HC Deb 19 July 2000 vol 354 cc392-3 4.32 pm
Miss Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone and The Weald)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am aware that you are not responsible for the nature of ministerial replies, or for their veracity or accuracy. May I ask, however, whether it is not a contempt of the processes of Parliament for a Minister's reply—as in the answers to detailed questions put by me and by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard)—to be not even remotely relevant to the question?

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst)

The right hon. Lady knows that the Chair has absolutely no responsibility for questions or answers.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I know from what you said during the statement that the slow process of business concerns you. It took 42 minutes to complete the initial statement and the responses to two questions today. That is appallingly slow. What can the Chair do to ensure more expeditious process of business? Perhaps, if need be, you could call participants to order.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Madam Speaker has asked Ministers to try to limit the length of statements so that everything that follows can be dovetailed with the length of the statement. Clearly, if a statement is long and complex, the first response from the Opposition Front Bench will also take some time. Over the years, it seems that statements have become longer, and questions have certainly become longer. Members have fallen into the habit of asking multi-part questions that require multi-part answers. The whole process could be speeded up with good will on both sides of the House, and the Chair is dedicated to that end.

Dr. Evan Harris (Oxford, West and Abingdon)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. On 6 July, I drew your attention to the fact that the Government appeared to have announced £1 billion-worth of public spending in science without making a statement to the House or supplying a written answer. You reminded us that Madam Speaker had deprecated such practice. Have you had any reply from the Government on that point, and how do you view the Government's boast in a press release yesterday that they were proud to have made their announcement at the United Kingdom-United States conference on 5 July?

In addition, is it not significant that there have been other occasions on which the Government have boasted about public spending announcements made to the media rather than the House? It is usual for press releases on Government spending to include significant detail in the paperwork attached to them so that hon. Members may receive it at the same time as the media. However, the Department for Education and Employment press release on the spending review's £100 million for higher education was not made available to Members yesterday although it was available to the media.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I am sure that those on the Government front Bench will have heard the point about the availability of detailed information which comes out in the form of press releases. No doubt I am merely echoing what Madam Speaker has said on more than one occasion, but it is important that that information should be available to hon. Members at the same time as the press releases come out. There is nothing particularly unusual in a head announcement being made about a general direction of policy in a Budget or expenditure review, and for the detail to be followed up within hours by another Secretary of State or by a later announcement in the House.

Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In the light of detailed newspaper reports at the weekend, have you received any requests from the Secretary of State for Education and Employment asking to come to the House to make a statement about his curious failure to declare in the Register of Members' Interests his receipt of rental income?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

No. There is a proper procedure for dealing with complaints of that kind.