Earl WINTERTONI with to raise a question of order arising out of Questions. I am aware that no question of Privilege can arise on Rulings which you, Mr. Speaker, give in respect of supplementary questions, in view of the fact that it has always been held that Mr. Speaker is the sole judge of whether a supplementary question is or is not in order. I am, however, anxious to safeguard what I respectfully claim is my right as a Member of the House to put a question as a notice question on the subject of a manifesto which recently appeared in a London daily newspaper. The matter arises in this way. A question which is No. 14 on the Order Paper to-day, was put to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. The question was:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to a manifesto by the executive committee of the Communist International, published in a Lonodon daily paper on the 1st May; and whether, in view of the revolutionary appeal contained therein and in view of the undertaking by the Soviet Government not to engage either directly or indirectly in subversive propaganda in this country, he will say what action he proposes to take in the matter?When the Minister replied, I asked him whether his reply also had reference to the portion of the manifesto in question, 968 which I hold in my hand, and to which I do not wish to refer now, in which the phrase occurs, "Long live the Indian revolution!" and in which there are what I should describe as incitements to the people of India to rebel. You ruled that this supplementary question could not arise on this particular question. I am only now anxious to safeguard what I respectfully claim is my right to ask a question on the subject, and I wish to ask whether it will be in order if I put down again the question which has already appeared on the Paper, and to add to it, after the words "in the matter" the words "of the incitement to rebellion in India"? It seems to be a matter of some importance in view of recent events.
§ Mr. McKINLAYMay I draw attention to the fact that repeatedly, at the Table, questions have been refused because they were based purely on newspaper information? No later than yesterday I had a question refused because it was a quotation from a publication.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIn reply to the Noble Lord and the last part of his question, I should like to see the question which he proposes to put, before I could say whether it is in order or not. As regards the first part of his question, it is a difficult duty which the Speaker has to perform to stop a supplementary question if he thinks it goes too far or is not relevant to the matter on the Paper. All I can say is that I do my best to perform that duty.
Earl WINTERTONMay I thank you for your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, and say that it entirely meets my point.
§ Mr. THURTLEIs it not an extraordinary and unprecedented act for an hon. Member to submit to you publicly the form of a question which he proposes to put on the Order Paper, and is not that a practice which is to be very strongly deprecated?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think it was only an isolated instance. I do not think we need attach so much importance to it as to make it a precedent.