Visitors to the House of Commons, both-British and foreign, often
express surprise that there is no time-limit to the speeches, and they well may, considering the length of some of the utterances they have to listen to. But whenever the subject comes up the House shows itself as resolutely opposed to any such limitation as it is to the idea of occupying a Chamber capable of accommodating much more than half the total membership. The Select Committee on Procedure, whose report has been discussed in the House this week, glanced at the proposal once again, in considering a compre- hensive memorandum on procedure submitted by the Clerk of the House, but as always it was rejected out of hand. The thing is too difficult. If there were a definite time-limit fixed it would have to vary as between important and unimportant debates, and it would fetter many speakers whom the House would willingly hear at length. If, on the other hand, it were left to the Speaker or the Chairman of Committees to pull an orator up at his discretion, the task would be intolerably invidious. So the House will go on listening to succinct speeches, which it likes, and prolix speeches which it does not. But the briefer speakers are more likely to be called.
* * *
Previous page
