HC Deb 13 May 1971 vol 817 cc620-1
Mr. Harold Wilson

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry to have to raise this matter. When you suspended the sitting you, as I understand it, told the House you were so advised and, so far as I am aware, this is in full consonance with the Standing Orders governing the business of the House. I wanted to ask you whether, in your consideration of this matter, which you said should be considered further even if it means changing the Standing Order, you are aware that at least on one past occasion your predecessor, finding that the earlier Questions had folded up, asked the leave of the House to start Questions to the Prime Minister before 3.15. Without impugning your decision, which is covered by the Standing Order, will you take that precedent into account?

Mr. Speaker

I was advised that I had no power to do that and that any attempt on my part to do so would be in breach of the Standing Order, with or without the leave of the House. But it is a matter which requires consideration.

Mr. McMaster

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. At five minutes past three, when you decided to suspend the sitting, I was in fact on my feet endeavouring to catch your eye in order to ask a supplementary question arising out of Question No. 33. Question Time is extremely valuable to hon. Members who wish to probe Ministerial decisions. Is it in accordance with precedent that a sitting should be suspended when an hon. Member is on his feet endeavouring to catch your eye?

Mr. Speaker

I do not think that there is much precedent governing the situation. That is one of the reasons why I suspended the sitting when I did. In any event, the calling of hon. Members is a matter for the Chair's discretion.

Mr. James Hamilton

On a point of order. When the sitting resumed for Prime Minister's Questions, it was very noticeable that Questions Q4, Q5, Q10 and Q11 were identical in almost every respect. Is not that an abuse of the period for Questions to the Prime Minister, since it is extremely unfair to back-bench hon. Members and, on this occasion, was obviously organised by the Government Whips?

Mr. Speaker

There are many precedents. The hon. Gentleman's right hon. and hon. Friends have acted similarly on previous occasions. However, the Chair has a remedy. It need not necessarily call every hon. Member with a Question to put a supplementary question, nor did I.

Sir F. Bennett

On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am glad that you have made that point. You will recall that there have been at least seven occasions when a similar state of affairs has arisen among right hon. and hon. Members on the benches opposite. On one of those occasions, there were not four but five identical Questions.

Mr. Speaker

That is interesting.

Dame Irene Ward

Further to that point of order. In view of the fact that Question No. 33 was my own, will you bear in mind in future that I could ask 10 supplementaries on it?

Mr. Speaker

I am not sure whether that is an inducement or a deterrent.