Speaker’s Rulings — Supplementary Questions

Before the Easter adjournment I was asked to give consideration as to whether extra supplementary questions can be allowed in certain circumstances. The short answer is yes. Speaker’s ruling 128/4 contemplates that if a Speaker feels that a Minister is trifling with the Chair, further supplementary questions can be permitted. I confirmed on 8 April that this ruling still applies.

However, I do not want members to misunderstand this. The Speaker does not judge whether ministerial replies are adequate or make political judgments on how well Ministers have responded in the House, or, indeed, how well other members are performing. Those are matters for members themselves, for the press, and for the public generally. There is nothing new about members being dissatisfied with Ministers’ replies, and appealing to the Speaker about them can be seen by Speakers’ rulings in the book going back at least to 1892. That was before I became a member. All a Speaker can do is to ensure that Ministers are relevant—that is, they address the question. In addition, Speaker’s ruling 128/4 makes clear that if a Minister answers facetiously the Speaker has a discretion to penalise the Minister by permitting further questions.