HC Deb 17 February 1831 vol 2 cc625-6
Sir H. Parnell

rose to submit the Motion of which he had given notice. He said, that he was relieved from the necessity of occupying much of the time of the House in consequence of the noble Chancellor of the Exchequer having consented to the appointment of the Committee for the purpose of investigating the Public Accounts. He believed that every Gentleman in the House was aware that the present system of keeping the public accounts was extremely defective. It certainly must be admitted, that in so important a matter as the regulation of the public purse, it was of the first importance to have a clear view of the receipts and expenditure. The object which he contemplated was, the appointment of a Committee to ascertain what plan was best for introducing a simple and uniform scheme of public accounts in all the departments; for securing a proper audit of the public money; and also, for causing such annual Returns to be laid upon the Table of the House as would furnish the House with correct information of the state of the income and expenditure of the country in each year. The Committee would carry on what was begun by the Finance Committee which was appointed in 1828. The latter Committee made some progress in the work, but in consequence of its not having been re-appointed, nothing effectual had been accomplished. He would conclude by moving for the appointment of "a Select Committee to inquire into what improvements may be introduced in the mode of keeping the Public Accounts, and of providing an efficient control over the expenditure of the public money."

Lord Althorp

said, he did not rise to offer any opposition to the Motion: on the contrary, he thought it very desirable that the Committee should be appointed. As an instance of the difficulty of coming to a correct conclusion with respect to public accounts under the present system, the House would recollect, that when the same set of accounts was laid before two Committees, they came to different results respecting them. He thought it most desirable that the proposed inquiry should take place, and it could not be conducted better than under the superintendence of his right hon. friend.

Mr. Herries

said, he had not the slightest objection to the Motion: on the contrary, he would endeavour to assist in carrying its object into effect. Some doubts, however, had suggested themselves to his mind, with respect to the latter part of the Motion of his right hon. friend—namely, the words "to provide a more efficient control over the public expenditure." He wished to know whether those words referred to a control to be had by the means of the and it ship of accounts, or whether it was meant that the Committee should enter into a general inquiry such as that to which the Finance Committee applied themselves. It was necessary that the instruction to a Committee should be clearly understood, for Committees were very often puzzled to know what they were empowered to do. There certainly was some ambiguity in the wording of the Motion. All he wished to know was, whether the Committee were to inquire into the mode of keeping accounts, or to enforce a better system of management?

Sir H. Parnel

said, that if he had entered into detail he should have explained his object more fully. He intended the latter part of the Motion to refer exclusively to the keeping of accounts, and the causing of them to be brought before the House, so as to give the House an efficient control over the public expenditure. If his hon. friend wished this object to be expressed more distinctly, he would alter the Motion.

Mr. Herries

said, that after the explanation given by his right hon. friend, he had not the least objection to the Motion in its present shape.

Motion agreed to, and Committee appointed.

Back to