§ 52. Mr. LYNCHasked the Prime Minister whether it has been brought to his notice that the no-majority in the vote on Conscription in Australia has been due in some measure to the treatment on the part of the Secretary of State for the Colonies of the sentiment of the Australian people with regard to the interference of a State governor in the politics of the country and also by the desire of the Secretary of State to introduce a system of imperial federation which is obnoxious to Australians and by the antidemocratic spirit which he manifests in all his pronouncements; and whether, in view of the magnitude of the loss of man-power which has followed from the pursuit of such policies, he will reorganise the Cabinet so that the affairs of the Dominions may not be dealt with at the Colonial Office?
§ Sir H. CRAIKOn a point of Order. Before the question is answered, may I ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, whether it. is not the case that the proper object of questions in this House is to elicit information on matters of fact; and, if that. be so, whether it would not be possible, before such questions are printed upon the Order Paper, to eliminate from them assumptions which impute improper motives to the Secretary of State?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe object of questions is to enable facts to be elicited, and also the views of the Government with regard to present and future policy. Some hon. Members make use of the Question Paper not so much to obtain the opinion of the Government as to ventilate their own. That is not in accord with the proper principle of questions, I think the object of the hon. Member's question is correct. There is no harm in its object, although it appears 671 to have a good deal of embroidery about it which might be dispensed with. If we had had time on Friday before the House rose to correct the questions, I think there would have been some exercise of the pruning knife.
§ Mr. LYNCHOn a point of Order. May J ask, as the point has been raised on my questions, may I have an opportunity of offering a defence of my questions, or rather a vindication?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is not a point of Order. If the hon. Member has any point of Order to raise, I shall be glad to hear it.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThere is no embroidery in the answer. The answer is in the negative.
§ Mr. LYNCHIs not this a case where a question is asked to obtain information of the very highest value, involving really the transference of nearly 500,000 men from one side to the other? Why are the Government authorities always like the Bourbons, who forget nothing and learn nothing?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThere is too much embroidery in that question.