§ MR. J. O'KELLY (Roscommon, N.)I wish to ask whether Her Majesty's Government have protested against the occupation of Kiaou Chau by Germany. 770 This Question would have been on the Paper, but the officers at the Table took it upon themselves to suppress it.
§ [No answer was given.]
§ MR. W. REDMONDMay I ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will be good enough to answer the Question put by my hon. Friend? [Ministerial cries of "No."] May I ask you, then, Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, whether it is in the province of the clerks of the House to remove Questions such as that put on the Paper by my hon. Friend, which was to inquire whether the Government had made any protest against the German occupation of Kiaou Chau?
§ MR. SPEAKERI did not interfere before because I really did not hear what the Question was when put by the hon. Member who first asked it. The Question is one which I now understand was put down at the Table, and was refused, and it seems to me perfectly proper, because it is a Question of a nature which the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had distinctly stated he did not consider he was entitled to answer.
§ MR. W. REDMONDAs this is a matter of some importance, might I ask you, Sir, whether the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs will clearly define the nature of the Questions which he does not wish to be asked?
§ MR. SPEAKERThat is not a Question of order at all. Ministers have a right to refuse to answer Questions when put, and if they clearly classify certain Questions and state that they will not answer any Questions of that description, it would be perfectly futile to continue putting such Questions down.
§ MR. O'KELLYHas your attention been called to this fact, Sir, that the Question merely deals with a matter of fact?
§ SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTUpon this Question I wish to ask whether there is any precedent for the clerks at the Table defining what is meant by a Ministerial declaration, and may I ask whether it has not always been the practice hitherto for the Minister to take the responsibility upon himself of declining to answer each Question, and not to delegate his responsibility to the officials of the House?
§ MR. SPEAKERThe clerks at the Table are not responsible. I am responsible. The clerks frequently inform Members what they propose to do, and if a Member objects he can come and speak to me about it; but in a general way they act on the assumption that the Member will appeal to me if he is discontented with what they do. As to any precedent, I believe the action generally at the Table has been, with the sanction of the Speaker for the time being, of the kind I have stated. I quite agree it is a matter which must be exercised with great discretion, and in this particular case it appears to me that the statement made by the Under Secretary was a perfectly clear one with respect to the particular class of Questions which he would not answer.
§ MR. JOHN ELLISI beg, Sir, to ask—is the House to understand that the Question was refused by your authority or the authority of the clerk?
§ MR. SPEAKERThis particular Question was not brought under my notice, but after the answer of the Under Secretary that he must decline to answer Questions of a particular class, I did authorise the clerks no to put on the Paper Questions which clearly came within that refusal.
§ MR. W. REDMONDMight I ask, with great respect, with whom the final decision rests when a Question is handed in, whether it comes within the category of Questions which the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has intimated his intention not to answer in this House?
§ MR. SPEAKERThe final responsibilty, as I have already stated, is clearly mine. If it is brought under my attention it is mine under any circumstances, but of course it is the duty of the clerks, in any case where a Member thinks a Question might be put on the Paper and remonstrates, to bring the matter under my notice, which they always do.
§ MR. MAURICE HEALY (Cork)I wish to ask you whether your privileges as Speaker of this House are not limited to excluding Questions which transgress order, and whether it is not for the Member himself to protect himself by refusing to answer?
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member asks me whether my duties are not confined to Questions transgressing order. The word "order" is used with reference to the practice of the House; and whatever is contrary to the practice of the House it is my duty to exclude. As I understand my duty, it is to exclude Questions of that description. As I said before, this is a matter to be exercised with great discretion.
§ MR. W. REDMONDI desire to ask you merely for the convenience of Members—[Cries of "Agreed!"]—whether you would be good enough to state, either yourself, or make known in some way, the exact nature of the in Questions that you consider it your duty not to allow to be placed upon the Paper. Are we to understand—I am merely sinking for information, and not for the purpose of obstruction—that at the present time we are not at liberty to hand in or expect to have put on the Paper any Question directed to the Under Secretary dealing with foreign affairs at the present time?
§ MR. SPEAKERNo. Nothing I have said will bear that construction. As to laying down a precise definition, I must decline to do so. If any Question is brought to the Table and any appeal made to me I will deal with it I must exercise my discretion according to what I consider to be my duty, but of course I am subject to the correction of the House.
§ MR. W. REDMONDI desire to ask—[Cries of "Order!"] This is a point of order—
§ MR. SPEAKERI hope the hon. Member will confine himself to what is simply a question of order, because I cannot allow any debate to be raised on my conduct in the Chair.
§ MR. W. REDMONDI beg to assure you, Sir, that nothing is further from my intention than to raise a debate on your conduct in the Chair. If any conduct is in question it is that of the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and I desire to ask you as a point of order whether the Under Secretary is entitled in this House to refuse to answer Questions put to him by Members dealing with foreign affairs.
§ MR. SPEAKEROf the answer to that there can be no doubt whatever. It is the right, and, I might say, it is the duty of the Foreign Secretary, as it is of the representative of any other Department, to refuse to answer any Question if he thinks reasons of State require him to do so. It has been done over and over again.
§ MR. W. REDMONDAll I can say is—
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! I must ask the Member not to debate this matter.
§ MR. W. REDMONDWe are simply muzzled in this House.