Points of Order

Debate between David Heath and Chuka Umunna

Thursday 15th March 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Chuka Umunna (Streatham) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Two written ministerial statements have been issued in the past two hours. One is the Government’s announcement on proposals for the reform of our competition regime, and it was sent to the Vote Office at 10.10 am, 20 minutes before Business, Innovation and Skills questions. The other relates to a consultation on no-fault dismissal, which the Vote Office received at 10.30 am, when Business questions started. Clearly, those are both matters of huge national importance.

First, the deadline for applying to you for an urgent question is 9.30 am, Mr Speaker, so the timing of the publication and appearance of the statements meant that we were not able to make such an application on those statements. Secondly, we were not given any time to prepare in a way that would have enabled us to raise during Business questions any issues to which the statements related.

Were you, Sir, given any notice of the statements in advance? Have you—[Interruption.] Have you been given any notification that we can expect oral statements on those matters of national importance—

[The Parliamentary Secretary, Office of the Leader of the House of Commons (Mr David Heath)]

This is outrageous.

[Mr Umunna]

The Deputy Leader of the House says that this is outrageous, but the Government’s behaviour in relation to those statements is outrageous, and shows an utter contempt for this House. I should be grateful for your views on the matter, Mr Speaker

Business of the House

Debate between David Heath and Chuka Umunna

Thursday 1st July 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Heath]

The hon. Gentleman has almost persuaded me that we ought to find Government time for that debate. I will give it very careful consideration indeed.

[Mr Chuka Umunna (Streatham) (Lab)]

The Chancellor of the Exchequer came here last week and declared that he would be the model of transparency. He said:

“I am not going to hide hard choices from the British people or bury them in the small print of the Budget documents.”—[Official Report, 22 June 2010; Vol. 512, c. 167.]

He added that the British public would hear those hard choices straight from him, in that speech.

The Deputy Leader of the House has already brushed aside concerns raised by the shadow Leader of the House about the memo that discloses Treasury predictions of 1.3 million unemployed. The Leader of the Opposition has already raised the matter with the Prime Minister, only to be ignored. Why can we not have full disclosure of this document, and a proper debate in this House? The Deputy Leader of the House is supposed to be a champion of Parliament, and there are clearly differences of view as to the content of the document. Why can we not have a debate on it?

[Mr Heath]

I thought that I had made it plain that we are having four debates in the next two weeks on that subject. I would have thought that that would be sufficient to satisfy the hon. Gentleman. Perhaps we ought to debate the pre-Budget forecast based on the policies of the March Budget—a Labour Budget—which showed a reduction of around 500,000 public sector jobs by 2014-15. I think that that would be a very worthwhile debate.