§ Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will be aware of the increasing concern expressed in the House about the standard of answers to parliamentary questions. I realise that the answers are not your responsibility, but I know that you are concerned that correct procedures should be followed.
I refer to an answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) by the Under-Secretary of State for Social Security, the hon. Member for Monmouth (Mr. Evans), in November last year. The Minister said:
The independent tribunal service has no plans to close any other venues."—[Official Report, 4 November 1996; Vol. 285, c. 386.]That means any venues other than the nine he had mentioned in the answer.My right hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) received a letter from the independent tribunal service saying that a meeting would be held in Chesterfield on 14 January to consult in connection with those future arrangements. What actually happened at that meeting was that the people there were informed that the tribunal service in the area was to be closed, which seems to run contrary to the provisions contained in the parliamentary answer on 4 November.
In these circumstances, should not the Minister come to the House to make a statement about the nature of his parliamentary answer? That would allow us to follow up some of the matters of substance connected with the closure of the tribunal, which will cause great problems in my constituency and those of my hon. Friends in the area.
§ Madam SpeakerI do not have the Hansard of November to which the hon. Gentleman referred. I have not been informed that a Minister is seeking to make a statement on that matter, but the hon. Gentleman could put down further questions. He could even seek an Adjournment debate on the matter, which would give him ample opportunity—at least 15 minutes—to air his views and to get an answer from the Minister.