Points of Order
Debate between Kim Johnson and Judith Cummins
Madam Deputy Speaker
The Chair is not responsible for comments made by individual Members outside of this place. If the hon. Member considers that there has been a breach of the code of conduct, the proper procedure is to complain to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. My point of order relates to the same person, but it is a different point.
I rise to raise a matter of both parliamentary courtesy and political accountability. I have been informed that last week, the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) held a political meeting in my constituency without giving me any prior notification. I have informed the hon. Member that I would be raising this as a point of order. Although there is no formal rule preventing Members from visiting other constituencies, it is a fundamental convention of this House that MPs respect the local representation of their colleagues and notify them before seeking to engage with their constituents.
They know that they are not welcome—coming into my constituency, stirring up hate and division. To ignore this convention of the House is discourteous; to do so in a city like mine, with a very long and proud history of diversity, is politically provocative. I call on the House to recognise that such actions undermine the norms of mutual respect between Members and disregard the right of constituents to be represented by their elected MP. The people of Liverpool Riverside do not welcome this opportunistic political activity. Madam Deputy Speaker, do you agree that this matter requires urgent attention, and can you reaffirm the principle that parliamentary conventions and respect for local representation must be upheld by all Members?
Madam Deputy Speaker
I thank the hon. Member for her point of order, and for confirming that she notified the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby in advance of making it. Mr Speaker has always been clear that Members intending to visit a colleague’s constituency, except for purely private purposes, must inform that colleague in advance.
Points of Order
Debate between Kim Johnson and Judith Cummins
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for giving me notice of his point of order. I understand that he has informed the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) that he intended to refer to him in the Chamber. The right hon. Member has put his point on the record. While I am not persuaded that anything unparliamentary occurred in the debate, I remind all Members that “good temper and moderation”, in the words of “Erskine May”, should be
“the characteristics of parliamentary debate.”
I encourage all Members to act towards each other with courtesy.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have given prior notice of my point of order to the Speaker’s Office. I seek your guidance on a matter concerning procedure relating to the ability of Members to hold the Government to account. Yesterday, I attempted to table a question relating to the use of RAF Akrotiri by Israeli bomber planes but was blocked. I received the following response: “The Government has blocked questions on the use of military bases”. The reasoning for that block was given as an answer from the Minister to a similar question tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) on 4 October, with the Minister responding on 14 October. Since then, six questions have been tabled relating to the activities of RAF Akrotiri, all without obstruction, and they all received timely answers from the Minister. Under this new ruling, all would have been ruled out of order and automatically blocked, yet they were allowed to be tabled.
Given the importance of transparency and parliamentary scrutiny, particularly in matters of defence, this raises serious concerns. Operational decisions must not be taken on an ad hoc basis to impede the ability of parliamentarians to scrutinise the decisions of Government. Will you advise on whether it is in order for the Table Office to decide to block legitimate questions in this way and on what recourse Members have when attempts to scrutinise and debate Government policy and activity are being blocked?
Madam Deputy Speaker
I thank the hon. Member for her point of order. She should raise the matter with the Table Office in the first instance. I can, however, advise her that the Minister for the Armed Forces, in response to a written parliamentary question on 14 October, indicated that the Government would not
“comment on any foreign nations’ military aircraft movement…within UK airspace or on UK overseas bases.”
It is not the Table Office but the Government that have blocked questions on this specific subject. Other questions about activities at RAF Akrotiri may none the less be in order. I advise her to talk to the Table Office, who are always happy to help.
Lebanon
Debate between Kim Johnson and Judith Cummins(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and congratulations on your appointment.
I am sure my right hon. Friend agrees that the escalation of violence can be reduced if we look at ending the suffering in Gaza. At a briefing that I attended today with Oxfam and Medical Aid for Palestinians, they talked about how Israel was using water as a weapon of war. People have 4.7 litres of water per day to wash, clean and cook. That is less than a toilet flush. I welcome the position that we have taken—we have moved greatly—but does my right hon. Friend agree that we need to go much further and much faster?