HC Deb 10 December 1929 vol 233 cc246-8
Major-General Sir ROBERT HUTCHISON

I desire to ask for your assistance, Mr. Speaker, on a matter which has arisen at the Table. On Friday I handed in a question dealing with the bad service of broadcasting in the East of Scotland. It was turned down by the Table, and, when I asked for guidance as to whom I should address the question, I was informed that there was no Department responsible, and that I could not address the question to the Prime Minister. I should like your guidance as to how the grievances of these people, who by law pay their 10s. a year for a receiving licence, can be ventilated, seeing that they have drawn my attention to the fact that broadcasting in the East of Scotland is so bad that they can get no benefit at all out of this service.

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. and gallant Member has put a question to me as to why this question was refused at the Table. It is generally understood, I think, or it should be, that one of the rules which governs questions is that questions must be on subjects for which the Minister has some responsibility. Hon. Members can easily realise that to put questions to Ministers on matters in regard to which they have no responsibility would be futile. In this case, I understand that there is no Minister who has responsibility for the British Broadcasting Corporation.

Mr. E. BROWN

Do I understand your ruling to mean that the Postmaster-General in this Government has no responsibility whatever for answering questions of this kind? Questions were put to the late Postmaster-General affecting broadcasting, and they were frequently answered in this House.

Mr. MACPHERSON

May I point out that during the last Debate on the Post Office, the question of broadcasting was raised, and it was replied to at very great length by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon, the late Postmaster-General (Sir W. Mitchell-Thomson)?

Mr. SPEAKER

Perhaps the Postmaster-General will assist me in regard to his responsibility?

The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Lees-Smith)

I understood that the Postmaster-General is responsible for questions of general policy, but I also understood that the Postmaster-General is not responsible for questions of details and particulars as to the service.

Sir R. HUTCHISON

There is a point of policy involved as to the strength of the broadcasting apparatus on the East Coast of Scotland.

Mr. J. JONES

I put a question the other day to the Clerk at the Table, and it was refused. It was a question dealing with perpetual pensions. I was told that I was not in order in putting that question. I would like to know what is the position of private Members of this House on the question of what they can or what they cannot do. I asked for a record of perpetual pensions, and the amount that they cost the State, and I was told that that question was not allowed. I do not know who gave the authority for saying that, and I would like to know what is the authority.

Mr. SPEAKER

A very large number of questions are brought to the Table, and hon. Members must understand that certain Rules must govern the putting of questions.

Mr. JONES

My question was addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury.

Mr. SPEAKER

The Clerks at the Table have an extremely difficult task to perform, and they do it extremely well.

Mr. BROWN

The House will agree with that statement, Mr. Speaker, but may I put this point to you: Where an issue is raised with respect to a public corporation which has been set up by Statute and which has complete control of policy, and where, as in the case of the question put by my hon. and gallant Friend, there is a question on the border line between detail and policy, ought not that question to go to the Department in order that the Department may be able to judge whether the responsibility lies there?

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON

I think that I can charge my recollection to say that, in previous years, as Postmaster-General, I answered questions of this kind as applied to the Post Office, on the ground that these were matters of general policy, but I always refused, as the Postmaster-General has just said, to answer questions on particular details, as being not my responsibility.

Mr. JAMES GARDNER

As it is in order to raise questions regarding the Suez Canal and the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, why is it not in order to raise questions about the British Broadcasting Corporation?

Mr. JONES

is not the question of perpetual pensions more a matter of public policy than the British Broadcasting Corporation?