HL Deb 15 March 1888 vol 323 cc1262-3
LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL

I shall not detain the House for many minutes. It is unnecessary to point out again in what sense, for what purpose and with a view to what approaching controversy I have ventured to approach the topic of the Standing I Orders. As regards this proposal every one knows that according to established usages in both Houses of Parliament a reply is given to the Mover of a Bill or Resolution, in order that he may defend himself and his proposal against the criticisms they have possibly elicited. That object is of course frustrated when, after the reply, now speeches are delivered. The Mover then replies again, and the debate may thus go on for over. On June 20th, 1884, there was a discussion in this House, and after the noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery) who brought it on replied, 12 speeches were delivered, the result being that the noble Earl had to reply three times over. It curiously happens that on Monday, 19th, we are going to renew the same discussion under the same auspices. It will not be denied, therefore, that such a Standing Order would be both apposite and practical. Of course, anyone who rises after the reply may now be called to Order; but not so easily as if the regulation can be cited. When the Speaker cannot interfere and no one else is bound to do so, regulation is more necessary. If this Standing Order is adopted some improvement will arise; if it is not, a further argument for salutary change will be created. The noble Lord concluded by moving the Resolution of which he had given Notice.

Moved, as a new Standing Order— That where the House permits reply upon a motion or a Bill to the Peer who brought it forward, the debate shall not be continued after the reply is over."—(The Lord Stratheden and Campbell.)

THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)

said, that no difficulty was experienced under the present system, and he did not think that the new Standing Order proposed by the noble Lord was desirable.

LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL

In the case referred to by the noble Marquess the statement could not, is I understand it, be considered a reply, lint I will not divide the House upon this question against the judgment of its Leader.

Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.