Points of Order

Julian Lewis Excerpts

Tuesday 21st April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance, in what I believe is truly a genuine point of order, as to how Parliament and the public should understand the terminology in “Erskine May” about inadvertently misleading the House. Yesterday, my hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) pointed out:

“The Prime Minister has said various things about Peter Mandelson’s vetting process…that have now turned out not to be true.”

He asked:

“Does he accept that he inadvertently misled the House of Commons?”

The Prime Minister replied:

“No, I did not mislead the House of Commons.”—[Official Report, 20 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 51.]

He then argued that other information that had been withheld from him had led to this situation.

My understanding is that giving the House wrong information, but in good faith, is precisely what is meant by inadvertently misleading the House. The Prime Minister does not seem to understand that, and nor does the Foreign Secretary, to whom I asked a similar question this morning. Is it me who is misunderstanding the meaning of the term “to inadvertently mislead the House”?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I thank the right hon. Member for his point of order, and for providing notice of it. Although Ministers are responsible for the accuracy of their remarks at the Dispatch Box, I am very clear as Chair that this is of the utmost importance and that Ministers must take their responsibilities to this House seriously. If the right hon. Member requires further advice on what may or may not constitute this House being inadvertently misled, I suggest that he follow up on the specific concerns with the Clerk of the Journals in the first instance.