§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. May I refer you to the 21st edition of "Erskine May", page 291, and the responsibilities for questions? The basic issue is that it is the duty of Ministers to answer questions on matters of ministerial responsibility. It is not the duty of Ministers, if one reads from "Erskine May" aright, to bring in all sorts of extraneous, tendentious matters to the answering questions, which actually demeans the House of Commons.
It is also relevant to mention that yesterday there was a Scottish debate. There were points of order that may have been brought to your attention, which have resulted in a serious letter to Sir Russell Hillhouse asking about the role of the civil service in preparing matters of a tendentious nature when introducing a Bill. Could I ask you, as Speaker, to reflect on the various submissions that have been made, and possibly to make a statement in your good time?
§ Madam SpeakerI will certainly look at the latter point that the hon. Gentleman has raised with me as soon as I can.
On his first point, I recognise that, over many years, Question Time has developed into a lively occasion, on which political points are scored. Of course, the primary purpose of Question Time is to hold the Executive to account. "Erskine May" says:
Questions …should relate to the public affairs with which they"—Ministers—are officially connected, to proceedings pending in Parliament, or to matters of administration for which they are responsible.That is on page 285 if hon. Members would like to study it further.Elsewhere, "Erskine May" says—it for the benefit of those Members who put questions—
The purpose of a question is to obtain information or press for action … it should not be in effect a short speech.[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Members on all sides of the House are guilty of that. That quote appears on page 287.As to answers and supplementary questions, I quote from page 295:
An answer should be confined to the points contained in the question, with such explanation only as renders the answer intelligible, though a certain latitude is permitted to Ministers".I ask the House to take my words seriously and to look at those sections of "Erskine May", so that all Government Departments will know my feelings about this matter and all Back Benchers will know that I feel that their questions are becoming long speeches. They should ask pertinent, brisk questions.
§ Mr. David Harris (St. Ives)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In contrast to the last point of order, I wonder whether I might raise with you a point of order about something that has affected the fabric of the House rather than its procedures. Some of us, when we went through the No Lobby—I appreciate that you may be unfamiliar, in the normal course of your day's events, with voting—
§ Madam SpeakerI spent a lot of my life going through the No Lobby.
§ Mr. HarrisBut not last night, Madam Speaker.
Many of us were surprised, and not a little dismayed, to find what can only be described as a memorial to Nancy Astor in the No Lobby—
§ Lady Olga Maitland (Sutton and Cheam)Hideous.
§ Mr. HarrisAs my hon. Friend says, it is hideous. I think that is a fair description of that memorial in the No Lobby, which has appeared apparently during the recess. I do not know whether you were consulted about this, but I wonder whether you would make inquiries about who authorised the erection of that memorial to Nancy Astor.
In raising this point of order, you will understand, I in no way detract from her achievement in becoming the first lady Member of the House to take her seat in the House—not to be elected: to take her seat—and one acknowledges that achievement, but I would put it to you that the No Lobby is a very inappropriate place for such a memorial, on two grounds.
First, quite apart from the aesthetic taste of that memorial, it is in the wrong position. If a memorial is to be erected, surely it should be where visitors to the House usually see it, apart from conducted tours. Secondly, I really do not think that we want the Lobbies of the House turned into a pale imitation of some of the aisles of Westminster abbey across the road, which are mausoleums with all sorts of memorials sprouting to all sorts of people.
I wonder whether you would kindly look at the matter as perhaps our landlord—or, indeed, our landlady—in this place. Would you use your influence to move it to a more appropriate setting?
§ Madam SpeakerThe responsibility no doubt rests with me. I will certainly look into the matter. As far as I can recall, the bust of Lady Astor was commissioned by her family. The Works of Art Committee of the House determined where it should be put—in the No Lobby. The hon. Gentleman is quite incorrect when he says that the visitors do not see it. It is the No Lobby that visitors go through each morning before the House is open.
However, I take seriously the point raised by the hon. Gentleman, who does not normally raise frivolous points of order, and this is not a frivolous one. I will speak with those who are concerned about these matters to see what we can do, since it obviously offends some Members of the House.
§ Mr. Michael J. Martin (Glasgow, Springburn)Further to that point of order—
§ Madam SpeakerNo; there can be no further points of order. I can only deal with it in the way that I have been asked to do by the hon. Gentleman. It is my responsibility; I will now deal with it.
§ Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Earlier today, you made a statement on questions, and of course we shall all be able to read your remarks in Hansard tomorrow. Might it not be a good idea to have printed, along with your remarks, the sections in Erskine May to which you referred, so that Members would have them readily to hand?
§ Madam SpeakerI will look at the hon. Gentleman's suggestion. I gave the page references, but if I can be more helpful, I will certainly do so.
§ Mr. Michael J. MartinOn a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Administration Committee gets the blame for moving Annie's Bar, and when some drunken journalists were a bit worried about that, they maligned hon. Members of the House. I would like to place it on record, as in a previous point of order, that that had nothing to do with the Admin Committee. I understand that the Arts Committee is an advisory committee.
§ Madam SpeakerThat was not a genuine point of order. Of course the Administration Committee has nothing to do with it. I gave my word to the House that I am always finally responsible, and I will deal with the matter.
§ Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is a different point of order. It concerns the principle behind decisions such as that to put up what I think is a very good plaque—and it must be put somewhere. How is the House to be consulted about such decisions? I do not think that the House was aware that it was going to happen.
§ Madam SpeakerThe House should have been aware that it was going to happen, because various hon. Members on both sides of the House sit on the Committees of the House. That is how the responsibility filters through.