Starred Questions (Hansard, 16 November 1983)

§ Lord Reigate
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)
Yes, my Lords, and I quite understand my noble friend's concern. But it is, I fear, inevitable that the Summer Recess should disrupt the normal pattern of Starred Questions.

§ Lord Reigate
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that helpful Answer, but would he not agree that the important thing about a Question is that it should have some topicality, which it cannot do under these circumstances? Would he consider that the period for tabling a Question should be limited to a calendar month without making allowance for the Recess?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, that of course is a matter for the House to decide. I understand that the rules are set out in Standing Order No. 40. No Question may be put onto the Order Paper for a date more than one month ahead; but in reckoning that period no account is taken of any time during which the House is in recess. If, however, the House was to change that and decide that the Recess should not be 1286 left out, that would be perfectly possible but it would require an amendment to Standing Order No. 40.

§ Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
My Lords, since the new system for tabling Questions has been introduced, can the noble Viscount confirm that there has been a greater opportunity for Peers to table Questions at an earlier date than was previously so?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, that is certainly true. I think that there has been a considerable improvement since the new arrangements were made, which was of course before I came to my present position. The Order Paper indicates that the first available date for putting down a Question is now 8th December, which, after all, is only three weeks ahead. If we disregard the question of the Recess, I think that shows that the situation is reasonably satisfactory. If the House wished to pursue the question of the Recess in this connection, it would be perfectly proper for the Procedure Committee to consider it.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, would it not ease the situation, however slightly, if we each limited ourselves to one Question, or double-barrelled Question, per day?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, I am entirely in the hands of the House in these matters. I accept at once that the arrangements that have been made for the number of Questions that may be tabled and the times at which they may he tabled have made a considerable improvement. I am told by some noble Lords that I am too reasonable about the time for which I am allowing Question Time to continue. I am totally in the hands of the House. I seek to judge the mood of the House on every particular question. If it is said that I am too reasonable, I know that I am perhaps considered not sufficiently reasonable by those to whom I am being reasonable, and very unreasonable by those to whom I am less reasonable. I understand all that, but I shall continue to do my best.

§ Lord Alport
My Lords, would my noble friend consider asking the Procedure Committee whether it would be possible to add a fifth Question, which should be tabled not more than seven sitting days and not less than three sitting days before it is answered?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, that can of course be considered, but I understand from my noble friend the Chief Whip—who is always willing quickly to advise me on such matters—that that was considered by the Procedure Committee and was rejected. That does not mean that the committee might not change its mind on a future occasion. The matter could certainly be looked at.

Lady Saltoun
My Lords, would the Procedure Committee consider having the fourth Starred Question tabled at a week's notice? Would it not perhaps reconsider the matter?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, the noble Lady raises another point which would inevitably extend the period for Questions, but as I say, it is in the hands of the House. I am advised that the House feels that 20 1287 minutes or thereabouts for Question Time is about right. If the House wants it to be further extended, that would be possible, but it would impinge on the debates thereafter. I am advised that that is not what noble Lords want.

§ Lord Derwent
My Lords, may I suggest to my noble friend the Leader of the House that if we lengthen the period of Question Time it would be very bad for the temper of the House?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, that is a matter for noble Lords as to how they judge their Questions. It is entirely a matter for the House whether we have more time for Questions. I am in your Lordships' hands. I am prepared to discuss with any noble Lord personally or through the usual channels whether this is something that is wanted. I am so far advised that it is not, so I hope that we shall be able to continue some arrangement on the same lines. I shall certainly consider all the points that have been put during this exchange.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, may I agree with everything that the noble Viscount has said? I think that we are moving towards a reasonable solution to some of the problems that confronted the House. In my judgment the noble Viscount's behaviour has been par excellence. Just one little thing seems to irritate Back-Benchers on both sides of the House, and that is the issue of the Private Notice Question. Such Questions always seem to be acceptable if they come from a particular Bench, commonly known as the Front Bench. But there is no reason to say that the Front Bench is more informed or knowledgeable than any other Bench. If a Private Notice Question is submitted other than from the Front Bench, does the noble Viscount consider that nevertheless it deserves whatever attention it ought to command?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, I think I should make the position—which perhaps the noble Lord does not quite appreciate—clear. In my duty as Leader of the House I have to consider a Private Notice Question put down by any noble Lord, irrespective of the Bench that it may come from. Of course, I do that. I have to be guided by the convention of the House that the matter must be urgent and topical. I have to consider it on that basis. Indeed, I do just that. In case there should be any doubt, I add that if a Private Notice Question is accepted in another place that raises different issues. The noble Lord may now be referring to that.

§ Lord Jacques
My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the House generally is very pleased at his tolerance, which is in accordance with the traditions of the House?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
My Lords, I am grateful to your Lordships. I am acutely conscious that when one marches up one day, one goes down the next. I shall do my best to continue on an even keel.

§ Lord Reigate
My Lords, will my noble friend note that practically all the supplementary questions have 1288 been totally irrelevant to the Question that I asked first of all? Will he consider submitting all the issues raised to the Procedure Committee?

§ Viscount Whitelaw
Of course I will, my Lords. I am sorry if I have done what I constantly tell all my fellow Ministers they must not do: that is, to stray outside the original Question. I realise, therefore, that my previous answer was all too correct.