QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS (Hansard, 9 February 1971)

§ Mr. Braine
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask your help and guidance? I do not know when my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General last answered Oral Questions in this House, but, through no fault of his own, he has not done so on at least the last two occasions when he was due to answer Questions and when it was reasonable, having regard to the point on the Order Paper at which the Questions appeared, that he might be expected to answer. The essential point about the order of Questions is that every Minister should answer Oral Questions at regular intervals, but this has not happened with the Attorney-General. You will appreciate, Mr. Speaker, that back benchers on both sides of the House are not parties to the arrangements entered into through the usual channels, and I therefore ask you what protection you may be able to offer and what advice you can give in a situation which is becoming increasingly unhappy for many hon. Members.

§ Mr. Speaker
The Chair is very much in the hands of the House in this matter. I tried to bustle things along yesterday, and we got through 41 Questions. Today we were getting along fairly well, and then things did not go quite so quickly and we only got through about 27 Questions.
280 The old tradition was that Questions should be put in order to gain information. The modern tendency is that Questions are put in order to make political points, which was not the original idea of Questions.
This is not a matter for the Chair but for the House, and the Chair is very much in the hands of the House. All I can do is to try to hurry things along, which I promise to do. If the House wishes to change its rules of order, it must do so.

§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. William Whitelaw)
Further to that point of order. Of course the Government are prepared to look at the order of Questions and the rota, which starts again after the Easter Recess, to see that all Ministers answer Questions, which is certainly our desire. All Governments have great difficulty in satisfying all requirements in working out the Question roster, but in conjunction with the Opposition and all hon. Members of the House we will try our best to do so.

§ Mr. Douglas
Further to that point of order. In view of your stricture, Mr. Speaker, that Questions should be put down to elicit information, may I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to the fact that the reply from the Minister is often that the information cannot be given because it would be embarrassing to the Government?

§ Mr. Alexander W. Lyon
Further to that point of order. Is it not obvious that this complaint and similar complaints which have been made in the recent past stem from the practice of giving subsidiary Ministers a lower place on the Order Paper? Would it not be better to revert to the practice of simply taking the Minister as he comes to the top of the list and starting, say, once every five weeks with the Attorney-General or another Minister?

§ Mr. Whitelaw
It is possible, but the House would find grave disadvantages in that course in relation to those Ministers whom the House wishes to question most. I am in the hands of the House, and I will consider that, but I hope the House will realise the difficulty of following that course.

§ Mr. Mackie
Further to that point of order. I hope the House will take note that out of 82 Questions today the Minister of Agriculture answered 21.

§ Mrs. Reneé Short
Instead of reorganising the rota of Questions to Ministers, will the Leader of the House say whether there is any chance of additional time being allowed for Questions, as this would be the real solution to the problem?

§ Mr. Speaker
Several points have been made on this matter. The hon. Member said that the Minister of Agriculture had only answered 21 Questions but I saw a number of disappointed faces when hon. Members were not called to ask supplementary questions. We have to get along as quickly as we can. This is not a proper matter for discussion now. It is a serious matter but not a new one. For 25 years there have been constant complaints about not getting through enough Questions. I hope the proper channels and those in authority will have regard to the points which have been made.

§ Mr. Mackie
Further to that point of order. Do not supplementary questions arise because of the unsatisfactory nature of the first answer?

§ Mr. Speaker
That is the view of every Opposition with regard to every Government. There is nothing new in it.