Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Rolleston, Sir John F. L.
Ropner, Colonel Robert
Royds, Clement Molyneux
Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-
Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander
Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)
Sandys, Lt. Col. Thos. Myles
Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert
Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)
Seton-Karr, Henry
Sharpe, William Edward T.
Simeon, Sir Barrington
Skewes-Cox, Thomas
Smith,H C(N'rth'mb Tyneside
Smith, James Parker(Lanarks)
Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)
Spear, John Ward

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

| Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset) | Williams, Col. R. (Dorset)
Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Stock, James Henry
Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier
Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Talbot, Rt HnJ.G. (Oxf'dUniv.
Thorburn, Sir Walter
Thornton, Percy M.
Tollemache, Henry James
Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray
Tufnell, Lieut -Col. Edward
Valentia, Viscount
Wanklyn, James Leslie
Warde, Colonel C. E.
Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney
Welby, Lt. Col. A.CE(Taunton
Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts.)
Whiteley, H(Ashton-und. Lyne
Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Willox, Sir John Archibald
Wilson, A.Stanley (York, E. R.
Wilson, Fred W. (Norfolk, Mid.
Wilson, John (Falkirk)
Wilson, John (Glasgow)
Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)
Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)
Wylie, Alexander
Wyndham,.Rt. Hon. George
Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.
Younger, William

* MR. SPEAKER pointed out that the Amendment was unnecessary. The Rule referred to Papers circulated "on the day before' that on which an answer was desired." For the purposes of the Rule, Saturday was the day before Monday, as Sunday was a dies non.

MR. O'SHEE said that if that were understood, he would not move.

Amendments made to the Amendment proposed to the Standing Order

66

[ocr errors]

TELLERS FOR THE NOES, Sir
William Walrond and Mr.
Anstruther.

(11.50.) MR. O'SHEE desired to move | Table or Mr. Speaker. It was an entirely the insertion of words securing that the new departure to leave to the discretion "day preceding" should include Satur- of the officials of the House the placing day, but not Sunday. His object was to of Questions in order of precedence, so carry out what the hon. Member for the that certain Questions should not only Thirsk Division had stated was the real come on earlier in the day, but even on intention of the Government. the day previous, as compared with others which in the eyes of the Members asking them were of equal importance. How were the clerks to judge of the relative importance of Questions? They would naturally be influenced by the importance of the individual Member giving the notice. For instance, to take a concrete case, the Questions recently put with regard to Mr. Cartwright, when put in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose, would be put in a prominent position; whereas, if they appeared in the name of, say, the hon. Member for East Bristol, they would be relegated to an obscure corner of the Notice Paper. The House ought not lightly to part with the right of priority which at present the humblest and most insignificant Member possessed over the most inreasonable to expect this question to be fluential and important. It was not allowed to go through sub silentio. There MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE moved was also involved the position of the omission of the words: "Questions Questions to different Ministers. At distinguished by an asterisk shall be present, to suit the convenience of the so arranged on the Paper that those Leader of the House, Questions addressed which seem of the greatest general to the right hon. Gentleman were placed interest shall be reached before five at the end of the Paper. There was no minutes before Three of the clock." guarantee that that arrangement would The paragraph referred, by implication, be continued. Although they had the to the highest authorities of the House. highest confidence in the impartiality of It was clear that unless some person un- the Chair, the House ought always named was referred to, the provision to regard with great jealousy any could never come into force. That infringement, even by the Chair, of person must either be the Clerk at the the privileges of private of private Members.

By inserting, in line 11, after the word he,' the words or any other Member deputed by him.'" (Mr. M Kenna); and "in line 14, by leaving out the words 'the Minister has consented to the postponement of, and inserting the words 'the Member has signified his desire to postpone. -(Mr. Gibson Bowles); and by leaving out the words from the word Question,' in line 15, to the end of the pro

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

posed Amendment."-(Mr. Fuller.)

