§ 2.54 p.m.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, before we leave Questions, may I ask the noble Earl the Leader of the House whether he will reconsider the—I hesitate to use the word "ruling" because, as I know, no Leader can give a ruling, but whether when the propriety or appropriateness of a question is under discussion, and the procedure that is to be followed is before the House, it is really necessary at that stage to frame one's remarks in the form of a question? I think the House will accept that I have always sought, and as Leader of the Opposition it is still my duty to uphold, the proprieties of your Lordships' House. But when my noble friend Lord Blyton raised a point just now, I do not think it was necessary to remind him of 974 our custom, since his question related to procedure and not to the Question on the Order Paper. It may be that the noble Earl would wish to consider this point further, but if the House is to exercise its judgment in these matters without giving rise to a general debate, even if what is said does not relate to the particular Question on the Paper, I think noble Lords who are concerned should be able, however briefly, to express their opinion. It may be, as I have said, that the noble Earl, Lord Jellicoe, would wish to consider the matter further, but I think it rather important in the interests of the House to make this point.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition. I certainly should not wish—indeed as he said, I am not in a position to do so—to give a definitive ruling on this sort of matter; and I certainly was not wishing to give any definitive ruling on the question of substance. I made it absolutely clear that there was nothing out of order in the way we were proceeding. But I felt—and here I am just as anxious as any other noble Lord to safeguard our proprieties—that we were straying rather beyond our traditional areas. This may be right: I am not expressing an opinion; I am merely pointing it out. If I curtailed the debate unnecessarily and improperly by asking the noble Lord, Lord Blyton, to couch a further supplementary question by way of interrogation, I extend my apologies to the noble Lord. It is my impression that at Question Time we go by way of interrogation. If one interjects, as I did, then I am not certain what happens within the square brackets. This is perhaps something that we can look at. If I was unnecessarily terse towards the noble Lord, Lord Blyton, I extend to him my apologies, but I do not, if I may say so, resile at all from anything that I said on the point of substance.
§ LORD ALPORTMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether, when he is considering this matter, he will bear in mind that the House took 22 minutes this afternoon to dispose of four Questions, which in another place would probably have been sufficient for 20 questions or thereabouts?
§ LORD ALPORTMay I also ask him whether he will not consider whether one of the reasons why we get into difficulties over Question Time is that we conduct ourselves so leisurely and give ourselves such latitude?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I will certainly consider that point, but I will not add to the twenty-two minutes by considering it at length at this moment.
§ LORD SHINWELLMy Lords, is the noble Earl aware that it would not take long at all—it need not take twenty two minutes to answer the Questions—if we could be given satisfactory answers?
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, there was no need for the Leader of the House to apologise to me. All I was asking was this. I regarded the Question that was at issue as raising a serious problem, and I was told by my noble Leader that it could be dealt with by a substantive Motion. But can it? If one puts a Motion on the Order Paper, it is left to the decision of the Leaders on both sides as to whether it is taken or not, and one is in the lap of the gods.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am glad to hear the noble Lord, Lord Blyton, draw a close parallel between the Leaders of both sides and the gods.
§ LORD HUGHESMy Lords, is not the noble Earl doing very well this afternoon? First of all, he is given a Marquessate, and now he is given divinity.
§ LORD SLATERMy Lords, would the Leader of the House, in regard to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Alport, who, like many of us has had experience in another place, consider whether it is necessary to go into so much detail, because over the years such has been happening?
LORD GRENFELLMy Lords, is it not a fact that we have now moved away from Question Time and are having a debate on rules? Can we have a debate on rules, as we have been trying to do, during Question Time? We have Standing Orders in this House. I cannot believe it is right that we should have a debate on rules in Question Time, when 976 Question Time for many years has been devoted to Questions.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, perhaps I can close the discussion by saying that such is the nature of our affairs that now and again we get into slight difficulty; we throw it around for a minute or two, and then somebody says: "Refer it to the Committee on Procedure". I just wanted certain points to be on the record. I think that clearly, if propriety is under discussion, the House cannot ignore referring to it; but I think if it goes on for more than a couple of minutes, at that point we stop and perhaps think again.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I think that this may be the moment at which to stop, because we have gone beyond the twenty-two minutes to which my noble friend quite rightly referred.