Points of Order (Hansard, 4 April 1995)

§ Mr. Phil Gallie (Ayr)
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I draw attention to a problem that arises constantly between me and the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes), to whom I have given notice of my point of order. The hon. Gentleman constantly invents phrases and attributes them to me. On this occasion, I point to the Hansard of the Scottish Grand Committee of—

§ Madam Speaker
Order. Political knockabouts that take place in the Scottish Grand Committee are not points of order; to raise them as such is an abuse of the House. The hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) should raise them at the time and not now.

§ Mr. Bob Dunn (Dartford)
On a point of order, Madam Speaker, concerning remarks made by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) during the education debate last Wednesday. I have given notice of my intention to raise a point of order to the hon. Member for Brightside, and to the shadow apprentice, the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle).
In column 1037 of Hansard, the hon. Member for Brightside claimed during the education debate last week that Kent county council had spent £9 million on a nursery voucher experiment. I have checked that, and it is not true.

§ Madam Speaker
Order. That is not a point of order for the Chair; it is a political argument. The hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) might have done me the courtesy of letting me know in advance. If he will come to his point of order to me, I will try to deal with it. He might have made some indication to me, so that I might also see Hansard.

§ Mr. Dunn
Madam Speaker, I am very sorry that you were not told about the point of order—it is my fault entirely. I am making a charge against the hon. Member for Brightside that he misled the House with a statement which was untrue. While I was debating the matter today on Radio Kent, I received a message that the hon. Member for Brightside had acknowledged that the statement was untrue.

§ Madam Speaker
What is the point of order for me, please?

§ Mr. Dunn
I am about to get to it, Madam Speaker. I am taking my time, to make sure that you have the full facts before you.

§ Madam Speaker
Order. If I had the full facts, I would be able to respond to the hon. Member. He might have done me the courtesy of giving me the full facts to start with.

§ Mr. Dunn
Madam Speaker, as you know, I have already apologised for not giving you the full facts.
The hon. Member for Brightside has acknowledged that the statement that he made was misleading and untrue. I think it is essential that he should come to the Chamber and apologise to you and to the House for misleading us last Wednesday.

§ Madam Speaker
I will look at Hansard. Far too often, hon. Members raise points of order that are not points of 1528 order but are questions of political cut and thrust and debate across the Floor of the House. Hon. Members on both sides of the House have the opportunity to correct these issues by means of the Order Paper and in debate.

§ Mr. Peter Brooke (City of London and Westminster, South)
I entirely understand the grounds on which you refused my private notice question, Madam Speaker, but I hope that you will allow me the licence to remark that, the next time a Secretary of State closes a hospital that is nearly 900 years old, he or she will have the moral courage to come to the Dispatch Box.

§ Sir John Gorst (Hendon, North)
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. The next time that a Secretary of State wishes to close another hospital in my constituency, I hope that a similar courtesy will be offered, so that I may be given an opportunity to vote against it.

Several hon. Members
rose—

§ Madam Speaker
Order. I must deal with those two points of order.
The right hon. Member for City of London and Westminster, South (Mr. Brooke) was a Secretary of State for many years, and therefore is probably not aware that we do not mention applications that are made to me about such matters. However, I understand his strength of feeling.
May I say to the right hon. Gentleman and to the hon. Member for Hendon, North (Sir J. Gorst) that there is an Adjournment motion tomorrow morning, when hon. Members will have three hours during which they may raise such issues? If hon. Members are in their place at that time, I might look their way. Who knows?

§ Mr. Ian McCartney (Makerfield)
I seek your advice on access to information to deal with constituency issues. For some months now, hon. Members on both sides of the House have been inquiring about the blood transfusion service, in particular the closure programme at Lancaster.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Ms Eagle) and I have found out that our telephone calls about these matters are being monitored by the management of the blood transfusion service, and, as part of that procedure is to prevent us from discussing matters with the staff at the centre, I find it an abuse of hon. Members' access to deal with constituency matters. I ask you what we need to do to ensure that that monitoring is stopped immediately.

§ Madam Speaker
There may well be a question of privilege involved in that. Will the hon. Gentleman please write to me without delay?

§ Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham)
What protection do hon. Members have from the provision of bogus statistics and information such as that provided by the Lib-Lab Kent county council to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett)?

§ Madam Speaker
I hope that they will exercise their minds about these matters and determine for themselves what are the true statistics.

§ Mr. Peter Butler (Milton Keynes, North-East)
I wish to raise a point of order of which I have given notice, both to yourself, Madam Speaker—although briefly and without a copy of Hansard, for which I apologise—and 1529 to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett). It arises from the debate last Wednesday on education. I was present at the opening of the debate and, indeed, for the hon. Gentleman's speech, but I had left by the time the incident that I am about to raise had taken place, because I had gone to the Home Affairs Select Committee.
After I had left, the hon. Member for Brightside, in an intervention, purported to describe a letter that I had written to a constituent, saying that it attacked Tory-controlled Buckinghamshire. That was a misrepresentation of the contents of the letter, but I appreciate that you will not take that point. My point is that, yet again, the hon. Gentleman did not do me the courtesy of informing me that he was going to raise the matter. He had the letter with him—translated, I believe, into braille, for obvious reasons. He was clearly prepared to use it, and intended so to do.
Madam Speaker, you repeatedly rule that hon. Members should observe common courtesy among themselves; you are repeatedly ignored. Is there anything that you can do about it?

§ Madam Speaker
I have no authority to enforce it. I simply ask hon. Members to abide by common courtesies. Far too many hon. Members do not do so.

§ Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark and Bermondsey)
Following that, and having heard your answers to colleagues earlier, Madam Speaker, I raise a more general point of order about statements and answers. I know that you cannot determine what Ministers do, but surely there must be some control of Ministers who make statements about a minor variation in policy, and yet do not make any statements about the conclusion of an assessment of policy—the health service reforms in London. The assessment of that policy was introduced by a statement, but the decisions were announced by way of a written answer, not a statement.
I have no chance, as the Member of Parliament representing Guy's hospital—and nor have the right hon. Member for City of London and Westminster, South (Mr. 1530 Brooke), representing Bart's, and the hon. Member for Hendon, North (Sir J. Gorst)—to ask any questions; and the whole process began with a statement in the House.
I am merely asking you, Madam Speaker, to find out whether rules exist to determine what matters are so important that they must be brought to the House. Otherwise, war could be declared by means of a written answer and peace by means of a statement, and we would have no chance to ask about the former—only a chance to say, "Thank you very much," when we are told the latter.

§ Madam Speaker
I well understand hon. Members' frustration, but there are no rules that I can consult. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman, and others, will put the matter to the Procedure Committee. I entirely accept that there are occasions when it is very important for a Minister to come to the Dispatch Box so that hon. Members can question him. I ask hon. Members to bear in mind the fact that there is an Adjournment debate tomorrow morning, but I make no promises. Let us leave it at that for the moment.

§ Mr. Michael Stephen (Shoreham)
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health has spent £41.5 million on building an almost completely new hospital to serve my constituents. I am extremely disappointed that she is not here today, so that I can congratulate her personally.

§ Madam Speaker
That is a total abuse of the House. I should have thought that hon. Members—however new they were in 1992—would be accustomed to our procedures now, and would not continue to abuse the House and its procedures.

Several hon. Members
rose—

§ Madam Speaker
No, I am going to move on now. I have taken enough points of order.

§ Mr. Gallie
rose—

§ Madam Speaker
I have already taken a point of order from the hon. Gentleman. He must resume his seat.