HC Deb 07 July 2003 vol 408 cc760-2 3.59 pm
Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On Wednesday 7 May, I asked the Prime Minister: Does he also agree that all future conflicts will equally depend on RAF Lyneham? He replied: I think that I know the point behind the question, having visited the base … I accept and understand the very important role that it has played in previous conflicts"— this is the key point— and, I have no doubt at all, will play in future conflicts, too."—[Official Report, 7 May 2003; Vol. 404, c. 688.] However, in a written statement on Friday, the Minister of State, Ministry of Defence said that if no further Defence use is identified for RAF Lyneham, the Station will be closed and disposed of. That news, of course, came as a devastating blow to the 10,000 people in my constituency whose livelihoods depend on RAF Lyneham. Does not that statement bring Prime Minister's Question Time into further disrepute, and have you had any indication from the Prime Minister that he intends to come to the House to make a personal apology for what was, by any standards, a substantially misleading remark?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman will have to ask the Prime Minister; the replies Ministers give are not a matter for me.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will have noted that that important announcement, which will damage the RAF's air transport capability in the future, was made in the form of a written statement. Can you use your influence with the Government to ensure that announcements of such significance and magnitude are made in the proper way—by oral statement to the House?

Mr. Speaker

My understanding, from the glance at Hansard that has been possible, is that the issue will not arise until after the aircraft goes out of service by 2012."—[Official Report, 4 July 2003; Vol. 408, c. 38WS.] Perhaps the hon. Gentleman and others will have some time to pursue the matter.

Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I apologise for not providing notice of my point, but are you aware of paragraph 137 of the report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, entitled "The Decision to go to War in Iraq", which reads: We further conclude that by referring to the document"— the second dossier— on the floor of the House as 'further intelligence' the Prime Minister—who had not been informed of its provenance, doubts about which only came to light several days later—misrepresented its status and thus inadvertently made a bad situation worse."? Given that the author of the main article on which the dossier was based, Mr. Ibrahim al-Marashi, testified to the Committee that his article and two other articles from Jane's Intelligence Review accounted for 90 per cent. of the second dossier, is it not clear that the Prime Minister did inadvertently mislead the House? Have you heard from him that he intends to come to the House at the earliest opportunity to set the record straight?

Mr. Speaker

Technically, the Prime Minister is coming before the House, because the Liaison Committee meets tomorrow—

Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst)

No.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Prime Minister will be questioned by that Committee. In fact, the Liaison Committee meeting was set for tomorrow in order that the document that the hon. Member for New Forest, East (Dr. Lewis) mentions would be available.

Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I personally asked the Prime Minister a question on the second dodgy dossier, and I also wrote to him a month ago asking him to come to the House or to provide a written apology to me and others who asked specific questions on that issue. I accept that Committees carry out work on our behalf, but we are not all members of Committees. Is there no way in which a Member who has received such a reply from the Prime Minister can receive an apology on the Floor of the House, as we would expect from any other hon. Member?

Mr. Speaker

Apologies are for the Prime Minister and any other Minister with whom the hon. Lady takes issue. As I stated, the Prime Minister will have to give an account of his stewardship at tomorrow's Liaison Committee, which was set up by the House. The Prime Minister may also be asked questions, similar to those that the hon. Lady has put to me, at Prime Minister's Question Time.

Mr. Forth

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Surely you are not suggesting, are you, that the Liaison Committee is now a substitute for the House of Commons? However eminent, important and superior it may be, it is not the equivalent of the Floor of the House of Commons and it does not give Members at large the opportunity to question Ministers. I do not want an immediate response from you, but I hope that you will not depart from the time-honoured principle that it is the whole House that is able to hold Ministers—including the Prime Minister—to account in the proper way. The Prime Minister must be prepared to come to the House, make a statement and answer questions from hon. Members as a whole, and not just go before a group of the elite and answer its questions.

Mr. Speaker

I am not changing policy. The Prime Minister will appear before the Committee tomorrow. That does not exclude the House from demanding anything, or from seeking the views of the Prime Minister on any other matter when the time comes. The House decided that the Liaison Committee would meet and that the Committee should ask questions tomorrow.

Pete Wishart (North Tayside)

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will be aware that none of the minority parties has seats on the Liaison Committee. What can you do to ensure that we in the minority parties will also have the opportunity to question the Prime Minister on this serious and significant issue?

Mr. Speaker

This is a matter for the usual channels. At the moment, I have enough problems with that.

Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne)

Further to that point of order—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We are eating into Opposition time. Does the hon. Gentleman realise that?

Mr. Wilshire

I am most grateful, Mr. Speaker. My point of order arises from a comment that you made a moment ago when you said that the House had decided that the Prime Minister would appear before the Liaison Committee. I am not aware that the House had decided that. My understanding was that the Prime Minister had decided that he would do it that way. Is there something that I have missed, namely a resolution of the House that the Prime Minister should attend?

Mr. Speaker

There is something that the hon. Gentleman has missed. The House set up the Liaison Committee and the House has given the Committee authority to call witnesses before it. Tomorrow, the witness will be the Prime Minister.