Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."— [Mr. F. Hall.]

I beg to ask the permission of the House to draw attention to a question which I venture to think is of public importance, namely the question of electoral reform. Members of the House will, perhaps, recollect that yesterday I put a question to the Under Secre- tary of State for the Home Department, asking him whether the Government preposed to introduce any legislative Measure to remedy the existing anomalies. My hon. Friend replied that it was a difficult and controversial question, and owing to the demands of other pressing business, the Government had not yet had time to examine it closely. I venture to urge on my hon. Friend that important though the other issues may be which the Government has to consider —and we are all very sensible of the claims upon their time—this is a question which really does not brook delay. If the three-party system is to continue in this country, it is absolutely vital to the proper representation of the people; at least, I believe it is so. One has only to consider two significant facts to arrive at that conclusion. The first fact is one which will probably appeal most strongly to hon. Members on the other side of the House, and that fact is that, whereas in the last Parliament they had a Majority, over all other parties combined, of something like 70, they have in this Parliament, a very considerable minority, and yet they increase the aggregate number of votes polled in their favour throughout the country. That is a very important factor, which must be considered if the representation of the country is to be on a proper basis. The other fact—and I think this is even more important — is the fact that in this House of Commons to-day there are—I am bound to say the figures when I got them from an authorative body struck me as being somewhat staggering—there are more than 200 minority representatives, that is to say, more than 200 Members who have been elected upon what is in fact—

I have just been looking at the list of public Bills introduced in the Session of 1924, and I find that there are three Bills on the Order Paper for which dates have been fixed dealing with the Amendment of the Representation of the People Act. The hon. and gallant Member, I am afraid, is anticipat- ing matters already fixed by the House, which is against our Rules.

On that point, I was about to refer to those Bills.

That makes it the more clear.

If I might make my explanation, my contention was that this was a matter of such great importance that the introduction of such a Bill ought to be undertaken by the Government of the day, ought to he passed as a national Measure and not introduced subject to the difficulties and vicissitudes which always attend private Members' Bills when they have a low place in the ballot. Would that be in Order?

Certainly not, or we might have the hon. and gallant Gentleman every night in the week going through the list of these Bills one by one.

On the same point of Order. Would not the question of urgency come into the matter? After all, there is always the possibility that the vicissitudes of politics may bring the country very soon face to face with another Election. That is always possible. Therefore, would it be in order to urge that the matter was very urgent, and that action ought immediately to be taken by the Government?

The same might be said about all these Bills. The hon. and gallant Gentleman might be doing all these hon. Members out of their opportunity by getting his speech in first. That would be quite unfair, and against our rule of anticipation.

In that case, I most ungrudgingly will not pursue the subject further.

Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Five Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.