PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Points of Order - 22 October 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
Contributions from Ben Obese-Jecty, are highlighted with a yellow border.
13:50:18
Ben Obese-Jecty
Huntingdon
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Last week I was notified by the Table Office that my Cabinet Office oral question about the £97 billion increase in failing major project spending that this Government have overseen had been selected to be answered by the Government. However, it does not appear on the list of questions to be answered during Cabinet Office oral questions tomorrow. The Cabinet Office has declined to answer, and has removed it from the list of questions, which means that it will not be asked or answered in the Chamber.
I have long suspected that the Government have been manipulating the oral question process in their favour. How can the general public have any confidence in the parliamentary process, or the holding of the Government to account, when the Government can avoid scrutiny by picking and choosing only the questions that they wish to answer? I am sure that the Government would not wish me to submit any more written questions, so what guidance can you give, Mr Speaker, on how I can best ensure that my constituents in Huntingdon get the answers that they deserve?
I have long suspected that the Government have been manipulating the oral question process in their favour. How can the general public have any confidence in the parliamentary process, or the holding of the Government to account, when the Government can avoid scrutiny by picking and choosing only the questions that they wish to answer? I am sure that the Government would not wish me to submit any more written questions, so what guidance can you give, Mr Speaker, on how I can best ensure that my constituents in Huntingdon get the answers that they deserve?
13:51:17
Mr Speaker
I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of his point of order. The transfer of questions between Departments is a matter for the Government rather than the Chair. However, the hon. Gentleman’s concerns are now on the record, and I hope that those on the Treasury Bench have noted what he has said. Let me add that there is always the expectation that Departments will inform Members of such transfers. If there is a continuation, I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will not leave it there—but please, will he come and let me know?
13:52:00
Ayoub Khan
Birmingham Perry Barr
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On Monday the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport told the House, in relation to the Maccabi Tel Aviv match, that the risk assessment was based
“in no small part on the risk posed to fans attending to support Maccabi Tel Aviv because they are Israeli and because they are Jewish.”—[Official Report, 20 October 2025; Vol. 773, c. 646.]
However, reports last night revealed that the decision to ban away fans was due to intelligence suggesting that the main threat came from extremist Maccabi Tel Aviv fans themselves, and that they were the likely perpetrators of trouble in Amsterdam last year.
The Ministerial Code requires Ministers to give accurate and truthful information to Parliament. If the Secretary of State had that information before her statement, she must correct the record. Can you ask her to clarify the position, Mr Speaker, and to return to the House immediately if she has breached the code that governs all parliamentarians?
“in no small part on the risk posed to fans attending to support Maccabi Tel Aviv because they are Israeli and because they are Jewish.”—[Official Report, 20 October 2025; Vol. 773, c. 646.]
However, reports last night revealed that the decision to ban away fans was due to intelligence suggesting that the main threat came from extremist Maccabi Tel Aviv fans themselves, and that they were the likely perpetrators of trouble in Amsterdam last year.
The Ministerial Code requires Ministers to give accurate and truthful information to Parliament. If the Secretary of State had that information before her statement, she must correct the record. Can you ask her to clarify the position, Mr Speaker, and to return to the House immediately if she has breached the code that governs all parliamentarians?
13:52:25
Mr Speaker
Unfortunately I do not have such powers, although perhaps at times I would welcome them. I will say this, however. I thank the hon. Member for giving me notice of his point of order. Ministers are responsible for their words in the House, and the Ministerial Code is not a matter for the Chair, but the hon. Member has certainly put his views on the record, and I am sure that—once again—we will find that those on the Treasury Bench have been listening.
Dawn Butler
Brent East
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. At the beginning of Prime Minister’s questions, I rushed in while a question was being asked, and I want to apologise. I was rushing in from celebrating Diwali and the new year from my local temple in Willesden. On Monday I was celebrating Diwali and the new year at my local temple in Neasden, the largest mandir in the United Kingdom, and the day before that I was celebrating in Kingsbury. I wish everyone who is celebrating today a happy new year and a happy Diwali.
Mr Speaker
Let me first say that that is probably the worst point of order I have heard in the form of an apology, but let me also say happy Diwali to all the temples that the hon. Lady has visited. She has certainly put that on the record, but I hope that next time she will wait at the Bar of the House until after the question.
Bill presented
Removal of Titles Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Rachael Maskell, supported by Nadia Whittome, Ian Byrne, Kate Osborne, Richard Burgon, Apsana Begum, Brian Leishman, Imran Hussain, Jon Trickett, Cat Eccles, Mary Kelly Foy and Bell Ribeiro-Addy presented a Bill to give the Monarch powers to remove titles; to provide that such removals can be done by the Monarch on their own initiative, following a recommendation of a joint committee of Parliament, or at the request of the person who holds the title; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 31 October, and to be printed (Bill 317).
Bill presented
Removal of Titles Bill
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Rachael Maskell, supported by Nadia Whittome, Ian Byrne, Kate Osborne, Richard Burgon, Apsana Begum, Brian Leishman, Imran Hussain, Jon Trickett, Cat Eccles, Mary Kelly Foy and Bell Ribeiro-Addy presented a Bill to give the Monarch powers to remove titles; to provide that such removals can be done by the Monarch on their own initiative, following a recommendation of a joint committee of Parliament, or at the request of the person who holds the title; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 31 October, and to be printed (Bill 317).
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.