HC Deb 30 November 1916 vol 88 cc449-50
3. Mr. KING

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has been officially informed that M. Stuermer is no longer Russian Premier, and whether he can assure the House that the policy of M. Stuermer and the present Russian Premier has been and still is one of unfailing loyalty to the pact of London?

Lord R. CECIL

The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative, and I repudiate most emphatically the invidious suggestion conveyed by putting a question on the Paper which implies doubt as to the good faith existing between the Allies.

Mr. KING

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question was submitted to his secretary and no difficulty was raised, and will he withdraw the imputation made upon me?

Lord R. CECIL

If the hon. Member tells me that is so, I accept the statement; but none the less, whatever the hon. Gentleman's intentions may have been—and I have no doubt they were perfectly correct—the question is undesirable.

Mr. LYNCH

On a point of Order, Sir. More than once it has been laid down by yourself, and very properly—[HON. MEM-BERS:"Oh, oh!]—that Members, in putting questions, are not allowed to express opinions or to bring in any question of emotion; but again and again on the Front Bench, in replying to these questions, instead of merely giving information, they give vent to their own opinions, or to some kind of resentment or emotion?

Colonel CRAIG

Is it not possible to stop at the Table of the House questions which are prejudicial, and if it is against the Rules of the House not to prevent such questions from being put, ought not, at the same time, the good sense of Members prevent them from putting questions which are undesirable and which embarrass us and embarrass our Allies?

Mr. SPEAKER

My only business is to see that the questions comply with the Rules of the House as to proper Parliamentary expression. It is no part of my business to say whether they are desirable or not. That is, of course, a matter for the Ministers.

Mr. HOUSTON

In connection with your present ruling, Sir, I wish to ask you whether it is in order for an hon. Member, as occurred yesterday, when I asked a question, on your calling my name, of the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs and I was told by the Minister representing him that I had been requested to postpone my question and I stated that I had not received the request, thereupon to ask me, "Why did you not sleep at home?"

Mr. SPEAKER

I cannot go back on what occurred yesterday. The point ought to have been raised at once.