– in the House of Commons at 4:46 pm on 26 October 1989.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
I beg to move——
What is the point of order?
Earlier this afternoon the Home Secretary was invited to apologise for the gross miscarriage of justice experienced by the Guildford Four. Mr. Speaker, you will have heard that he gave what must have been the most graceless apology for what is clearly a serious miscarriage of justice. At the time, justified protests were made. My point of order is that the Guildford Four are in the process of submitting claims for compensation for the miscarriage of justice that they have suffered, and the view that was expressed this afternoon on their conviction may influence the amount of compensation awarded.
Yes, but that is not a matter for the Chair or for order in the House. I said at the time, and I took the points of order at the time because they arose immediately out of the answer to that question, that it is a matter not for me but for the Government.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Earlier this afternoon the Home Secretary informed my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) that I had given my unreserved support to the so-called women's safety charter. He was referring to a press report in which I make it quite clear that I do not give that charter unreserved support. I accuse Ministers of using the charter to obscure their failure to tackle the root causes of violence against women. It is important that Ministers of such high rank do not misrepresent matters.
Again that is not a matter for me.
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
We have already started on the timetable debate.
This is an important matter.
Very well.
May I refer you to column 871 of yesterday's Hansard Mr. Speaker in which the right hon. Member for Swansea, West (Mr. Williams) referred in a point of order to part-time Tory Members, following a point of order that I raised at 4.45 pm. Can you advise me, Mr. Speaker, as a relatively junior Member of the House—in fact a very junior Member—whether it is in order for one hon. Member to refer to another as a part-time Member when the hon. Member who did the calling has a worse voting record and was referring to an occasion when he too was absent?
We must never attribute any dishonourable actions to each other in this House, but being called a part-time Member does not quite come within that category and it is not an issue in this debate, which has already started.
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not want to upset a new Member of Parliament. My comment may have caused him embarrassment in his constituency, but I must point out to him that what was said in the course of heated debate was not meant to cause him any personal harm or embarrassment. In his particular case, I withdraw my comment.
I beg to move,
That the following provisions shall apply to the remaining proceedings on the Companies Bill [Lords] and the Children Bill [Lords]:—