As well as an oral and written answer, we have now introduced into Question Time a kind of hybrid, that is a mixture of both. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to have supplementaries. Questions should have either a written or an oral reply. If it is a written reply it is not suitable for supplementary questions but supplementaries may be asked on orals.

I am sorry, Sir, but by making that ruling you are inviting Ministers to get as many of their answers behind the barrier of written replies as they possibly can.

The Chair has no such intention.

I recognise that but it may be taken up like that, and I hope it would not be an iron rule from the Chair, whoever occupies it.

The Chair has no iron equipment; I am merely making gentle suggestions which I think would improve the structure of Question Time.

I appreciate that you mean well but what I am trying to put to you, respectfully, is that when I was on the far side of the House there were many instances, when a Minister had plainly gone out of his way to try to squash the answer to a question which was unwelcome to him into tabular form so that it would be insulated against questions. The attempts of the Opposition, or the Chair's own colleagues who have some interest in questioning him——

The Chair is calling Question No. 10.

Before giving the answer to Question No. 10, I would like to make an observation. The Chair stopped me a few moments ago when I was about to add an explanation to the information contained in the tabular statement circulated. I did so out of concern that the answer would be as complete as possible. If I have in that sense transgressed on your ruling, I am willing to accept chastisement.

The Chair wants to make it clear that he is not referring specifically to the Minister for Finance, but that Minister gave an example of why I made that ruling. Part of his answer was written and the other part oral, but when answering supplementary questions on the oral part he was forced to read part of the written reply.