§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I put a Question to the noble Earl the Leader of the House? I asked whether I might be able to put a Private Notice Question, but I appreciate that I asked for it very late. The Question was, Whether the Government—
§ LORD BROCKWAYAll right, my Lords; I accept that. Let me put it this way. In view of the fact that a Statement is being made in another place, may we have a repetition of that Statement in this House?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I think it is not true to say that a Statement is being made in another place. An Answer is being given to a Private Notice Question. We have very clear Rules on these matters. They are contained in the Companion. Perhaps I should, for the sake of your Lordships, read the relevant extract from page 52 on Private Notice Questions:
A Lord who wishes to give Her Majesty's Government private notice of his intention to ask a Question on a matter of urgency should submit his Question in writing to the Leader of the House by Twelve noon on the day on which he proposes to ask the Question. The decision as to whether the Question is of sufficient urgency to justify an immediate reply rests in the first place with the Leader of the House and ultimately with the general sense of the House. (Report of Procedure Committee, 13th April, 1960).In fact, I received notice from the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, only about an hour ago. I felt that my hands were tied by the 12 o'clock Rule here. This was really the only consideration which was governing me in this matter. We have rather more Rules than sometimes we give ourselves credit for, and it is important—and I think noble Lords generally feel it is important—that we should be guided reasonably by those Rules, although we have a reputation, a deserved one, for flexibility.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I am bound to uphold the noble Earl in the view he has given. My noble friend Lord Brockway, who is a very skilled and effective raiser of matters, will know that on occasions I have had to refuse Private 1123 Notice Questions from him, not always because they were out of time. It is of course a fact that generally we apply a sort of test of urgency. But where a Private Notice Question is allowed in another place, it is quite often allowed here. It might well he (I am not sure what matter is in mind) that this could be dealt with by the device which we have invented, now sanctified by the Procedure Committee and approved by the House, of an Unstarred Question, which would mean that the matter would be before the House. I am not clear whether this has been allowed in another place. I am only trying to be helpful, but I am somewhat mystified.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I do not want to come between the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, and the House. The Question has been allowed in another place. I would say to Lord Brockway straight away that I recognise both the urgency and the importance of this particular matter. But I felt that I was bound by a quite clearly expressed note in the Companion. This was the only reason for the ruling which I felt perforce bound to give.
§ LORD SHACKLETONI am sorry, my Lords; I referred just now to an Unstarred Question: I meant a Written Question.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I have no complaint about this matter. I appreciate that I gave notice very late. That was because the news came very late, and when I indicated that I desired to put it I recognised the implication of the time factor.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Brockway. This is a matter to which we may conceivably come back in the next day or so. If at any time he, or any other Member of the House, feels that our 12 o'clock Rule is too stringent, then of course the Procedure Committee can always look at it. But I myself do not think it is an unsensible Rule.