§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Fred Peart)With permission, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a short business statement.
Tomorrow, there will be, until about seven o'clock, a debate on an Opposition Motion on the rising costs of home ownership. This will arise in Supply.
The business already announced will follow.
§ Mr. HeathMay I thank the Leader of the House for facilitating the arrangement of this business? Are we to understand that the rest of the Supply will continue for an additional time?
§ Mr. Michael FootDid my right hon. Friend receive any representations through the usual channels that this debate on the mortgage rates—if the Opposition consider it to be a matter of importance—should be taken today instead of the Parliament (No. 2) Bill, or were there no representations from the Front Bench opposite to postpone the Parliament (No. 2) Bill at all?
§ Mr. Emrys HughesDoes this mean that my right hon. Friend is taking more time out of our consideration of the Air Estimates? He has already stolen four hours from our consideration of the Defence Estimates. Does he intend to steal another two hours?
§ Mr. Arthur LewisWill the Leader of the House now answer the Question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot)? Did he receive any approaches from the Opposition Front Bench?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. There is no need to put the same question twice at business question time.
§ Mr. OgdenWill the Leader of the House suggest how I might answer a constituent who inquires how it is that the House of Commons can spend three hours debating the situation on mortgages and yet spend eight, 10, 12, or 15 hours considering the Parliament (No. 2) Bill?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Questions must be about tomorrow's business.
§ Sir Harmar NichollsOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In order to help the House, are we to understand that, if a question is put to a Minister and he does not answer it, no one else can put the same question to try to get in answered?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The simple answer is commonsense. It is an otiose exercise—[Laughter.] Obviously I must translate.
§ Sir Harmar Nichollsrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am answering the hon. Gentleman. If an hon. Member asks a Minister a question and the Minister refuses to answer it, to ask it again does not secure an answer from the Minister.
§ Sir Harmar NichollsFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. There are occasions when it is the duty of the House to pursue certain questions. If the Minister does not answer a question, I would 214 have thought that the House must pursue it. Your Ruling seems contrary to that.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Mr. Speaker never rules. He only advises the House on matters of commonsense.
§ Mr. HeathWould not the Leader of the House agree that both he and the Opposition thought it more important to look after the convenience of the House by not changing the business with less than 24 hours' notice than to pander to the peculiar obsessions of the hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot)?
§ Mr. PeytonMr. Speaker, further to the point of order raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls). If, in your wisdom, you describe so innocent a pastime as repeating a question to a Minister as "an otiose exercise", would you be good enough to tell us with what graphic phrase you would describe the Government's pursuing the Parliament (No. 2) Bill?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman must not tempt Mr. Speaker.