have things to say in the House. A little patience from the hon. Gentleman, please.
I must inform the House that of course I am not giving up the discretion that I have as Speaker. What I read out to the House today was in accordance with a report that has received the approval of the House, and I want to be helpful to all Members in it.
§ Madam SpeakerI shall take no further points of order on that matter.
§ Madam SpeakerNone at all on that matter. Is this on another matter?
§ Madam SpeakerNo. No further points of order on that matter. I have dealt with it.
§ Mr. ConnartyOn a point of order, Madam Speaker.
§ Madam SpeakerIs this on a different matter?
§ Mr. ConnartyYes, this is on a different matter. I have noticed the way in which the ballots go and, as you know, Madam Speaker, I have been fortunate in coming up early. However, my son is a computer student at university and he tells me that it would be possible to have a weighted computer system whereby people who come up early are weighted so that there is a chance for other people to come up in the ballot in a more sensible way, rather than the 450 random selection every day, which makes a bit of a nonsense of putting one's name in. Would it be possible to do that with the computer system in the House?
§ Madam SpeakerWe carry out those procedures under the present rules of the House. If the hon. Gentleman wants a weighted computer system, he could suggest it to the Procedure Committee.
§ Mr. BanksOn a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is not only the names that appear on the Order Paper that signify Members' attentiveness in submitting questions. Now that the procedures here have been changed, questions beyond a certain number do not appear, so many people put in questions that never appear on the Order Paper. If you intend to study the Order Paper, may I suggest that you study the computer printout, so that you also know who has tabled questions?
§ Madam SpeakerIf hon. Members were to examine my statement and reflect on it, they would find it extremely helpful. I made the point that there will always be subjects of topical interest or controversy, on which an extended line of questioning would be appropriate. The House has to have confidence in me to ensure that hon. Members are allowed to continue that line of questioning. It is important that the Executive are answerable to the House, and I want to see that that is the case.
§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. If there is to be an extended line of questioning, can you be more generous in allocating it when private notice questions are requested?
§ Madam SpeakerI thought that I was always very generous with private notice questions. However, the hon. Gentleman has been a Member of the House for a long time, and he will appreciate that they have to meet certain criteria. If they do, they are accepted. We shall now move on to the Opposition day motion.