Limits on supplementary questions
After the Chair urged Members to limit supplementaries so more questions could be answered, Deputies challenged whether the Chair should allow slower progress to pursue fuller replies; he maintained that he would decide the number of supplementaries.
I am sorry to have to cross the Chair but it appears as if the Minister is now getting away with pretending he does not know, when in fact he must have it on his file. It is unfair of the Ceann Comhairle to protect him.
Comment on this
I think the Deputy should withdraw the statement that the Chair is protecting the Minister. We have had seven questions only answered in 30 minutes. The situation is this: there are many Deputies who have questions down and who will not have an opportunity ——
Comment on this
—— of having their questions answered if we proceed at this rate. We should try to be reasonable in the number of supplementaries. Question No. 8.
Comment on this
Since you are expressing legitimate and understandable concern, Sir, about Deputies' questions not being answered because of the rate of progress — if the Whips of the two Opposition Parties, who have most of these questions down, convey to you a clear indication that Opposition Deputies are prepared to have a slow movement of such questions in order to get satisfactory supplementary replies — would the Chair accept that as being legitimate and enable us to extract decent answers from Ministers of State?
Comment on this
Then, Sir, where is the concern for Deputies, if the Deputies themselves who have the questions down clearly indicate to you, through their Whips, that they are prepared——
Comment on this
Let me make my point, Sir, without meaning any disrespect to you. If the Deputies in question clearly indicate that they are prepared to slow down the rate of answering of questions in order that supplementaries can be answered properly, will you, as Ceann Comhairle of this Chamber, accept that and enable us to pursue Ministers who are not giving us satisfactory answers?
Comment on this
Then, Sir, you are leaving yourself open to the charge that you are protecting the Minister.