QUESTIONS TO THE PRIME MINISTER (Hansard, 21 December 1976)

§ Mr. Lipton
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to raise the misuse of the Order Paper for Questions to the Prime Minister. Hon. Members who have had experience in previous Parliaments will realise that the standard of Questions has fallen considerably and that we are getting poor value from this quarter of an hour.
For example, there were 10 Questions on the Order Paper about the Prime Minister's engagements for today. I consider that to be a misuse of the Order Paper and I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to draw this matter to the attention of the Committee on Procedure so that it might consider how to improve this quarter of an hour.
I suggest that only one Question should be allowed on the Prime Minister's engagements for a particular day. We should then be able to cover much wider ground.
We also spent five minutes today on the Mole Valley Farmers Limited, which was a misuse of the time of the House, because Questions which appear on the Order Paper often have nothing to do with the supplementary questions which hon. Members ask. I suggest that hon. Members should be allowed to put their supplementary questions on the Order Paper instead of the Questions which now appear.

§ Mr. Tebbit
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not so much the Questions on the Order Paper which are trivial as the answers from the Prime Minister over which you have no control? Would it not be better if the Prime Minister did not use Question Time in future as an opportunity to attack an association which was founded by, among others, Mr. McWhirter, who died in the defence of freedom against the scurrilous Marxists and their allies—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Hon. Members must not use points of order to pursue arguments.

§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Does the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) have a genuine point of order?

§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton
Yes, Mr. Speaker. I wish to follow up the point raised by the hon. Member for Lambeth, Central (Mr. Lipton). I had hoped to catch your eye in order to raise with the Prime Minister a matter of grave importance, namely, the employment prospects for people in the paper board and textile industries—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member is going to Liverpool to get to Maidenhead. It is ridiculous to bring in other matters, as the hon. Gentleman is doing, on a point of order.

§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton
I believe that the hon Member for Lambeth, Central made a valid point which he has made before. There is abuse of Prime Minister's Questions and I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will refer the whole matter to the appropriate Committee so that Back Benchers who wish to raise genuine matters of importance to themselves and the country will be able to do so.

§ Mr. Pavitt
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The practice since 1970 has been that because of the transfer of Questions from Prime Minister to other Departments, only a few Questions to my right hon. Friend are in order. Could not you and the appropriate Committee consider a procedure such as that used in the Consolidated Fund so that instead of bogus Questions which are put down to enable an hon. Member to ask a supplementary question, there is a list of hon. Members to ask Questions thereby giving a fair share of the number of hon. Members who can put Questions to the Prime Minister rather than of the number of Questions?

§ Mr. Dykes
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I have a genuine point of order. Is it not an abuse of Question Time for the Prime Minister to evade giving Answers to serious Questions? The right hon. Gentleman intervened earlier on a matter after you had said that it was not a real point of order. Yet he would not answer my serious question whether he would prefer first to get rid of the Secretary of State for Energy, Transport House or Mr. Bevan.

§ The Prime Minister
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I hope that the Prime Minister will not try to answer questions. I am dealing with points of order.

§ The Prime Minister
As you and some hon. Members know, Mr. Speaker, I am discontented with the way in which Questions are phrased, and I have felt for some time that this is becoming a charade. I gave vent to this feeling only a few weeks after assuming this office.
Having looked into the matter, I am not sure what can be done, but I should be glad if the Committee would look at it again and, if we wish to be sensible, look at the system under which the Opposition put down syndicated Questions from groups of hon. Members. How can I be expected to take them seriously when everyone knows that they are syndicated and put in groups in order that I may be caught on one point if not on another? That is not a genuine seeking of information, but the scoring of points, and I find it of no value.

Several Hon. Members
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Before I take further points of order, I know that I have taken enough to say that both sides of the House are aware that soon after I was honoured by election to the Office of Speaker I endeavoured to make sure that supplementary questions were related to Questions on the Order Paper. The House resisted that very strongly indeed, and the result is that we rarely get beyond Question No. 3 in Prime Minister's Question Time.
Select Committees have considered Prime Minister's Questions and have rejected the idea that hon. Members should be free to jump up and ask questions without notice. Therefore, it is a fair assumption that they believe that supplementary questions should be related to the Questions on the Order Paper.
It has always been difficult to get a Question addressed to the Prime Minister that he cannot legitimately pass to one of his colleagues, but over the years right hon. and hon. Members have succeeded in so doing, and Prime Ministers have answered Questions, quite apart from the sort of Question that we have been getting. I do not want to use anybody else's words—

§ Mr. McNamara
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The House must understand that it is not for me to refer matters to the Select Committee. The Leader of the House is listening? I presume that either the Government or the Opposition can contact the Committee. It is not for me to refer matters to the Committee.

§ Mr. Faulds
Is not one of the problems of Prime Minister's Questions at the moment the poverty of intervention of the Leader of the Opposition, in that somewhat comic treble of hers, and would it not—[Interruption.] Would it not—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that that is not a point of order.

§ Mr. Faulds
rose—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has finished.

§ Mr. McNamara
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My question is not concerned with the content of Prime Minister's Questions, nor is it concerned with the supplementary questions which are asked. It concerns rather the procedure which you followed, Mr. Speaker, for the acceptance of supplementary questions when my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was replying to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). A point of order was raised by the hon. Member for Stretford (Mr. Churchill) which you accepted, Mr. Speaker, when the normal custom has always been that on these occasions, before accepting such a point of order, you ask a Member whether he will not wait until after Question Time. As a result of the procedure you followed, hon. Members who had Questions down to the Prime Minister were unable to make their points.
It also appears that there is a question, therefore, of the Chair seeking to distinguish between hon. Members on points of order, and this is of concern to all Back Benchers.

§ Mr. Speaker
It would be of concern if it were true. The hon. Gentleman is quite correct in saying that I allowed the point of order from the hon. Member for Stretford (Mr. Churchill) but, as it happened, it was after 3.30 p.m., as the 467 Questions were allowed to go on for a few minutes. I endeavour to ensure that both sides of the House are treated alike.

§ Mr. Alexander W. Lyon
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Leader of the House and myself were members of the last Committee which considered this matter. We decided against allowing the use of direct Questions to the Prime Minister because the Prime Minister had so often in the past transferred those Questions to departmental Ministers.
If my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is seriously saying that he wishes to improve the standard of Prime Minister's Questions, perhaps he will indicate that in the future Prime Ministers will not—or at least he will not—transfer Questions which are directed to him, even though they happen to be the responsibility of some other Department.
All that happens under the present system is that a ruse is devised with the Table Office whereby the original Question is merely the platform for a departmental Question later in the guise of a supplementary question. It serves nobody, and the Prime Minister has to answer in the end. It would be a saving of time, therefore, and much more pertinent if direct Questions were allowed to the Prime Minister.

§ Mr. Speaker
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman's words will have been noted.