Plenary, 18 Apr 2002

Meeting date: Thursday, April 18, 2002

Official Report 761KB pdf

---

Points of Order

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. This morning we received intimation of a ministerial statement on the United Kingdom budget, which is to be made this afternoon at 2 pm. As everyone knew the date of the budget, I am not sure why the statement is of an urgent nature. No doubt all will be revealed this afternoon.

As members will want to raise a number of points of interest and ask questions, half an hour is not sufficient time for the statement. It would have been helpful to have had the statement at 12.30 pm, as that would have allowed us to move on. However, at 2.30 pm, we are up against the buffers of question time.

Will the Presiding Officer take representations to move forward the start time of the statement to 1.45 pm, as that would allow more time for questions, in particular from back benchers? I would be grateful if the Presiding Officer would intimate his view to the chamber and to members who are not in the chamber this morning.

I assure the member that I have already given careful thought to the matter. I agree that the problem with a statement is that it comes up against the buffers of 2.30 pm, in which case the Presiding Officers have no discretion to extend the statement.

However, this morning, I received an assurance that the statement will be very brief—something in the order of seven minutes. In that circumstance, I am quite happy to limit the questioning so that we can get it all done in half an hour. I have taken note of the point that was made by Fiona Hyslop.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer has received an assurance that the statement will be brief. Even if it is brief by ministerial statement standards, it will take 10 or 15 minutes.

No.

I am sorry, but the subject of the statement is the budget. It is an absolute absurdity to give only half and hour to the statement. Back benchers, as is usual in this place, will have no opportunity to participate in the questions. This place is supposed to be run on the consultative steering group principles, but it is being run more like the Kremlin.

No. I can assure the member that I have taken that point carefully into account. I was prepared to ask for the statement to be made at 1.45 pm, but I have been assured that the statement will be brief. Questions that follow it will therefore be correspondingly brief.

Will the Presiding Officer limit front-bench speakers to 10 minutes in total in order to give back benchers 20 minutes to ask questions? Back benchers are being treated like second-class citizens.

The member will have to leave that to my discretion. Immediately after the ministerial statement, Opposition parties will have the opportunity to put their points.

With all due respect—

No. I take the member's point that there has to be enough time for back benchers. That is why I sought assurances this morning that the statement will be brief. If it had been a statement of more than 10 minutes, I would not have allowed half an hour.

With all due respect, Presiding Officer, the minister may take 10 minutes—

No. He will not. I assure the chamber that the minister will not take 10 minutes. He will be brief.

Can the Presiding Officer define brief?

That will be in the hands of the Presiding Officers. I have already looked into the matter very carefully this morning.

How brief will contributions from the front bench be before back benchers get a chance?

We will have to wait and see.