§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I do not know what plans you have for the weekend but if you are staying in your official residence, I fear that your peace will be sorely disturbed by a rave party that is being organised and is advertised in the current edition of Time Out in county hall. Given that the House has taken a decision about illegal rave parties, could you make inquiries to ensure that the Japanese owners of county hall do not proceed with that rave party? It would be an insult to the House and it could result in severe damage to county hall. Will you please make some inquiries and get it stopped?
§ Madam SpeakerI shall certainly give no such commitment to the hon. Gentleman, but I can tell him that I have been disturbed before, whether by rave parties I am not certain, by the activities at county hall.
§ Mr. Peter Luff (Worcester)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would appreciate your guidance on some remarks in the Chamber yesterday evening during the debate on rail privatisation. During my speech, I drew attention to the poor attendance on the Liberal Benches for the debate on a motion that the Liberal Democrats had inspired, and I mentioned their failure to seek to catch your eye in that debate. A Liberal Member intervened and said:
in a three-hour debate such as today's, we are not entitled to more than one speech at the beginning and one at the end. We could not intervene even if we wished to do so."—[Official Report, 11 July 1995; Vol.263, c.787.]968 I would appreciate your clarification, Madam Speaker, that while they are entitled to open and close their debate, they are perfectly free to catch your eye, as five successive Conservative Back-Bench Members did yesterday. Is not the real reason for their absence that they were just not interested in the debate, and does that not show an appalling lack of gratitude for your championing of the rights of Back-Bench Members?
§ Madam SpeakerAll Members know that, if they wish to intervene at any time on someone else's speech, it is for the Member who has the floor to decide whether to give way. Quite a number of Members wished to speak in both the debates that were sponsored yesterday by the Liberal Democrats.
Perhaps we might get on. I have an inordinately long list of Members who wish to speak in the debate today, and I shall have to limit speeches by Back Benchers to 10 minutes.
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. It was not a point of order for the Chair. We have enough business without petty points of order from all parts of the House. We have business to conduct