§ Mr. AshtonOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The matter I wish to raise concerns the Answer to Question No. 1 to the Prime Minister about statistics relating to the number of Questions which have been transferred to other Ministers.
Many of us have tried to put down Questions about how many Questions have been transferred, but the Table Office has ruled such Questions out of order. Questions on this matter were ruled out of order by your predecessor who, on 20th July, 1964, said that not only could Questions on why a transfer had taken place not be asked, but that statistics relating to Questions transferred could not be given. The then Speaker went back to a precedent of 1901 for his view and said that the information was to be found by looking at HANSARD. The HANSARD of 1901 is very different from the HANSARD of today, taking into account the amount of the business of the House.
In view of that, would it not be possible for the Prime Minister to transfer every Question put to him, and virtually to do away with Questions? And if he did that we would not be able to question him about why he had transferred them. Would he then not even have to say why he bothered to transfer them? Would 1467 it be in order, in view of this, simply to put down Questions addressed to the Government, because no one knows with which Minister the Question is going to end up?
In view of the 158 Questions that have been transferred and the farce that is taking place and the obstructionist tactics being adopted towards back benchers, can you, Mr. Speaker, not revise this earlier Ruling of 1964 and examine the position again?
§ Mr. SpeakerI commend to the hon. Member the Ruling to which he referred of 20th July—
§ Mr. Fauldsrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I commend to the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Ashton) the Ruling of 20th July, 1964, which I read carefully this morning. It is a very long Ruling. It goes into the whole matter of transferred Questions and summarises in one sentence the position about transferring Questions. The transfer of Questions is a matter purely for the Minister. Mr. Speaker has nothing to do with it, and I am not prepared to change the carefully worded and elaborate Ruling of my predecessor four years ago.
§ Mr. BuchanWould it not be better if all the Questions to the Prime Minister were transferred to the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell)? This would have the advantage that we would know Government policy six months before it was enunciated?
§ Mr. SpeakerI doubt very much whether the hon. Member himself believes that that is a point of order.
§ Mr. David ClarkOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I bear in mind that your responsibility for Questions is limited to compliance with the rules of the House. I am also aware that any Minister can refuse to answer any Question. My point of order relates to a Question that was tabled in connection with a Royal Commission. It appeared on the Order Paper, and it was later transferred by the Prime Minister's Department to another Minister.
That surprised me, because I had understood from Erskine May that 1468
Questions addressed to Ministers should relate to the public affairs with which they are officially connected …
Mr. ClarkI was merely quoting Erskine May to keep the matter in order. To save time, I shall not quote any further, but Wade and Phillips confirm the strong impression which I think most constitutional scholars have. It is clearly understood that the Prime Minister is responsible for the establishment of a Royal Commission. On looking through HANSARD, I find that most Prime Ministers have accepted this convention. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, when he was Prime Minister, did so on many occasions. The last occasion on which he did so appears in HANSARD, Volume 799, columns 1570 to 1571, when my right hon. Friend answered a Question about a Royal Commission on a matter directly related to the responsibility of another Department, and this procedure was following by his predecessors in 1963 and 1955.
I have tried to show that it is a convention of the British Constitution, derived from the Royal Prerogative, that the Prime Minister accepts responsibility—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
§ Mr. ClarkI am trying to put the case to Mr. Speaker. Many of us on this side of the House are interested in democracy and the Constitution. Under the Royal Prerogative, Prime Ministers have accepted responsibility for Royal Commissions. Furthermore, the acceptance of this responsibility by the Prime Minister has been a custom of the House. By refusing to accept a Question about a Royal Commission—not by refusing to answer it—has not the Prime Minister broken the rules and the custom of the House, and has he not broken a convention of the British Constitution affecting the working of this House? Should he not make a statement to the House on this matter?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member has submitted his point of order courteously and clearly. May I remind the House that every mining constituency Member is anxious to take part in the debate that lies ahead of us.
The simple answer to the hon. Member's point of order is the one that I gave 1469 to the previous point of order. It is in order for a Minister to transfer Questions. The Speaker has no power to interfere in that transfer, and the Speaker is not in a position to comment on the constitutional or unconstitutional propriety of a Minister, or even the Prime Minister, so transferring a Question. I hope that we can get on.
§ Mr. M. StewartFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. To save time, could not the Prime Minister help us? My hon. Friend has put a simple important point to you relating to the responsibility of the Prime Minister for matters concerned with the appointment of a Royal Commission. Would not a short statement by the Prime Minister accepting this responsibility solve the matter straight away?
§ Mr. Fauldsrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Faulds.
§ Mr. FauldsI was afraid that you might overlook me.
§ Mr. SpeakerI never overlook the hon. Gentleman; I occasionally overhear him.
§ Mr. FauldsI am only too willing to make another contribution to your study. Do not the Prime Minister's difficulties in answering Questions arise from the fact that that particular right hon. Gentleman has the pretensions of an amateur in politics as in piano playing?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is not a point of order, and it was not very remarkable.
§ Mr. William PriceWould it not help the House and perhaps save time, Mr. Speaker, if you could persuade the Prime Minister to place a list in the Library of those Questions which he is prepared to answer?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman, like every hon. Gentleman for the last 100 years, learns which Questions a Prime Minister transfers when he transfers them.