From the course of the Committee on Parliamentary Procedure, it
would seem that the finding of any remedy for " obstruction " will be a difficult matter. The Chancellor of the Exchequer appears to wish the House to adopt a rule that any Member who has been "twice formally declared out of order in the same sitting, or to be abusing the rules of the House, shall stand sus- pended from his duties as a Member during the remainder of that day's sitting of the House ;" but even if that rule were adopted, besides the difficulty of declaring a man out of order if he were really discussing the subject before the House, however tediously, there would be nothing to prevent a knot of obstructionists from taking up in turns the invi- dious duty of getting suspended. Moreover, it would seem that Mr. Raikes at least,—the Chairman of Committees,—is very loth to have the punitive power lodged in his hands. The House or the Committee, he says, should punish, while the Speaker or the Chairman should have the power of interfering on behalf of any minority unduly opposed by the majority. We fear that the nervousness as to enforcing discipline is so considerable, that the House or Committee will try to put it all upon the Speaker or Chairman, and the Speaker or Chairman on the House• or Committee. There must be somebody to will the sweeping-away of obstruction, if it is to be swept away. You cannot effect anything by wishing it away, or it would not be there now. But volition is becoming obsolete.
Previous page
