I did get one comment in yesterday. Today I failed miserably.
The Speaker reply was kind but not not helpful for the point that I was raising yesterday. It aroused from the contemptuously stupid reply that David Cameron gave to George Galloway's question a couple of minutes earlier.
Paul Flynn (Newport West) (Lab): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. May I ask you to consider the situation that exists because the Backbench Business Committee has only one slot to allocate and had nine applications? One of those applications was for a motion asking Parliament to follow the example of the decisions in Australia, Canada and the Netherlands to withdraw troops from Afghanistan independently. Is it not a shame that procedure is preventing this Parliament from taking the decision to act independently to withdraw our troops from a conflict that very few people now believe in?
Mr Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is a wily and mature bird of a very distinct pedigree, and he has penned a book, recently updated and republished, on how to be an MP and how to operate as a Back Bencher. It is a much-thumbed tome, and he uses every device to get his concerns across. That is what he has done. I say to him, though, that all sorts of things are a shame, a pity or regrettable, but sadly they are not matters for the Chair. I think he would like them to be, but unfortunately they are not. We will have to leave it there for today.
Today was even worse. Nick Cldegg was giving evidence before the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee. I wanted to aske three brieg qusetions that could have been fully answered with one word replies. They were:-
Would Nick Clegg advise those in Wales who want devolution-max to campaign for independence in order to provoke an angry backlash from voices in London.
Has the coalition gone soft on the Tony Wright's reforms. Electing members of the backbench committee by parties rather than the whole House increases the power of the whips and reverses a valuable reform. Will it stop there?
The Queen has been inert and silent for 60 years. Should we now prepare for crises resulting from interference and absence of silence from King Charles III?
Alas, although I waited patiently for an a hour and forty minutes. I was not called. An emergency in my office then forced me to leave the meeting. Will we ever know what Nick Clegg thinks?