§ 3.31
§ Mr. Francis Maude (Horsham)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister without Portfolio mentioned previously that he proposed to make an announcement—on Tuesday next week, I think—about the contents of the millennium dome. The matter was raised with you last week. Have you received any indication from Ministers whether the House will be the first to know what the contents of that great project will be, or whether that will be announced in a press conference or unveiling outside? Given the huge amounts of public money, whether taxpayers' or lottery money, to be spent on it, I am sure that you would agree that the House should hear first.
§ Madam SpeakerI refer the right hon. Gentleman to the response that I gave to the point of order last Thursday. The answer to his second question is no, I have not heard that a Minister is prepared to make a statement next week, but I am told that on the morning of the day that a statement is to be made.
§ Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is not a criticism of you, but that was the first time that we have had 10 minutes of questions to the Minister without Portfolio. Those of us who strongly support the millennium dome and project feel that very few of the hon. Members who were called for questions and supplementaries take our view, which is the overwhelming view of both sides of the House. We feel that we are not getting our fair share of the 10 minutes at Question Time.
§ Madam SpeakerPerhaps the hon. Gentleman should put the point to the President of the Council on Thursday, so that we get even more time with the Minister without Portfolio.
§ Mr. Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will be aware that several hon. Members attended the House in the hope of raising questions specifically related to questions on the Order Paper and were frustrated from doing so by the absence of hon. Members whose questions were on the Order Paper—in my own case, relating to lottery distribution in East Anglia. Can you offer us some protection or assistance in that respect, to ensure that we can raise questions when questions are on the Order Paper and are not withdrawn beforehand?
§ Madam SpeakerI can do nothing about questions that are withdrawn, but I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman tabled a question about East Anglia. Is that the point that he is making? [Interruption.] Hon. Members should table questions to get the answers that they require, and not rely 766 on the substantive questions of other hon. Members. I am not prepared to go on calling supplementary questions so that hon. Members can come into the House and latch on to the substantive questions of other hon. Members. They must take the initiative themselves. I thought that I had made that clear last week.
§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. On Friday 13 February, in column 740 of Hansard, I referred to a question that the Foreign Secretary had answered earlier in the week. It reads:
Does the House have the clear unambiguous undertaking that, before military action is taken, we will return to the Security Council of the United Nations for its clear, unambiguous endorsement of that military action?"—[Official Report, 13 February 1998; Vol. 306, c. 740.]That question was not replied to in the Adjournment debate—which is not a matter for the House on a point of order. However, on Sunday's "The World at One" programme from Chatham House, my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, appeared to give the impression—it is difficult to follow his exact words—that no such watertight undertaking had been given.Have you, Madam Speaker, had any requests from the Foreign Office to clarify that crucial question? Have you received any requests from the Foreign Office to put an explanation in the Library before tomorrow's debate of the legal reply to Mr. Marc Weller from the centre for international studies at Cambridge and other international lawyers who challenge the legal validity in international law of the proposed military action against Iraq?
§ Madam SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman will appreciate and understand that I have no responsibility for outside broadcasts or for what is said in those broadcasts. In answer to the thrust of the hon. Gentleman's point of order, I have received no indications from Ministers about a statement to be made today or tomorrow, or what they might say in the course of the debate tomorrow. It will be for the hon. Gentleman and others who are interested to press the points that he has just made. Those on the Treasury Bench have heard his comments and may relay them to Ministers at the Foreign Office.
§ Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Will you allow me simply to defend those who were unable to attend Question Time today? You may not be aware that many hon. Members are stuck on British Rail trains and cannot get into London in time to attend Question Time. Many Members from the north of England, including me, have missed Question Times because of Railtrack and the rail operators.
§ Madam SpeakerI do not want this to be a debate between the hon. Gentleman and myself, but there are telephones on railway stations and on trains. Many hon. Members withdraw their questions at the last moment because they are in exactly that position.