Mr. De la BèreMay I respectfully ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on a matter affecting Questions which were on the Order Paper in my name on Thursday, 30th October? In accordance with my usual practice, I had a limited number of Questions down for that day, but owing to the congestion on the Order Paper, those Questions, which were to be answered by the Minister of Fuel and Power, were not reached. Anticipating that they would not be reached, I went to the Table, where I received, as always, the utmost courtesy, and the Questions were postponed. I then found that one Question—I think it was No. 84–was included together with a large number of others for Written Reply, and it was answered by referring me to the statement made by the Minister of Fuel and Power on the evening of Wednesday, 29th October. I would ask you, Sir, to uphold the right of hon. Members to postpone their Questions during that period. It is a right, I think, which they have enjoyed for many years, and I know, Mr. Speaker, that I shall not appeal to you in vain in this matter.
There is a further point which I will not raise, because you, Sir, have asked me not to do so. I say that with great respect, but, on this particular point, I would ask for your Ruling that hon. Members have a right, in view of the great difficulty of getting anything down on the Order Paper, and in view of the congestion, to postpone their Questions should they not be reached before the appropriate time. I would, therefore, request you to be so good as to ask the Minister of Fuel and Power to give an assurance that he will answer my Questions which were thus postponed
§ Mr. SpeakerI am afraid that it is quite impossible for me to do anything about it. If during Question Time an hon. Member comes up to the Table and says, "Please postpone my Question"—he 1541 cannot telephone the Minister, or do anything of that sort because the time is too late—and if by chance that Question has been answered with another, I think the remedy is in the hon. Member's own hands. Of course, if the Question has not been completely answered, he has the right to put it down again, but if it has been completely answered, then I am afraid I cannot see that there is any very great grievance. It would be most inconvenient for the House if for, say, four Questions referring to the same subject, the Minister got up four times and made the same answer to each. The House world not stand for that for very long. Therefore, I think it is for the convenience of the House that Ministers, when the Questions are similar, should just give one answer which covers all four, all three or all two. I think the 1542 real answer to the hon. Member is that if his Question has not been fully answered, he is then entitled to put it down again.
Mr. De la BèreFurther to your Rulin Mr. Speaker, which I accept in the spirit in which I always accept your Rulings, may I ask that, in this case, as the Minister apparently, had been unable to answer on the evening of 29th October the Question concerned, I have permission to ask him to answer these specific Questions, which dealt with the abolition of the basic petrol ration which, affects hundreds of thousands of people throughout the country?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is a matter of opinion, and not one on which I should be asked now to give a Ruling.