Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Earlier this morning, I raised a point of order in business questions, which the Leader of the House responded to. In her response, she suggested that in our earlier correspondence I had chosen to misunderstand what she had said in the Chamber on 21 June. I was very careful in my point of order this morning to report what she had said to me by way of explanation of her remarks to the House, and I want to place on the record that I had no intention of deliberately reporting to the House a misunderstanding of her remarks and that it was Traveller groups that asked me to raise the issue because of their concern about the language used in the Chamber on 21 June. I am grateful for the opportunity to place that on the record.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)
I thank the hon. Lady for giving me notice of her point of order. I understand that she also gave notice to the Leader of the House. Obviously, each of us is responsible individually for what we say in this place, and the principle of parliamentary free speech is very important, but that has to be exercised with care and sensitivity. The hon. Lady has clearly put her view on the record. I suggest we leave it at that.
John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Ind)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I apologise for not having had a chance to give you notice of my point of order. During the urgent question this morning, I asked the Immigration Minister about the accuracy of previous remarks she had made in the House. In response, she said she had placed information in the House of Commons Library. The House of Commons Library tells me it has no such record of any correction. Can you advise me of what can be done in this circumstance?
Madam Deputy Speaker
The hon. Gentleman has made clear the discrepancy he feels has taken place. I am sure that the Treasury Bench will have heard his comments and that the Minister, if she feels anything needs to be corrected, will do so. I am sure that the Treasury Bench will take that away.