§ Mr. SteeleOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will recall that yesterday there was some criticism because not all the Prime Minister's Questions were reached. There is criticism in the House that Scottish Members are, perhaps, too dilatory in these matters. Today, Sir, I think you will note that we have reached only Question No. 41, and there were no Scottish Questions to Scottish Ministers.
§ Mr. MellishOn a very serious point of order, Mr. Speaker. Today, the Foreign Secretary replied to Questions on disarmament, very important Questions, and he replied to several at the same time, making a very long statement. I do not deny that this is an important matter but, in cases of that kind, should not a statement be made after Questions to enable it to be discussed really intelligently and, at the same time, to expedite the whole business of Question Time? This matter today took up fifteen minutes of Question Time.
§ Mr. SpeakerTwo paints have been put to me. On the first, when I was, in effect, asking for the help of the House yesterday, I was not shooting arrows particularly at Scottish Members any more than at anybody else, or at questioners rather than answerers. I just wanted everyone's help.
On the second point, I appreciate that there is much in what the hon. Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Mellish) says. I am never quite sure how these things work out. It is very difficult, if one has 1388 Ministerial statements after Questions, to prevent other business of the House being chiselled into by questions after statements.
§ Mr. MellishMost of it is rubbish, anyway.
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is extremely difficult to know how it works out. I suspect that, on balance, when several Questions are answered together, it works out about the same. But I do not know: circumstances vary. I think that we must all hope that, by mutual restraint, we shall improve—and that includes myself.