HC Deb 07 May 1969 vol 783 cc453-6
Sir F. Bennett

On a point of order. May I now raise with you, Mr. Speaker, a point of order of which I have given you prior notice, and which in view of Minister's remarks in answer to my last question, suggesting that if I had put a Question down to him he would have answered it, I was very tempted to raise during Question Time, but instead bowed to your original advice that this was inappropriate?

On 1st May I put down a Question on the very point which he then mentioned, the cost of the British patrol in Madagascar. I put the Question to the Treasury on the first day which would ensure an Answer on 20th May. I put it in to the Treasury because the best advice I could obtain was that it would answer this Question and not the Ministry of Defence. It was not until Tuesday morning that I received notification that the Treasury was to transfer this Question to the Ministry of Defence, because it thought that it would be appropriate for that Minister to answer.

I thereupon went to the Table Office which, quite procedurally correctly, advised me that, had I received notification of transfer by Monday, before the House sat, I could have put the question down to the Minister of Defence for a verbal reply on Wednesday 7th May. The Table Office said that as I did not receive the notification of transfer until Tuesday afternoon, it was then too late for me to put such a Question to the Minister for today. I was told that my only remedy lay in leaving it for the Defence Minister to answer as a Written Question on 20th May or for me to leave it indefinitely until Questions on Defence came to the top of the list again.

I know that you have no control over whether a Minister transfers Questions, Mr. Speaker, but I think that on behalf of every Member in the House some advice should be given by the Chair as to the celerity with which Ministerial Departments give notification of their intention to transfer Questions. Otherwise, we are put in the position when a Minister who does not want to answer a difficult Question—and I must admit I had some suspicions on this today—takes steps to ensure that the Question is not answered verbally, by the manoeuvre to which I have referred.

Mr. Speaker

I am never concerned with the motives of Ministers, which I am sure are the purest.

I am obliged to the hon. Member for Torquay (Sir F. Bennett) for having given me notice that he intended to raise this matter. The general point he makes, and it is an important one, was considered by the Procedure Committee in Session 1966/67. In paragraph 13 of its Second Report is said: It has been submitted to Your Committee that a Member's opportunity to ask a question for an oral answer is seriously prejudiced if there is delay in informing him that his question is to be transferred from one Minister to another. … It has been consistently emphasised by the Chair that the transferance of questions is the responsibility of Ministers. But Your Committee recommend that Ministers should as a general rule, not later than two sitting days after the appearance of a question on the Notice Paper, inform the Member who has given notice of it of the fact that it is to be transferred, and to which Minister. It does not seem on this occasion that the Department disregarded the Committee's recommendation, since notice of the Question was published on 2nd May, which was a Friday, and notice of the transfer was given on 5th May, which, being a Monday, was within the specified two sitting days.

All the same, this is a clear illusstration of the inconvenience which can arise if there is any delay at all in the transfer of Questions and I am sure that all Departments will use their best endeavours to avoid this. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman.

Sir F. Bennett

I accept that notice was given, but one cannot know that unless one receives notification and I did not receive notification by post until 6th May, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

I understand that notice was given on Monday, but did not reach the hon. Gentleman until Tuesday.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

Further to that point of order. I am sure that the whole House will thank you for the Ruling you have given and the suggestion made to Departments. It is within the knowledge of most hon. Members that this sort of thing has been happening for some years now. Could the Department concerned not follow the admirable example set by the Table Office which, often within minutes and certainly within hours, sends a postcard to an hon. Member informing him that it wishes to discuss a Question, or that something is not in order?

Surely the Departments could send a printed card stating that they were transferring a Question? It could be sent within a matter of hours. If the Table Office can do it, the Departments can.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Departments will note the advice of the hon. Gentleman. May I say that the Table Office appreciates the tributes which the hon. Gentleman has paid to it.

Mr. Paget

Further to that point of order. When the Committee recommends that the communication should be made with a Member within 48 hours, or two sitting days, surely that means communication to the Member, not the mere posting of a letter? It should be up to the Department, by telephone or otherwise, to find out where the Member is, and let him know. Could that be made clear?

Mr. Speaker

The House will agree that the sooner notice is given the better. If it is within the two days, even so much the better for the convenience of the hon. Member who may be disadvantaged if he does not know that his Question has been transferred.