HC Deb 19 December 1966 vol 738 cc1000-2
Mr. Wigg

I rise on a point of order, of which I have given you notice, Mr. Speaker. I have also given notice to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Bristol, West (Mr. Robert Cooke). It relates to a Question on the Order Paper, which was down for answer on Monday, 28th November. It was deferred until 5th December, and deferred again on 12th December and has been deferred again today. This meant that on 28th November and again today I have been here for the whole of Question Time, waiting to answer a Question which had been deferred, obviously as part of a prearranged plan—[Interruption.]—the sole object of which was presumably to cause me inconvenience, and I presume, judging by the titters, annoyance, which has met with the approval of some hon. Gentlemen opposite.

I do not complain of a lack of courtesy on the part of the hon. Gentleman in not informing me of the deferment of his Question, but in my submission the hon. Member for Bristol, West has abused the procedure of the House quite irresponsibly and in so doing has raised a point of order which requires a Ruling by you as to whether the hon. Member, having invoked the procedure of the House and thus placing servants of the House in the same position as myself, is not guilty of disorderly conduct in using this procedure for no purpose, except the adolescent enjoyment of causing me inconvenience.

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid that the simple answer to the point of order raised by the right hon. Gentleman is that the putting down of Questions and the failing to be in one's place to ask the Question at the appropriate time is not a matter for the Chair. Any dispute between the right hon. Gentleman and the hon. Gentleman to whom he referred is a matter of courtesy.

Mr. Kershaw

I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he had given you notice of this question. As the question turns out not to be a point of order, should the House have been troubled with it?

Mr. Speaker

There is a lot in what the hon. Gentleman says.

Mr. Lipton

Since this matter has been raised by my right hon. Friend, would you ask the appropriate authority concerned to consider for how long a Question can be deferred? There ought to be a limit, three, four or five or six weeks, imposed on the extent to which a Question can be deferred from week to week. At present the procedure permits a Question to be deferred from week to week for the whole of the Session. This is surely an abuse.

Mr. Speaker

The question of deferring Questions and how many times they should he deferred would be a very difficult matter for the Chair to make any rule on. If there were any really serious abuse of Question Time the House would have to look into it.

Mr. Onslow

On a point of order. It will have been within your notice, Mr. Speaker, that the Foreign Secretary has tacked on to a number of early Questions on the Order Paper some of the later Questions up to and including the last one put down. This has allowed more supplementary questions on points of public interest than would normally be the case. May I ask for your guidance as to whether this is a practice which you might wish to encourage in the case of other Departments with long lists of Questions?

Mr. Speaker

I have been asked the same thing previously from exactly the opposite point of view, namely, to discourage the taking of a very late Questions with early ones. I have to watch this matter of late Questions to see if there is any shade of abuse. On this occasion, the reason why the Questions had high numbers made sense. Some incidents referred to happened only last week, which meant that by the time the Questions got on the Order Paper they were quite late. If there was any abuse I would seek to stop it, but if there was an advantage to be gained by taking late Questions on the grounds that they were topical and could be tacked on to earlier Questions, then it seems to me that they might be allowed. One must leave this to the Chair.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Before any more points of order are raised, I would remind hon. Members that we have a lot of business before us.

Sir Knox Cunningham

Is it not always possible for a Minister to ask your permission to answer a question at the end of Question Time or to make a statement, if he so desires?

Mr. Speaker

It is always possible for a Minister to answer a Question at the end of the Question Time or to make a statement, if he asks permission of the Chair.

Mr. Winnick

Is it not an abuse of the time of the House for an hon. Member to put down a Question with the obvious intention of not being in his place, as is the case with the Question to the Paymaster General?

Mr. Speaker

The point was put a little more eloquently by the right hon. Gentleman who raised it.