§ Mr. ReynoldsOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. A few moments ago the hon. Member for Bristol, West (Mr. Robert Cooke) rose to put a point of order on a supplementary question and gave notice that he would raise the matter on the Adjournment. He did not use the usual form about not being satisfied with the nature of the reply, but said, in effect, that he was giving notice because, in his view, the matter had already been adequately considered on five previous occasions and that notice of an Adjournment debate would stop further questions today.
Is this not an abuse of procedure? What guarantee have we that the hon. Member who, in effect, stifled further questioning by giving this notice, will, in fact, give notice in the correct way in seeking an Adjournment debate and that his application will be considered by you in the ordinary way if he has good fortune in the Ballot?
§ Mr. SpeakerTwo points are involved here. The first is that it is highly desirable that hon. Members, in giving notice, should remember to use the traditional formula and not add words to it. Almost everyone does add words, but it is an undesirable practice and I hope that we can get rid of it.
Secondly, it is for me to judge whether notice is given in abuse—that is to say, merely to stifle further questioning. When I accepted the notice given by the hon. Member for Bristol, West (Mr. Robert Cooke) I did not think that it was, in such circumstances, subject to my having made a mistake in forgetting that I had called the hon. Member for Gloucestershire, West (Mr. Loughlin). An hon. Member having given notice that he will raise the matter in that manner, I cannot go further.
§ Mr. ReynoldsFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I question you at some future date if you know by then that this notice was not given by the hon. Member for Bristol, West?
§ Mr. SpeakerIf the hon. Gentleman wants to ask a question of me he will have to do so by Private Notice, so that the Chair can consider whether or not to allow it.