HC Deb 26 January 1953 vol 510 cc676-9
Mr. Speaker

I have a short statement with which to trouble the House. On Wednesday last, the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale) drew the attention of the House to the fact that a Question which he had put down to the Prime Minister had been transferred to the Home Secretary. The Question related to the progress of the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition put the point that while transfer of Questions was common practice in Departmental matters, it was not appropriate to Questions about Royal Commissions, which should be answered by or on behalf of the Prime Minister.

I promised to look into the matter and have had a search made for precedents and I find that there has been no wholly consistent practice in the matter. Sometimes one Minister has answered, sometimes another. On 30th October, 1945, notice was given of a Question to ask the Minister of Labour when he expected to receive the Report of the Royal Commission on Equal Pay. This Question was transferred to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who answered on 1st November. A Question on the same subject had been answered by the Prime Minister on 31st October. Others were put to, and answered by, the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the 8th and 13th November.

On 24th November last a Question asking for a Royal Commission on safety on the railways was answered by the Minister of Transport. As far as I can discover, the general practice is that Questions asking for a Royal Commission to be set up, and Questions on the progress or the Report of a Royal Commission either addressed to or transferred to the Departmental Minister if that is appropriate and if the matter is not considered to be one of such major importance as to necessitate an answer by the prime Minister.

On the other hand, Questions asking for the membership or terms of reference of a Royal Commission have generally been answered by the prime Minister since he alone makes recommendations on these matters to the Sovereign. Even in this case, however, the practice is not invariable, since the membership and terms of reference of the Royal Commission on Land in Kenya were announced by the Secretary of State for the Colonies in the course of debate.

I must remind the House that these matters are quite outside my province and that I can only help by reporting what, from study of the OFFICIAL REPORT, the practice appears to have been. On the point of what questions on this subject would be accepted by the Table, provided there is prima facie reason to believe some Minister to be responsible, I think a question addressed to any reasonably likely Minister would be accepted. The actual responsibility, and any necessary transfer, would then be worked out by the departments concerned and, with that, as I have repeatedly had occasion to remind the House, I cannot interfere. The answer should be given by the Minister who is, in fact, responsible and the question of responsibility is one for Ministers and not for the authorities of the House.

Mr. H. Morrison

I am sure that the House is much obliged to you, Sir, for the information you have given us, although it still leaves us in some doubt as to what the appropriate course would be. Would it be a reasonable deduction from what you said—apart from matters which arise in debate, when a Minister in charge is speaking in the debate and, therefore, it is inevitable that if the question of a Royal Commission arises he will refer to it largely at the request of the House—that, generally speaking, Questions about the initiation of a Royal Commission, composition and terms of reference of a Royal Commission, are for the Prime Minister and Questions thereafter about the progress and ultimate Report of the Royal Commission are more likely to be for the Departmental Minister? If we could reduce this to a rational formula it would be better. I wonder if that would be approximately right.

Mr. Speaker

I think that what the right hon. Gentleman has said is approximately right. In this matter, of course, I can only give the House the fruit of my researches into what the practice has been. I think it is the practice that Questions referring to the personnel or terms of reference of a Royal Commission should be addressed to or answered by the Prime Minister, or someone on his behalf. But there have been numerous cases in the past of hon. Members who have asked whether a Royal Commission will be appointed addressing their Questions to Departmental Ministers and that is the way the matter stands, but what the right hon. Gentleman says is, I think, in accordance with the practice of the House.

Mr. Hector Hughes

May I ask your guidance about this very matter, Sir? I think the House is in a real difficulty here. The Question asked by the hon. Member related to the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment. I also have frequently put Questions down concerning the delay of that Commission in issuing a Report. It seems to me that there is no way whereby hon. Members can accelerate the bringing in of a Report by a Royal Commission, as in this case, and the House is, therefore, in great difficulty. I am asking you how the House can accelerate the bringing in of a Report where there is, as in this case, undue delay in bringing in a Report?

Mr. Speaker

There is no way in which a matter of that sort can be accelerated if a Royal Commission is set up. The only way I can suggest is for hon. Members to ask Questions, making their opinions known. There is no power I know of whereby a Royal Commission, once it has been set up, can have a term set to its labours before it reports.

Mr. I. O. Thomas

Would you indicate, Sir, how and by whom it is determined that Questions shall or shall not be answered? You referred to practice in this respect. Who determines such practice? Is it a question of accident, or is there any question of design in such practice? Is it not about time—if we have reached this stage of not being able to have effective guidance even from you, Mr. Speaker—that the question as to the appropriate channel for putting the Question and through which a reply shall be received should be definitely considered and determined by the House?

Mr. Speaker

In general, Ministers are, as the name of their Department indicates, responsible for particular areas of Government activity. But there are, as the hon. Member will realise if he reflects, certain subjects which overlap from one Department into another—questions of food and agriculture, for example, and questions of tariffs and import duties, which may concern both the Treasury and the Board of Trade. A number of other examples will occur to hon. Members. In that case, it is for the Ministers themselves, in the light of the actual terms of the Questions submitted, to decide which one shall answer the Question and that has been the practice in my time.

Mr. Spence

In the case of Questions on a Royal Commission and Ministerial responsibility would it not be in order, in the first instance, to address a Question to the Prime Minister of the day asking to which Minister the Question itself should be put? Would that not deal with the changing circumstances?

Mr. Speaker

I think the Question would not be out of order.