Points of Order

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The shadow Secretary of State for Defence, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), visited my constituency last week on 6 March. He did not make me aware of his visit to my constituency, as is the convention of this House, as he will know as an experienced Member of the Commons. As such, I would be grateful if you provided me with advice on preventing such discourtesy and disrespect from taking place in the future.

[Mr Speaker]

I thank the hon. Member for giving notice of his point of order. I reiterate—[Interruption.] I am dealing with a Member. I reiterate that I do not care whether it is Ministers, shadow Ministers or Back Benchers, the courtesy is that you must let the Member know before you get to their constituency, unless your visit is on private business. Show courtesy to each other. The public out there expect us to follow the rules, and the rules should be adhered to.

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Yesterday, the Government brought a statement to the House entitled “Protecting What Matters”. One might think that that could be preserving historic buildings or endangered wildlife, or simply affirming the importance of our Christian heritage. In fact, the statement was about defining anti-Muslim hostility. I am not going to debate that, but I seek your advice on whether a title of that kind is misleading—it cannot possibly have been deceptive, but it is certainly confusing. Is it fair to Members to entitle statements in a way that gives them no chance to anticipate what is going to be debated and prepare accordingly?

[Mr Speaker]

The right hon. Member is always here, so he should not have to worry about the titles. In fairness, I take that on board. The fact is that the Government are in charge of the titles of their ministerial statements. They have full responsibility; I have no responsibility for that. That is certainly on the record. I expect those on the Front Bench to have taken it on board that titles should be understandable and not misleading.

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

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not know that point of order was going to be raised until I heard it, but I myself noticed, a little bit earlier, that there was a statement entitled “Pensions Update” that was really all about the WASPI women. I for one was misled into thinking that it was some routine, general statement about pensions. It would have been perfectly possible for the Government to have made it explicit that it was about the WASPI women, in which case it is likely that more Members would have been present.

[Mr Speaker]

I do not disagree, but I know that the right hon. Member has a sneaking understanding of what happens in government and how Governments might try to get away with things. He is another Member who is always around, as well. What I will say is that it would be much easier if the Government were to be very explicit and open, so that all Back Benchers from all parts of the House know what is going to happen. I will also say that if Members spent more time in the Chamber, they would not have to worry.