HC Deb 19 June 1951 vol 489 cc252-4
Earl Winterton

Mr. Speaker, you were good enough to say on Wednesday of last week, when I raised two points of order, that you would give consideration to the matter and give an answer in due course. I beg to ask if you will now do so.

The first of my points related to the matter of a Question answered by a Minister after Question Time, and I wished to know with whom the initiative rests, whether the Minister should apply to you for permission to answer the Question on the ground that it was of great importance, or whether the hon. Member who put the Question down had a right to do so. I might have added—and perhaps you will also give a Ruling on that as well—the question whether the statement that the answer is given with the leave of the House is a mere formality, or whether it has the same effect as when an hon. Member begs to ask leave to withdraw a Motion and some hon. Members shout "No," and he cannot withdraw it. Has the House really got the right to refuse leave?

The second question related to the matter of Mrs. Felton. You will remember that the hon. Member for Farnham (Mr. Nicholson) and myself raised this matter, and we asked you whether or not the fact that the Minister had mentioned that Mrs. Felton had apparently committed some offence in not giving evidence after she had been asked, or had promised to do so before a Select Committee, constituted a breach of the rule that there should be no disclosure of the proceedings of a Select Committee.

Mr. Speaker

The noble Lord the Member for Horsham (Earl Winterton) gave me notice that he was going to ask these questions, and I have considered them since he raised the matter. The first was as to who has the right to answer Questions out of turn. The initiative comes entirely from the Minister, but he does not have to ask the permission of the House. If he says "With the permission of the House," he is really saying something which is not necessary, and, even if one said "No," he would be entitled to answer the Question if, in his judgment, and he is given my permission, the Question is urgent and of sufficient importance. Of course, it is quite impossible for me to send to the Minister and say "What is the nature of your answer?" and, therefore, I have to take his word for it. All the objection I have is very often to say, "Well, there are several statements down today, and I think this one really might not be answered today."

With regard to the particular Question to which the noble Lord referred, I think there was a misunderstanding. It was down for the day before, and the War Office Questions were then down on the Order Paper before the Prime Minister's Questions. As events turned out, there was a somewhat unusual number of Scottish Questions on that day, and so it would not have been reached in any case. The Minister did take the precaution ask me if I would give my permission for that Question to be answered. Having given it for one day when the Question was not asked, I felt that I could not refuse it on the next day; although it appeared last, it was a Question which was properly transferred according to order. I think that covers the first part of the question.

The next question was whether anything was disclosed from the Select Committee improperly. I have considered the Minister's statement in the House, and the only reference in it to any event in the Committee is that Mrs. Felton failed to appear. Erskine May, on page 434, says: The proceedings and report of a Select Committee may not be referred to in debate before they have been laid upon the Table. On page 608, Erskine May says: By the custom of Parliament no act done at any Committee of either House should be divulged before the same be reported to the House. I cannot see that the non-attendance of a witness is either a proceeding or an act of a Committee. It would seem natural for the Permanent Head of a Department to report to his Minister that a witness who had been summoned through him did not, in fact, attend. In this case, he had already, before the Committee met, been informed by Mrs. Felton that she could not be present.

Mr. C. S. Taylor

On that latter point, is it not a fact that the proceedings of this Committee have been reported in the House, but that the proceedings have not, in fact, been published?

Mr. Speaker

I do not think so; I do not know. Of course, I would not like to say anything about the proceedings, because I do not know what the Committee may or may not decide to do, and therefore I should like to be rather guarded in what I have to say.

Earl Winterton

I am very much obliged to you, Sir, for making the matter clear to me and, I hope, to the House.

Mr. Speaker

I am much obliged to the noble Lord.