HC Deb 11 February 1957 vol 564 cc915-7
Mr. Warbey

Might I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on a matter affecting the rights of hon. Members? We are in the third week since we returned from the Christmas Recess. Today is the first day on which we have had an opportunity of questioning the Foreign Secretary orally. We have covered about 30 Questions out of about 80. There will not be another opportunity on a Monday for several weeks. There will not be an opportunity to question the Foreign Secretary orally on a Wednesday for 10 or 17 days.

I suggest that three points arise from this. The first point is whether it is at all possible, although I realise the difficulties, to limit in some way both the number and the length of supplementary questions, whether they come from the Front Benches or the back benches.

Secondly, is it possible to revert to the pre-war practice of giving priority to Foreign Office Questions on one day a week in order to be sure that at least once a week there is a chance to question the Foreign Secretary orally?

The third point that I wish to raise affects the right of hon. Members to raise matters on the Adjournment. I had tabled three Questions, Nos. 43 to 45, about the transfer of Bahraini citizens to St. Helena, and it was my intention, unless the Foreign Secretary was able to give satisfactory replies, to give notice to raise the matter on the Adjournment. How are hon. Members to exercise their right to raise matters on the Adjournment if their Questions are not reached and answered orally?

Mr. Speaker

With regard to the length and number of supplementary questions. I welcome the hon. Member's intervention. I shall, of course, do my best to control them, but I find it very difficult. That is a matter in which the whole House must co-operate if it wishes to make progress. Very often if I interrupt a supplementary question because I think it is too long, there is a further expenditure of time. I hope that hon. Members will take the hon. Gentleman's reproof to heart.

As to the number of days on which Foreign Office Questions are answered, that is not a matter for me. It is a matter which can be taken up in the usual way.

With regard to the subject of a Question being raised on the Adjournment, some time ago the House sanctioned my choice of two subjects a week, on the Tuesday and the Thursday. On the three other days the subjects to be raised on the Adjournment fall according to the luck of the Ballot. I try to pick subjects of which notice has been given. However, if another subject is put before me, I try to give it as much consideration as I give others.

Mr. Bellenger

Is it not a fact, Mr. Speaker, that before the war, even when there was a large number of Questions, the House often got through all the Questions on the Order Paper and then went back for a second round? Might I suggest that considerable power lies with the Chair in speeding up answers to Questions?

Mr. Speaker

The second round, as I remember it, was only for hon. Members whose Questions were called but who were not present when they were called. That is not what holds us up now, because there is no second round and no second chance. What really holds us up is that subjects of great interest, like the ones we have had today, are raised and a great number of right hon. Gentlemen feel it necessary to express their views. We generally get through more Questions than we have done today, between 50 and 60 on most days, but the subjects raised today have been of very great interest.

Mr. Lipton

Is it not clear, Mr. Speaker, that if the original Answers were satisfactory we should get through many more Questions?

Mr. Speaker

I do not think that that follows at all.