§ Mr. Peter Pike (Burnley)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I rarely raise points of order, but I must seek your guidance. Several issues were covered in this afternoon's statement by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, but empty houses and the Pathfinder project, which are crucial to my constituency and the constituencies of many of my hon. Friends, were not dealt with, although they formed an important part of the statement. Is there any way for us to indicate our concerns to the Chair during statements? I realise that those in the Chair always have a difficult job and that not everyone can be called, but can we ensure that all parts of statements are covered?
§ Mr. Neil Turner (Wigan)Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Only two Members representing constituencies in the north-west were called to ask questions, although we have a huge problem in the north-west. I think that the Chamber should be seen to reflect the whole nation, not just parts of the south-east and East Anglia. I realise that you are in a difficult position in having to ensure that all points are covered properly, but I would be grateful if you could tell us how those of us who represent areas beyond the south-east can make our points in regard to a statement by the Deputy Prime Minister that covers the whole of England.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst)Experience teaches that Members must always be extremely selective in making points relating to a statement of that kind, but I think I heard the Deputy Prime Minister describe his statement almost as an interim statement, suggesting that there was more to come. Even between today's statement and the statement that is promised, there may be plenty of opportunities for Members who are concerned about the subject to seek Mr. Speaker's approval for Adjournment debates. Several more hours are now available for such debates in the calendar of the House.
§ Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, of which I have given notice to Mr. Speaker.
Item 6 in the section of the Order Paper entitled "Remaining Orders and Notices" mentions a statutory instrument,
the Local Government Finance (England) Special Grant Report (No. 105) … on Invest to Save Budget Round 4 Projects and Local Government On-Line".At the start of business today, that statutory instrument had not even been printed, and it was not on the internet. It was not on the departmental internet, or on HMSO's website.The statutory instrument is not a matter of urgency, yet it has been selected for debate in the Second Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation at 4.30 pm on Monday. We, the official Opposition, still have no idea of its contents. Indeed, had it not been for the excellent Order Paper of the House, we would not even have known of its existence. Given that it concerns putting Government information online, it seems something of a mistake not to put it on the internet.
477 I must add that this is not the first time we have had this problem with the Deputy Prime Minister's Department. When discussing numerous statutory instruments, we have found that vital information on, for example, environmental impact and on important maps has not been placed in the Library.
I have raised these points consistently in the relevant Committee. We expect better from it—or is this an attempt to stop Government information being disseminated and, above all, to stop the House performing its scrutiny role properly? I consider it a gross discourtesy to the House.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerI thank the hon. Gentleman for giving notice of his important point of order. I note that the statutory instrument was laid before the House on 9 July. It follows that there should be at least one copy in the Library. If, as the hon. Gentleman says, a supply of fully printed copies is not yet available in the Vote Office nine days after the laying of the document, that is indeed most regrettable. I hope that the hon. Gentleman's point will be noted, and that action will be taken as quickly as possible to resolve the problem.
§ Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance on a matter relating to the Home Energy Conservation Bill, which, as Mr. Speaker's Office will be well aware, was pulled suddenly. It was due to be debated tomorrow.
There is massive interest in the Bill out in the country. By sheer coincidence, a Conservative Member has tabled an identical Bill—the Home Energy Conservation (No. 2) Bill—which is rather low in the batting order for tomorrow. Can you advise the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and advise all who are so concerned about the fact that the Labour Member has pulled his Bill, whether the Conservative version of what is in effect the same Bill could be moved up the batting order, and whether the Government have notified you that they would be willing for that to be done?
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerIt was the promoter of the Bill who decided to withdraw it, and the Chair has no control over that. As the hon. Gentleman says, another Bill of a similar nature then appeared. That Bill, I am afraid, must take its appointed place, and neither the Chair nor anyone else has power to change the order. We must wait and see what happens tomorrow.