Constant to trench upon the rights of private Members, and to diminish their usefulness in the House, but, after all, the opponents of these proposed changes were defending not only their own for that was what the proposal really rights, but the rights of those who sent them to the House of Commons. There was no more common request made to Members by their constituents than that Questions should be put in the House upon certain matters. The point concerned might be unimportant to the House or to the Member himself, but of far-reaching importance to the person immediately concerned; and by the Question being put in the House the matter received that publicity through the Press which answers printed and circulated in the Votes would never get. Of all the proposals in the amended Rules, the one under consideration he regarded with the greatest dislike and suspicion, and he could not help thinking that the day would come when Members would deeply regret having parted so lightly and unnecessarily with so many of their rights and privileges.

attempts had been made desired should exist between the officials and Members of the House than that it should be the daily duty of those officials to discriminate between the relative importance of different Members of the House

entailed. It would be impossible for the officials to avoid giving grave offence every day. No one could expect either Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Committees to do this work; they already had as much as they could do. It would have to be undertaken by one of the clerks at the Table, and not, he ventured to say, by the chief clerk. By what criterion would that official judge of the relative importance of the Questions ? He could have no other criterion than the relative importance of the Members asking the Questions. He could not go to Mayo, or China, or any other part of the world to which a Question might refer, and make careful inquiry as to its intrinsic importance. The task could not do otherwise than resolve itself into the drawing up each day of a list o Members in the order of their personal importance in the opinion of the clerk. Was that a fair task to put upon any Amendment proposed to the proposed official? Every day the Table would be Amendment,

surrounded by discontented Members,

"To leave out lines 16 to 18.”—(Mr. Charles and, no matter what Rules might be Hobhouse).

Question proposed, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."

devised, the discontent would bubble out in the House in one form or another, and complaints would continually be made as to the manner in which individual Members had been treated. The officials

MR. DILLON said the proposal con- had a right to the consideration of the tained in this paragraph was perfectly House, and before a task which would new, and one to which he was confident greatly increase the friction and unthe officials of the House, if they were pleasantness of their position was impermitted to express an opinion, would posed upon them the House ought carebe bitterly opposed. There was no task fully to consider whether there was any at present placed on the officials of the real necessity for it. Then there was the House which was more disagreeable and effect of the Rule on hon. Members onerous than that of keeping Questions themselves. Over and over again he had within the lines of order. That, however, heard Mr. Gladstone declare that the was an absolutely necessary task, but the essence of the life and the greatest experience which the officials had gained tradition of the House of Commons was from the discharge of that duty would the equality of its Members. cause them to view with extreme dislike humblest and newest Member of the the imposition of any further duty which House stood on precisely the same would have the effect frequently of footing as a Minister of the Crown. bringing them into collision with Mem- This new departure would revolutionise bers and leading to all sorts of friction. that position, and entirely sweep away There could not be devised a task more that fine old tradition. The only object calculated to disturb those relations of of the classification was to determine courtesy and goodwill which everyone who should be cut off at five minutes to Mr. Charles Hobhouse.

The

that the this new Rule would not be directed against him or his friends, but its object was to see that those forty minutes should be used to the best advantage. Therefore, he thought the task thrown upon the officials of the House would be a very light one, and he did not believe there would be the smallest difficulty. He did not think the House would be willing to entrust him with the arrangement of the Questions.

three, and it would mean
obscure Members would be those who
were sacrificed. On days when a large
number of Questions were put down,
some would have to be cut off by the
time limit, and he contended that all
should take their chance. The principle
should be, "First come, first served,"
and the man who first gave notice of
his Question ought to be answered first.

MR. LAMBERT: Yes, we are proposing it.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR said that if it would shorten discussion he would be prepared to assent to a Committee for dealing with Questions, provided it were made clear that such a step would meet a general demand and satisfy hon. Members. He thought, however, that it would be found best to see how the Standing Order worked without such an Amendment. He was anxious to meet the general views of the House, and if the general view was that a Committee should be appointed he should not shrink from any proposal of that kind.

