§ Mr. F. Noel-BakerOn a point of order. May I ask for your guidance and help, Mr. Speaker? For about ten days I have had on the Order Paper three Questions addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and which, for the second time, we have just failed to reach. The effect is that I now have either to lose my opportunity for asking supplementary questions upon what I consider to be important matters, or defer them for another week, making a total of very nearly three weeks. Can you suggest any means by which hon. Members on the back benches can protect themselves against this sort of thing?
§ Mr. SpeakerI sympathise with the hon. Member's dilemma. I think it is very regrettable that today we have been allowed to reach only Question No. 34. That is due entirely to the lack of distinction—which I find it necessary to comment upon from time to time—between Question Time and debate. There is a tendency to pursue these matters further than they can legitimately be pursued at Question Time, and the only way of seeing that Members on the back benches get their full share at Question Time is by limiting the number and length of supplementary questions by every Member and trying to get through the list. It will need to be a co-operative effort if we are to get through more Questions.
§ Mr. DonnellyLast week we had one Question answered by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and this week we have managed to have 14 answered, although the right hon. Gentleman started at No. 19. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to give consideration to the whole question of the problem of Questions addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies? A very large number of Questions are asked of him, and his responsibilities are very wide. There is a real 578 problem in relation to the control of this House upon that Department.
§ Mr. SpeakerHon. Members will exercise more control over Departments if they ask fewer and shorter supplementary questions.