§ Mr. Norman Hogg (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will have noticed that question No. 175 appears on the Order Paper today in the name of the hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Shaw). The question appears to have been placed on the Order Paper to elicit the result of the inquiry to which the question refers. This is a matter of immense importance that should have been dealt with either by a statement to the House or by an oral answer from the Secretary of State for Scotland. All Scottish Members are here and, while we have plenty to do, we could hear the answer to that question orally. Is there a procedure whereby that question can be answered now so that we can debate the matter now?
§ Madam SpeakerThere is no procedure whereby the hon. Member can secure an oral answer to that question. I have not heard that any Minister is seeking to answer it orally or to make a statement on the matter.
§ Mr. Bill Walker (North Tayside)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I rise to draw your attention to the fact that the European Commissioner for Transport has today approved the expenditure of —440 million of public funds in aid to the state airline of Spain, Iberia. This will have a damaging impact on UK airlines. Is there any way in which the House can debate this matter, because British taxpayers' money will be used to damage British interests?
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman may like to raise the matter with the Leader of the House during Business Questions if he is seeking a debate on this or other matters.
§ Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. It has been widely reported today that senior judges—including a former Master of the Rolls—have criticised the Home Secretary for playing politics with the administration of justice. Given the gravity of these accusations, has the Home Secretary indicated to you whether he intends to come and give an explanation to the House?
§ Madam SpeakerNo. As I said earlier, I have not heard from any Minister that we will be having a statement today on any of those issue.
§ Mr. Brian Wilson (Cunninghame, North)Subsequent to the point of order of my hon. Friend the Member for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth (Mr. Hogg),Madam Speaker—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman and the House know that once a point of order has been dealt with, it must rest there. I have given my answer to that point of order.
§ Mr. WilsonIt is a different point of order.
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman said that it related to the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth. He cannot have it both ways.
§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)On a point of order, Madam Speaker.
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Member for Cunninghame, North (Mr. Wilson) might like think about a different point of order while I deal with the hon. Member for Linlithgow.
§ Mr. DalyellWhile it is quite right, Madam Speaker, to say that there is no procedure available in such cases, used there not to be a convention that—at least as a courtesy to the House—Ministers who knew that controversial statements were due to be made placed them in the Library at two o'clock at the latest?
§ Madam SpeakerThat is a decision for Ministers to make, not one for the Speaker.
§ Mr. Wilsonrose—
§ Madam SpeakerIs it a different point of order?
§ Mr. WilsonYes, Madam Speaker. I used the word "subsequent" in a purely chronological sense.
The question on the Order Paper refers to a specific local authority. I was under the impression that, according to a convention of the House, any such specific reference should be made by an hon. Member representing the area concerned. The fact that the question was tabled by the hon. Member for Dover—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. That is not a point of order for me. I think that the House knows the answer to that one.