§ Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise a question regarding a breach of the courtesies of the House. It reached my attention only a little while ago, so I was not able to give you advance notice of the matter in writing.
At 12 o'clock today, the Select Committee on Defence presented a substantial report on Kosovo. As you know, Mr. Speaker, the rule of the House is that the Government are required to respond in writing to the Defence Committee within 60 days. However, by 2.30 this afternoon, the Government had held a press conference to reply to the report. Is that a breach of courtesy, or is it merely the greatest possible accolade for a damning report?
§ Mr. SpeakerThere has been no discourtesy in the way in which the matter has been conducted.
§ Mr. David Maclean (Penrith and The Border)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will be aware that during the summer my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition called on the Prime Minister to recall Parliament, so that hon. Members could discuss the grave crisis that the nation faced as a result of the fuel protests. The Government admitted that the protests almost brought the country to its knees, and they are now taking emergency measures to combat any future crisis.
Tomorrow, the House will have its first opportunity to debate the crisis. A few moments ago, the Deputy Prime Minister told my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) that he was always ready to come to the House to discuss important issues. However, he has decided that he will not reply to tomorrow's debate, and that a junior Minister will do so instead.
In view of what was said yesterday by all the candidates for the speakership, and of the Government's acknowledgement—
§ Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)This is a speech, not a point of order.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. There is only one Chairman in this establishment. If the right hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean) is making a point about which Minister is to deal with a debate, I can tell him that that has absolutely nothing to do with the Chair.
§ Mr. MacleanI appreciate that point, Mr. Speaker, but in your normal discussions with the representatives of the usual channels will you, as a new and respected Speaker, point out that the fact that neither the Prime Minister nor the Deputy Prime Minister will be present to answer a debate on the gravest crisis facing the country is a slight injustice—not to say a grave insult—to the House? However able the junior Minister involved may be, does not putting him or her forward to respond to the debate mean that justice is not being done to this important matter?
§ Mr. SpeakerI will be present for the debate, and it is possible that the right hon. Gentleman may be too. That is all that he has to worry about, so that will be all right.
§ Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Member for
153 Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) made a fine speech yesterday about re-establishing the primacy of the House, in which particular reference was made to the fuel crisis. We welcome you to your post, Mr. Speaker, but surely, if you are to take steps to re-establish the primacy of this place, you must allow Back-Bench Members to have the ear of the Deputy Prime Minister when we raise our constituents' very real concerns arising from the fuel crisis?
§ Mr. SpeakerThese are not matters for the Chair.
§ Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I urge you to look at the innumerable pronouncements made by your predecessor, in which she made clear her concern about the House's loss of authority in our national life? You, Mr. Speaker, were among the many candidates in yesterday's election who shared her concern. Your predecessor frequently deprecated the behaviour of Ministers in the treatment of the House.
May I therefore invite you, Mr. Speaker, to set out to the House, and for the benefit of the Government Front Bench, what your feelings are on this matter? How do you believe Ministers should treat this House in terms of making statements here rather than on the Radio 4 "Today" programme, and in appearing here to be answerable to us on important occasions, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean) has pointed out?
§ Mr. SpeakerI would not want to make comments on these matters.
§ Mr. Bruce Grocott (Telford)Further to the point of order raised by the right hon. Member for Penrith and 154 The Border (Mr. Maclean), Mr. Speaker, do you share my concern that on a simple issue such as that of who speaks from the Government Front Bench it appears that many Opposition Members, including senior figures such as the right hon. Gentleman, are not aware of the simple rule that this is not a matter for the Chair but for the respective Government and Opposition? Could you arrange for a crash course in procedure for Members who do not understand that?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am always willing to give guidance on procedure, but perhaps on another occasion as I am quite busy these days.
§ Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire)Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. When you come to give that guidance, perhaps you could advise the Prime Minister's parliamentary private secretary that we do not expect to be lectured by No. 10 Downing street through the Back Benches of the Chamber.
§ Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)rose—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I hope that this is definitely a point of order.
§ Mr. BercowIt most assuredly is a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will you confirm, with the full authority of your office, that public support for this institution is dependent upon an understanding of its procedures? Is it not the case that right across the country, large numbers of people of all political persuasions and of none fail to understand the sudden afflictions of shyness and reticence that occur when Secretaries of State are called upon to answer Opposition-day debates?
§ Mr. SpeakerThere is one thing for sure—the hon. Gentleman is not shy, so I would not worry about that.