(12.15.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR said the hon. Member for East Mayo had based his argument upon the supposition that there was a gradation of merit amongst hon. Members. He traversed that statement, and repudiated it altogether. The Rule had been proposed not in the interest of the Treasury Bench or the Front Opposition Bench, but in the interest of the House at large, in order that forty minutes might be devoted to Questions in which the House was interested. He denied that the task imposed on the officials of the House would be so heavy as had been represented. When there were more Questions than could be answered it would not be necessary to put them in order of merit. It would be sufficient to take out those which were of least general interest. If the number of Questions remained about the same as it had done this session, the task thrown upon the officials would be of the lightest possible description. As a rule the number of Questions fell short of the number provided for by the forty minutes, and in that case there would be no classification at all, and no extra work would be thrown on the clerks at the Table. Supposing, however, that under these new Rules hon. Members were unwise enough to put an abnormal number of Questions down for Monday,munity and large interests, and they there might be some little difficulty, but he did not believe that such a practice would prevail. He would suppose that more than sixty or sixty-five Questions were put down. The clerks at the Table would not have to go through all those Questions, but they would simply take the Questions which raised the smallest interests, and take out some ten or fifteen which answered that description.

think the right hon. Gentleman quite 12.25.) MR. BRYCE said he did not appreciated the extreme difficulty in which they were placed, because it was very hard to say what really were Questions of general interest. He had considered the forty-one Questions which were on the Paper that day, and fully which it would be extremely difficult to one half of them were Questions as to of them affected large classes of the comsay which were of general interest. Some

might or might not be urgent. The difficulty was a very great one, and the only answer which seemed to meet the difficulty was that given by the right hon Gentleman when he said that it was not necessary to consider those Questions in their order of merit, but simply take a certain number of unimportant Questions and put them at the end of the list. Out of the forty-one Questions to which he had alluded there were nine or

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Yes, and ten which were not of great importance. they would all be Irish Questions.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR said he could not assent to that statement, and he could assure the hon. Gentleman that

MR. A. J. BALFOUR: But with fortyone Questions we should not have to make any arrangement at all.

the

MR. BRYCE said he would consider met every day, they would have, it 1 such a case as the outbreak of a war, might be assumed, sixty Questions before or a great strike affecting a large popu- them. They must carefully consider them lation, or some question of domestic one by one in order to decide which policy affecting different parts of the seemed to be of most general interest. country in different ways. Instead But of most general interest to whom— of having fifty or sixty, they might to the Clerks, or the House, or to the have 100 Questions. It was per- public outside? The Clerks and the fectly right that priority should be given House might not to important matters upon which legiti- public might easily differ with both. agree, and mateinquiry was required by the people of It was an impossible task to throw the country. In that case the difficulty on the clerks, and one which they became very great, and the pressure should not be asked to undertake. upon the Rule would be heaviest at the But if it were possible, he held time when the Rule was unable to meet that this was not a task fitted to it. There was a very serious difficulty the officials of the House. Many in the matter, but it was one which was Questions which appeared on the Paper inherent in the Rule itself, and he did from day to day were of a purely political not think any expedient could be suggested character, or if not purely so, they had to meet it. He felt very strongly the a considerable element of the political great unfairness, or at any rate the great character in them. But the officials at undesirability, of throwing a duty of this the Table had no politics, and they ought kind upon any Committee of the House. to have none, and yet they were required He did not feel that a Committee would by this Rule to weigh the relative immake things much better. If a Com- portance of difficult political Questions, mittee had to be appointed, it ought and to give preference to one only, as had been said, to come in when another. The right hon. Gentleman the Rule had been actually tried and had not been found to work satisfactorily. The Committee would have to sit daily, and it might be exceedingly difficult to get any number of Members to undertake the duty. He did not look upon that at present as a practicable proposition. He must say that he was not able to throw very much light on what ought to be done, but as he protested against this Rule he would vote for the Amend

ment.

