§ Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Yesterday, you were kind enough to hear my point of order, and you were also in the Chair for business questions today. In the light of the response of the Leader of the House to what I said, may I ask you to reflect on the resolution of the House, detailed on page 63 of "Erskine May", that
ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments …?I do not believe that I have had a satisfactory reply to the important point that I raised. I ask you to reflect on the matter and give a ruling on how Ministers should be accountable for what they say in the House.
§ Madam SpeakerAt the risk of appearing brusque to some hon. Gentlemen, I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave yesterday, which was a considerable and considered one. I heard the exchange today and I was happy to give the right hon. Gentleman the opportunity to raise the matter with the Leader of the House. As he requests, I shall refresh my memory of "Erskine May" and see what I can do about the matter.
§ Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) raised his concern about the conduct of Prime Minister's questions, but you will have observed that several hon. Members, including me, were exercising their leg muscles to no productive effect during questions to the Solicitor-General and were disappointed that we got through only three questions in the 15 minutes allotted. Is it not reasonable in the circumstances to advise the Solicitor-General that he is deputed to answer questions, not Adjournment debates?
§ Madam SpeakerThree questions were taken, but the hon. Gentleman will, I am sure, readily accept that there were supplementaries to those questions. However, I am sure that the point has been taken.