PROCEDURE OF THE HOUSE. (Hansard, 17 December 1940)

THE EARL OF ONSLOW
My Lords you will remember that this matter has been the subject of discussion in your Lordships' House on more than one occasion, and that on the last occasion it was decided to set up a Committee to consider this and any other matter connected with it and to report to your Lord- 143 ships' House. It was a strong Committee which was appointed, consisting of members who have had great experience in debate and of members from all quarters of the House. The Committee had two meetings and considered the whole subject very carefully. They did not think it desirable to make any alterations in the present procedure and they approved the Amendment recently made to the Companion of Standing Orders which I will read to your Lordships: If a Peer is not satisfied with the answer given, a supplementary question can be asked, provided such supplementary question is confined to the subject of the original question.' I think your Lordships will all agree that the practice of having starred questions is to save your Lordships time, and therefore that the amount of question and answer which passes should be as strictly limited as possible. The object of the starred question is, of course, to avoid having a lengthy discussion.
The next point is covered by the words of the recent addition to the Companion—namely Debates should not take place on a starred question:"— that of course is the object of the starred question— it is, however, open to any Peer dissatisfied with the answer given to the starred question to put on the Paper for a subsequent day a Motion dealing with the subject at issue. Notice of any starred question should appear on the Order Paper not later than the day before that on which an answer is desired. Your Lordships will see it is suggested that if the answer to a starred question is of such importance as to require it, any member of your Lordships' House desiring further discussion should put a Motion on the Paper for a subsequent day, so that the matter raised would receive full discussion and consideration in a debate on the subject in the House. The whole object of the starred question is to use that method simply for obtaining information and not for the purpose of discussion upon the matter indicated in the question. If it is necessary for other discussion there are many other methods by which a debate can be raised.
The only other point that I think I ought to mention to your Lordships is this. Your Lordships will see that this 144 is called the First Report from the Select Committee on the Procedure of the House of Lords. We suggest to your Lordships that the Committee might remain in being, so that if any other points arise on any other question of procedure we should I not have to reconstitute the Committee or set up a new one, but should have this Committee always available to deal with any points that may possibly arise in the future. I beg to move.

§ LORD DAVIES
My Lords, I am sure you would like to thank the noble Earl who has just spoken for his very clear exposition of the Report of the Committee. The position seems to be precisely the same as it was before. The starred question remains as part of the procedure of your Lordships' House. The only thing I am sorry about is that the Committee did not see their way to recommend that the starred question should have a priority on the Order Paper. I believe that such a procedure would suit the convenience especially of the Ministers who have to reply to these questions, because they would not then be kept hanging about until all the other business had first of all been done before they were able to reply to the starred questions which they had come here to answer. That is the only suggestion I have to make, and I would like to thank the noble Earl for his admirable and clear exposition of the Report.

LORD STRABOLGI
My Lords, as a member of the Committee may I for a moment reply to what my noble friend Lord Davies said about the time of Ministers? We carefully considered that, and the Committee, which contained many Peers of far greater experience than myself, reminded us—I am sure Lord Templemore will appreciate this—that the place of Ministers is on the Bench opposite, that members of the Government are supposed to attend meetings of your Lordships' House. In an older and better age that rule was strictly enforced. My noble friend (Lord Snell) and Lord Templemore are examples to their colleagues in that matter.