THE PERSONAL EQUATION IN PROCEDURE.
IT is natural to human beings to be interested in human beings, and nowhere is this feeling more irrepressible than in and about the House of Commons. We say in and about not merely as two words for the same precinct at Westminster, but as implying that what interests the House interests also those who read about the House. The great debates are not those that are most studied ; indeed, it is increasingly doubtful whether they are studied at all. The merest summary commonly satisfies public curiosity except when some Member undertakes to explain why, on this occasion, he is going to vote against his party. What are studied are the little passages of arms between the leaders on both sides, or between leaders and discontented or inquisitive followers ; the conflicts, so long as they remain decorous, between the Speaker or the Chairman of Committees and, some obstinate Member; the unexpected successes that some chance occurrence gives to a plan in itself seemingly hopeless. These are the things that ensure Parliamentary audiences, and get Parliamentary intelligence read.
From this point of view, Monday's debate on the Educa- tion Bill No. 2 was unexpectedly interesting. No one can possibly have foreseen that it would bear this character. The ordinary progress of a Bill of this kind through Committee follows on well-ascertained lines. On each amendment in turn there are so many attempts to deliver second-reading speeches over again,—attempts defeated after a longer or shorter interval by the intervention of the Chairman, and so many applications of the Closure after more or fewer repetitions of the same objections. This is all part of the game. The alterations in the rules of procedure have only scotched obstruction, not killed it. They have made it much more difficult, but in doing so they have at the same time stimulated the ingenuity of those who resort to it. The action of the Government in reference to the Education Bill was designed to give this ingenuity the least possible scope. It is a one-clause Bill, and even Mr. Balfour, experienced as he is, allowed himself to dream that this fact would greatly restrict the oppor- tunities for moving amendments. It may do so in the end; upon that only the event can enable us to speak. But in the first instance it has seemed rather to encourage than to depress the Opposition. To have a one-clause Bill thrown at you with the defiant challenge, "Obstruct that if you can," is a stimulating experience, and the notice-paper shows how great the effect has been in the present instance. Page after page tells the same story. Every sentence, every line, every word, has been scrutinised by the keenest eyes in the party, and every occasion for moving amendments taken advantage of. The labour is great, no doubt, the prospect—at least down to Monday morning—was not encouraging. But then the reward is great also. A good deal of other busi- ness remains to be got through, and a certain number of nights must be reserved for set debates which havp been promised, or can but too surely be counted on. If by some happy chance the withdrawal of Education Bill No. 2 could be forced on the Government, what a dis- grace it would be to them, and what a triumph for the Opposition ! Clearly in circumstances like these a good Liberal cannot employ his time better than in devising amendments plausible enough to provoke discussion, and ingenious enough to defy the Chairman of Committees. It is a very proper work for him to take in hand. The Bill, though it be little in bulk, establishes a far-reaching principle. The transfer of elementary education from the control of a body elected ad hoc to that of a body elected. for the general administration of local affairs is certain to work great educational changes—for the better, as we believe ; for the worse, as the Opposition believe— and we do not question their right to wreck such a Bill if they can. They have to exercise that right in subjection to certain rules, but so far as those rules permit they are free to make the most of their opportunities. So much debating they will be able to put in between each resort to the Closure, so many amendments out of the whole number will be too germane to the subject to stand any chance of being ruled out of order. If they cannot hope for victory they can at least calculate on making a good fight.
So the case stood on Monday morning. The order of events in the evening seemed settled beforehand. The long list of amendments would dwindle under the Chair. mast's hand, and as each of• those that remained had run the time allotted to it in Mr. Balfour's mind, the Closure would be moved, would, ordinarily speaking, be accepted by the Chair, and. would then be voted by more or less of the normal Ministerial majority. Every newspaper reader who is familiar with the Parliamentary report knows the whole process beforehand. So many speeches, so many motions to end theparticulardebate then and there, so many divisions, so many foregone results, so many cries of "Gag!" when the numbers are announced. If the reader in question ever rubs his eyes in sheer bewilderment he must have done so when he opened his paper on Tuesday. Column after column of debate appeared. without one of the familiar phrases interposed. No motions that the question be now put ; no figures recording the votes on each fresh application of the Closure. Nothing but an unbroken succession of speeches, ending in an adjournment of the debate on the first amendment, and in an announcement on the part of the Leader of the House that the Bill would not be set down for further discussion in Committee before Monday next. One whole precious night gone, the Bill only just got into Committee, and no further progress to be made with it for a week, and that the third week in July ! The cause of the catastrophe seems almost too simple for belief. It lay hid in the innocent-looking little sentence in the Times report : "The House resolved itself into Committee on the Bill, Mr. Stuart Wortley in the chair." The personal equation had indeed. asserted itself. The Chairman of Committees was unwell, and a Deputy-Chairman had to take his place. But the rules of procedure do not invest the Deputy-Chairman with the full powers of the official in whose place he sits. The Chair- man, equally with the Speaker, can put the Closuire to the vote. The Deputy-Chairman is unable to do this ; there- fore, so long as he is in the chair, the Closure does not exist, and obstructives—if obstructives there be—have it all their own way. This was the reason why hour after hour passed with Mr. Balfour sitting helpless, and speech suc- ceeding speech, notwithstanding that the supply of unused arguments had. come to an end. The House had for the time gone back to the old days when the only way of dealing with obstruction was to leave it to wear itself out. It was plainly useless to repeat the performance on the Tuesday, or on any later evening, unless Mr. Lowther is well enough to take his place at the table. It is hoped that a week will see him back in the House, and for that time the Education Bill No. 2 will remain on the shelf. Nothing can be done in the House or by the Cabinet to hasten its reappearance. The only forces that can help the Government are Mr. Lowther's constitution and. Mr. Lowther's doctor. The personal equation is indeed mighty.
It may be said, Why not alter the rule and arm the Deputy-Chairman with the power of applying the Closure? There is one sufficient objection to this course. It would not help us out of the present difficulty. However ad- vantageous the change might be in itself, it would. not benefit the Education Bill. To propose a new rule of pro- cedure designed to deprive the Opposition of one of the oppor- tunities of obstruction still left them would involve an amount of discussion which would probably be fatal to every Bill now before Parliament, except such as are absolutely indispensable to the ordinary conduct of public affairs. It is a thing to be done, if done at all, in an autumn Ses- sion, or at the verybeginning of a normal Sessionwith Parlia- ment summoned a month before the ordinary time. For the moment, at all events, we can but put up with what we cannot help, and find what consolation we may in the thought that after all that has been done to convert the House of Commons into a place of humdrum routine, chance and the individual still exercise an influence over its proceedings which defies all human forecast.
Previous page