Over

had said that it was not a difficult task he was asking the House to impose on the clerks. If it was not a difficult task, why did not the Government undertake it themselves, or why did they not appoint a tribunal ad hoc that would undertake and carry out the duty from day to day? He was afraid this was only another instance of the difficulties they were going to get into as the inevitable result of the decisions they had already arrived at. The old Rules under which the House had flourished *MR. CHAPLIN said this was certainly for generations had been the outcome a novel proposition, and it seemed to him of mature and prolonged deliberations, one of the strangest ever brought be- and the experience of generations, and fore the House of Commons. He entirely the difficulties which they were feelagreed with the objections to the throwing now as they got deeper and deeper ing of this responsibility upon the clerks into those questions, had no doubt been at the Table, a responsibility which he felt and been considered and thrashed understood would be most obnoxious to out and provided against in the arrangethem. But supposing it was right ments which it was now proposed to do so, how were they to perform suddenly to override. We had got into the task? They had plenty of work a difficulty no doubt, and what was at the present time. This would be a to be done now was a question for new and most onerous addition to their the Government and not for the House duties. They must meet every morning of Commons to decide. They had got and consider the relative weight and im- the House into its present condition, and portance of the Questions on which they must get it out in the best way they would have to decide. When they they could. But one thing was certain-

[ocr errors]

this was a duty which ought not to be imposed on the Clerks, and he would vote for the omission of the words.

(12.40.) SIR EDWARD GREY (Northumberland, Berwick) said he believed the motive of the Government simply to be to make the Rule square so far as possible with the convenience of the House. The First Lord of the Treasury had admitted that, in his view, the occasions when this particular provision would come into force would be very rare. If that was so, the danger of any inconvenience arising to the House in connection with the order of Questions would be very rare too, and he would rather run the risk of some inconvenience being caused to the House on rare occasions when there were a large number of Questions down, through the order of the Questions being inconvenient, than run the risk of seeing the authority of the Chair undermined. If the arrangement of the Questions were entrusted to the clerks at the Table, no doubt difficulties would arise as to the discretion exercised by them, and the House could not prevent the ultimate responsibility from falling upon the Chair. He would much prefer that the Leader of the House, or some one nominated by him, should perform the duty of drawing up the order of Questions, than that it should be imposed on the officials of the Honse. But it would be much simpler to omit the paragraph altogether, for if any inconvenience arose afterwards it could easily be remedied. That would give longer notice. It would be a matter of convenience to the House at large, to the Members asking the Questions, and to the Ministers to whom they were addressed. But if the paragraph were left in the Rule, a Member might think that his particular Question was of importance, and he would give short notice; but the clerks at the Table might not take that view, and the result would be that Members would be disappointed, and that disappointment was certain to concentrate itself on the officials of the House. It would be far simpler to omit the paragraph altogether. In that case, the inconvenience would not be irremediable; but if the paragraph were retained, the incon

venience would be irremediable.

MR. PARKER SMITH (Lanarkshire, Partick) said he should like to appeal to the First Lord of the Treasury to accept the suggestion to leave out the paragraph altogether. He confessed that he himself did not share in the apprehensions and suspicions that had been put forward; but if they were felt widely, and if there were a preference for a democratic equality among all Members, why should they not allow Questions to take their chance? The Amendment might have the effect of longer notice being given, and there was always the remedy that words had been inserted by which a Member, when he saw that his Question would not be reached, instead of getting an answer in writing, had the power to postpone it, and to get a verbal answer next day or the day after. Surely, that was a sufficient protection for Members. The paragraph was inserted in the interests not of the Government but of the House, and if the House were willing to take. the risk of Questions of general interest being put back for a day on account of Questions of local interest being answered, and if it did not wish to give to anyone the power of arranging Questions in order of merit, then he did not see why the House should not have what it desired and let the Questions stand in the order, of time in which they appeared on the Question Paper.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Is this really the general view of the House? It is not a matter in which the Government or Ministers, as Ministers, have the smallest interest. My own personal view is that the Amendment would have the effect of protecting the Government against intricate Questions, but if the House takes the view which has been taken by the hon. Baronet, it is really. not for me to resist. If the Rule works without this final paragraph, so much the better. The House will allow me to say that I do not think it will. I agree that if it does not work, the only sufferers will be the questioners, not the Government, and it will be possible either to introduce the the machinery

we

more elaborate machinery I have already now propose, or the further and said I am prepared to accept, or some other scheme which may be proposed.

« ElőzőTovább »