HC Deb 10 February 1944 vol 396 cc1916-7
Sir H. Williams

I wish to ask for your guidance, Sir, on a matter concerning both procedure and Business. You have been good enough to institute procedure under which there is given, at the back of your Chair, an indication of what subjects will be raised on the Motion for the Adjournment and by whom they will be raised. I take it that when hon. Members come to you—there may be more than one coming—your decision as to who is to have the opportunity of raising a question on the Adjournment is largely influenced by the subject-matter, and therefore it is not to be regarded as an allocation of an opportunity to a Member primarily but to a Member in association with his subject. I notice that in one case the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Driberg) is the lucky person but that the subject has been changed. It seems an extraordinary thing if, when an occasion is allocated to a Member for the purpose of raising a particular issue, he is entitled to change the subject and raise another issue.

Mr. Driberg

May I put it to you with the greatest respect, Mr. Speaker, that once an Adjournment date has been allocated, with your approval, to a particular Member, the subject-matter is primarily a question between that Member and whichever Minister he can induce to come to the House to answer him, and the publication of it is only incidental and for the convenience of hon. Members?

Mr. Speaker

I think it is perfectly clear that the Adjournment is given to an hon. Member as an individual. It is for the convenience of the House that a list is put up showing what will be the subjects. It might not be convenient for a Minister to attend on a particular day, and the hon. Member who has that day would be entitled to change the subject; but I do hope that hon. Members, having once stated the subjects which they wish to raise, and the list having been put on the back of the Chair, will do their best—and Ministers too—to abide by the decision to raise that subject and not change it.

Mr. Austin Hopkinson

Are we to understand that it is not a matter for a Ruling but a matter of ordinary decent conduct?

Sir A. Southby

Following what you, Mr. Speaker, have just said, may I ask you to consider this point? It is customary for hon. Members who are dissatisfied with the answers which they have received to their Questions at Question Time to give notice that they will raise the subject on the Motion for the Adjournment. I submit that if they have given notice to that effect, then that should tie them to raising that matter and only that matter, and they are not entitled afterwards to change their minds and substitute another subject.

Mr. Speaker

I think that what the hon. and gallant Member has said might be taken to mean that I was asked to make a fundamental change in the Rules of the House. Any hon. Member can raise anything he likes on the Motion for the Adjournment, and I have no right to interfere with him so long as he conforms to the Rules of Order.

Mr. Neil Maclean

Some subjects which have been raised on Motions for the Adjournment have been backed by a number of names. If the hon. Member who heads the list of names asking for that subject to be raised is to change the subject, what is the position of those hon. Members who have supported the original subject which he was going to raise? I think it would be a difficult position if their names were still to remain on the list.

Mr. Woodburn

Is it not the case, Mr. Speaker, that any hon. Member, if he catches your eye, can still raise the original subject on that date?

Mr. Speaker

Yes, if he catches my eye.