§ Mr. Denis MacShane (Rotherham)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You kindly called me in Question Times in which 15 questions were answered, but just three related to employment matters. Of the total number of questions tabled for oral answer, just 10 out of the 37 related to employment. We all understand that that is the luck of the draw, but since the merger of the Departments of Employment and Education, employment issues such as the labour market have been wiped off the parliamentary agenda. I have written to you about that, Madam Speaker, and I have received a courteous reply from the Secretary of State, but could something be done about it?
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman has answered his own point of order. The answer lies in the number of questions on employment that are tabled by hon. Members. Then, of course, whether a question is selected is down to the luck of the ballot, as the hon. Gentleman has suggested. I believe that the answer is to table more questions on employment. The hon. Gentleman has the answer in his hands.
§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. May I be helpful on this occasion? My hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane) has made a good point. I do not think that we should rely so much on the luck of the draw. It would be better if the Procedure Committee, of which I am a member, considered whether it would be possible to introduce some sort of allocation, because it is unfair that we have to rely on pure luck to get an answer to a question that has not met the employment criteria currently required.
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman has made an interesting point. He may wish, as a member of the Procedure Committee, to refer the matter to that Committee. I leave it to the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)On the same matter—
§ Madam SpeakerNo, there is no other point on the same matter. We are all sympathetic about it. Let us look at what has been suggested.