QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS (Hansard, 22 February 1966)

§ Mr. John Wells
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Before the Financial Secretary leaves us, may I raise this point? In answer to Question No. 3 today he said that he had nothing to add to the Answer given by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food yesterday. The Answer given yesterday was a Written Answer to the hon. Member for Norfolk, North (Mr. Hazell). The hon. Member first tabled his Question on 16th February for an Oral Answer tomorrow by the Minister of Agriculture. Had it stayed on the Order Paper as an Oral Question for answer tomorrow, we would have had the opportunity of questioning the Minister on this most important point.
Unfortunately, for reasons best known to the hon. Member, he altered it from an Oral Question for tomorrow to a Written Question for yesterday. Consequently, when my Question, which was originally tabled 16 days earlier, namely, on 1st February, was reached today, the Treasury Minister was in the comfortable position of being able to duck any serious questioning. This is not the first time that a set of circumstances of this sort has occurred with reference to the Department—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] This is not the first time this has occurred with reference to Questions on agriculture. There was a very parallel episode over the Apple and Pear Order—

§ Mr. Speaker
I hope that the hon. Member will pursue only the single point of order he has and not go into history.

§ Mr. Wells
I am grateful, Mr. Speaker. My third point is that my right hon. Friend the Member for Grantham (Mr. Godber) tried to raise a similar matter in a Committee this morning and was ruled out of order there. We are in the difficulty that hon. Members on this side of the House—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I understood that the hon. Member was referring to something which happened in a Committee this morning. That is quite out of order.

§ Mr. Wells
That was a slip of the tongue, Mr. Speaker.
My point of order, in substance, is that hon. Members seeking to raise questions on agricultural and specific horticultural 238 topics are being flouted by members of the Government by having Written Questions put down after Oral Questions are tabled.

§ Mr. Hazell
Further to that point of order, as my name has been brought into this matter. My Question was for Oral Answer and presented on Friday, but the Table Office made a mistake. I received a written apology from the Table Office for putting the Question down as one for Written Answer.

Hon. Members
Withdraw!

§ Mr. Wells
I am grateful that the hon. Member for Norfolk, North, has given that explanation. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."] There is nothing to with draw. The Question was on the Order Paper as a Written Question and hon. Members on this side of the House were unaware of this chain of circumstances. That does prevent—

Hon. Members
Withdraw.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I hope that the House will allow the hon. Member for Maidstone (Mr. John Wells) to conclude.

§ Mr. Wells
I am most grateful to the hon. Member for Norfolk, North, for his explanation. Naturally, our personal relationship in desiring—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] The hon. Member and I both wish the best for British horticulture and it would be a good thing—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I know of the hon. Member's keen interest in horticulture, but he must pursue only his point of order and not start a debate on horticulture across the House. I think that I have heard enough—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Perhaps the hon. Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe, (Mr. John Hynd) will wait until I have dealt with this point of order. I do not think that I need help on this one.
Hon. Members do suffer from time to time from the way in which Questions appear in various forms on the Order Paper, but this is not a question for the Chair unless the rules of order governing Questions are in some way infringed. I listened to the hon. Member for Maidstone with very great interest, but nothing he said raised any point of order for the Chair.

§ Mr. John Hynd
Is it not clear that the hon. Member for Maidstone (Mr. John Wells) made an imputation of collusion against my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, North (Mr. Hazell) and against the Government? In those circumstances, should he not withdraw that?

§ Sir W. Bromley-Davenport
On a point of order. Is it in order for an hon. Member to raise a point of order on a point of order which is not a point of order?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I am almost tempted to rule the hon. and gallant Member for Knutsford (Sir W. Bromley-Davenport), who raised the point of order, out of order. I did not see any imputation in what the hon. Member for Maidstone said which called for a withdrawal. I understood from what the hon. Member said that he accepted the explanation by the hon. Member for Norfolk (Mr. Hazell) as to what took place. I hope that we can move on now to the business of the day.