§ Mr. SEXTONI gave notice that at the end of Question Time to-day that I should ask your ruling or advice, Mr. Speaker, on a question which, I think, is a growing menace to this House; that is, the gross abuse of supplementary questions to the exclusion of legitimate questions of hon. Members. I raise this question—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member must not have a long preamble. I understood that he was going to put a simple question on this matter.
§ Mr. SEXTONI will confine myself to that. Yesterday hon. Members of this House put down questions of legitimate importance to themselves. There are cases which have happened where hon. Members not only exercised the right of putting down questions on the Notice Paper, but, with the proclivities of the cuckoo, intervening with supplementaries to the exclusion of others.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is not an occasion for a speech. I only called upon the hon. Member because I understood he had a direct question to put to me as Speaker, and that is all he is entitled to do in this case.
§ Mr. SEXTONI would like your advice or ruling, Mr. Speaker, on this point: Is there no limit to supplementary questions by an hon. Member on questions not affecting the matter he has on the Notice Paper himself?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThere is no rule of the House with regard to supplementary questions. I must say that I agree with the hon. Member that the right is frequently extended much too far in what 1056 I think I may say is a rather selfish manner, and I take this opportunity of asking hon. Members to think of one another in this matter, and not to rise to put supplementary questions—
§ Mr. STANTONLike Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy.
§ Mr. SPEAKER—that are not absolutely necessary to elucidate the point in the question. I have often heard hon. Members repeat, in a supplementary question, almost the same words in the question on the Paper, In my view it is quite possible to get through 100 questions during Question Time each day, even allowing a legitimate number of supplementaries, if hon. Members will be good enough to exercise a little self-restraint in the interests of their colleagues.
§ Mr. J. DAVISONWhat steps is it necessary to take in order to limit the number of supplementary questions?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think it is necessary to take any hard-and-fast steps, and perhaps an appeal to the general feeling of hon. Members is all that is necessary.
§ Mr. DAVISONIt will be futile.
Dr. MURRAYWill you include in your appeal, Mr. Speaker, an appeal to Ministers to give the facts asked for in their answers, because it is only by supplementary questions that we are enabled to get the main facts out of Ministers?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not deny that there have been cases where supplementary questions have been well justified, and that in turn has led to an abuse of the real purpose of supplementary questions. My object will be to preserve the rule for its proper use, and if hon. Members support me I think this can be done.