LOCAL RADIO STATIONS (Hansard, 24 November 1969)

§ 55. Mr. JAMES JOHNSON
To ask the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what plans he has to establish a local radio station for Humberside; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Bryan
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. We are informed on the tape that the Answer to Question No. 55 will contain a major statement on radio policy. May I ask you whether the Minister sought your leave to answer the Question at the end of Question Time, or has he, once again, run away from the Question?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I cannot answer the last part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. The Minister has not indicated to the Chair—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—that he wished to answer the Question at the end of Question Time.

§ Mr. Lubbock
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. If it is the Minister's intention to make by means of a Written Answer a major statement on policy, how does it come about that the news of that statement appears on the tape before the Minister has had a chance to answer it and before any hon. Member has seen it? Will you strongly deplore the practice of Ministers giving Written Answers to Questions which are much more appropriately dealt with in the form of a statement?

§ The Minister of Posts and Telecommunications (Mr. John Stonehouse)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am in the hands of the House. As hon. Members know, my position in the order of answering Questions was put down rather late for today, with the result that, perhaps, Oral Questions that are late in the list are not reached. But if it is the wish of the House, I will now, with permission, Mr. Speaker, answer Question No. 55.

Hon. Members
Hear, hear.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. It will help the Chair if the Minister now announces which Question it is that he proposes to answer.

§ Mr. Stonehouse
I propose to answer Question No. 55—

§ Mr. Hugh Jenkins
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Before the Minister replies—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The Minister is not replying. He is telling the Chair, as he failed to tell the Chair earlier, which Question of his he is answering. It is Question No. 55.

§ Mr. Hugh Jenkins
I wish to complain, because the Minister apparently intends to make an important statement on the policy of the B.B.C. radio in this fashion. It seems to me that the Minister is treating the House with insufficient respect. If the Minister intends to make such a 33 statement, it should be a proper statement and, preferably, associated with a debate on the subject. If the Minister is to come here, and, in answer to a Written Question—

Hon, Members
Oral.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I am seized of the point of order from both sides. Some hon. Members object because the Minister was not going to answer the Question, and some now object because he now seeks to do so.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The Chair can do many things, but it can take only one point of order at a time. Sir Ian Orr-Ewing.

§ Sir Ian Orr-Ewing
The particular facility now being offered places the Liberal and Conservative Oppositions in a difficult position, Sir. When a statement is made, which is desirable, we are given notice of it. That practice leads to informed questions, which is much more useful 10 the House than springing questions at short notice when we have had no opportunity of studying a statement. It is not desirable to have this statement at the end of Question Time, when we will have had no opportunity of a considered reply.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have followed the course of the points of order. The case is exactly as I have said. There were protests from the Opposition Front Bench that Question No. 55 was not to be answered at the end of Question Time: there are now protests that it is to be answered at the end of Question Time. This is an example of British freedom.

§ Mr. Strauss
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Does not this procedure raise a dangerous precedent? It has always been accepted that if a Minister is to answer an Oral Question that is not reached, he must give notice to you beforehand. If he does not do so, the Question is not answered. What I am worried about is that if this old procedure is broken by a precedent today, it may often happen that a Minister who is not able to answer a Question, because it has not been reached, will be pressed by two or three hon. Members, or a certain section of the House, to answer that Question.
34 Today's precedent will be quoted and he will be pressed to answer the Question. That will be followed by pressures being put upon him to answer even further Questions. It seems to me that the whole of Question Time might get into disarray if the old procedure whereby Mr. Speaker is given notice of a Minister's intention to answer a Question is not followed.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am seized of the point. The right hon. Gentleman speaks from a wealth of experience. The rule is not quite as cast-iron as he suggests. In history, it has been known for pressure to be put on a Minister to answer a Question that has not been reached. Occasionally, he has yielded. That is what he has done in this case.

§ Mr. Bryan
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I want to try to be helpful. We on this side will be quite satisfied if we can have a full statement tomorrow.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I can take any number of points of order provided that they are raised one at a time.

§ Mr. Peyton
Following on the point made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Vauxhall (Mr. Strauss), one of the things which worries us is that the Minister had obviously contemplated answering the Question, because news of his intention to make a major statement has appeared on the tape. What we are complaining about is that Ministers almost make a habit of failing to communicate these intimate thoughts of theirs to the House beforehand.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This point, too, has been raised many times in the House. It is not a matter for Mr. Speaker at all.

§ Mr. James Johnson
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. As Question No. 55 is my Question, perhaps I may be allowed to say that if it were for the convenience of the House and of you, Sir, I would be perfectly happy if it were answered tomorrow, and if hon. Members—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Since the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications responded to the wish of the House just now, he may perhaps concede further and not make a statement until tomorrow.

§ Mr. Stonehouse
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am very willing to respond to the wish of the House—

§ Mr. C. Pannell
On a point of order—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. With respect, the Minister is addressing me: he is on a point of order.

§ Mr. Stonehouse
In my own defence, in view of the points raised this afternoon, it was by the wish of the House that I was placed to answer Questions from No. 35 every fourth Monday. That was the wish, apparently, of those who arrange the business of the House. It was not my wish, Mr. Speaker, that this important Question should have been so far down the Order Paper that it has not been reached orally. But I am certainly very willing to respond to the wish of the House, and I will see that my reply is given to the House tomorrow.

§ Mr. C. Pannell
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not the fact that, in the normal way, if this Question had not been reached the Minister would have given a Written Answer which would have been issued this afternoon? Out of courtesy to the House, and at the direct request of the hon. Member for Howden (Mr. Bryan), who presumes to lead on these matters for the Opposition, my right hon. Friend bowed to what he considered to be the will of the House. I should have thought that this sort of courtesy to the House should be greeted with approbation and not with condemnation. Let him get on with it.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I think that the right hon. Gentleman has put very clearly half of the point I made. There was a request that the Minister should answer: there was, however, an equally violent request that he should not answer. I think that we can now leave it that the Minister will answer the Question tomorrow.

§ Mr. Kenneth Baker
Further to that point of order. I am rather reluctant to leave it because we are in a farcical situation in which every evening paper will have it, every morning newspaper tomorrow will have it, and we are graciously to be told about it tomorrow afternoon. [Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I have said very often that we are a free society. That means that different people have different opinions at a certain moment of time. That is evident at the moment. We are dealing with telecommunications.

§ Mr. Pavitt
On a point of order. May I be told whether Question No. 49 has been answered or not?

§ Mr. Speaker
It has not been answered.