HC Deb 24 June 1861 vol 163 cc1533-44

House in Committee;

Mr. MASSEY in the Chair.

(In the Committee.)

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum not exceeding £811,300, be granted to Her Majesty, on account, for or towards defraying the Charge of the following Civil Services to the 31st day of March, 1862.

Mr. PEEL

said, he thought that the hon. Gentleman behind him (Mr. A. Smith), who had expressed his belief that the Vote on account was completely unnecessary, would have done better had he allowed him first to state the reasons of the application. The hon. Gentleman was under a mistake in saying that the Estimates were accepted without scrutiny by the Treasury from the different departments that made up the Civil Service, and that the Government held that the House ought to receive them on the responsibility of the Executive. Her Majesty's Government had no objection to the Estimates being subjected to the closest scrutiny which the House could institute; and even his short experience at the Treasury enabled him to say that, when received from the different departments, they were subjected to a scrutiny only second in severity to that to which they were subjected in that House. The hon. Gentleman said that the effect of granting Votes on account would be to postpone to the end of the Sessions the consideration of these Estimates in detail; but if the hon. Gentleman would refer to the papers in the hands of hon. Members, he would find that the Vote proposed to be taken on account formed a very small proportion of the total amount required. The sum asked was exceedingly moderate, and was just sufficient to meet the payments that were immediately falling due. The hon. Gentleman was under the impression that the Government had large balances on hand on each of the Votes, applicable to the purposes for which money was now asked, and referred particularly to two Votes of last year, one in the Treasury and the other in the Foreign Department, of which he said there must be a considerable amount left over. From a return which he had obtained of the Exchequer balances on the 19th of June, he found that there was no balance upon either of the Votes in question. Indeed, omitting the balances of the sums granted by the House on account, and a couple of balances of large amount applicable to the maintenance of prisons and prisoners, the balances in the Exchequer did not reach £30,000, a sum obviously insufficient to meet the payments that fell due at the termination of the quarter. All the services for which the Vote was now asked were of an established character, and had repeatedly received the sanction of the House, and to which the sanction of the House would no doubt continue to be given. It did not include any new Vote, or any Vote involving a question of principle likely to excite discussion. Nearly the whole of the sum was to be applied to the payment of pensions and salaries for services actually rendered, which could not be postponed without hardship and inconvenience to the parties entitled and some discredit to the country. In agreeing to the Vote the House would not abandon any portion of their control over the Estimates, or delay the discussion of them. There might not be many examples, except of late years, of voting money on account, but the circumstances of former times were totally different from those of the present time in that respect. There were only two ways in which, in these latter times, Votes on account could be avoided. Either the House must be prepared to pass the Civil Service Estimates early in the Session, or soon after the commencement of the financial year; or else they must permit the Government to retain large balances in their hands applicable to these services, till the period arrived when the Estimates could be proceeded with in Committee of Supply. Hon. Members could judge as well as he could whether it was possible to arrange the business of the Government so that the Estimates might be passed early in the Session. Experience showed that it was not sufficient to place Supply on the paper to secure a night for it, because nearly every question had precedence of it. Moreover, it was necessary to Vote the Army and Navy Estimates at the commencement of the Session. The Army Estimates had not been unusually delayed this year, in order to make way for the general business of the Government, and yet they were not concluded. In his opinion, it was impossible to count with certainty upon getting through with the Civil Service Estimates early in the Session. The objection to the course suggested by the hon. Gentleman, of submitting to the House the Votes on which balances were falling short, was that it assumed the continued existence of those balances. The Public Moneys Committee of 1857, recommended that the practice of allowing the Government to use the grants for any year after its expiration should be abandoned, and that, as in the case of the Army and Navy Estimates, the Government should, at the end of each year, surrender any balances that remained to the Exchequer. The Committee of last year on the Miscellaneous Estimates gave a similar recommendation; and if that plan were adopted, Votes on account would be indispensable. Presuming that the House would adopt the recommendation of the Committee, the Government were anxious to make such arrangements as would facilitate the transition from the old to the new system. Under these circumstances he trusted the Committee would not hesitate to grant the Vote.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

hoped that they would not establish a principle of going on from year to year voting money without being allowed to discuss the Estimates in proper time. There had been almost a promise that the Estimates would be introduced in sufficient early time to allow of the various Votes being discussed before the House lost its proper control over them. As the Government refused to assent to his proposition, and as the Estimates must come before the House in a few days in regular course, he would move that the Chairman report Progress.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that until within the last three years, Votes on account had never been asked for except-on extraordinary occasions. This was the second time this year that the House was asked for a large Vote on account. The sum now applied for, with that voted six months ago, would amount to £1,311,000. The result of the present system was, that they were called upon to vote upwards of £40,000,000 without having a fair opportunity of discussing the items of which that large sum was composed. Nominally, there were now four nights a weeks for Supply; but, as all sorts of questions took precedence, it was usually about midnight before the House got into Committee. If there were one night in the week on which Supply should take precedence of all other business, that would afford a remedy for what must be admitted to be an evil. As the Secretary for the Treasury said that the money now asked for was wanted, the Committee could not refuse it; but he hoped they would set their face against a repetition of the system year after year.

SIR FRANCIS BARING

observed that his hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth was quite correct in saying that the practice of taking Votes on account had become more frequent of late years; but there was another practice which had been very rare in former times, and was very common now. He alluded to the custom of moving Amendments on the Motion for going into Supply. The result of this was to render it impossible for the Government to bring on the Estimates at as early a period as formerly. There was another reason which ought to induce the Committee not to throw any obstacles in the way of the Government on an occasion like the present. Hitherto, the Government had been in the habit of carrying over large balances. That practice had been objected to by more than one Committee appointed to consider questions relating to the public expenditure. In order to meet the views of those Committees the Government had reduced their balances, and they now returned to the Exchequer sums which, according to the old practice, they might have kept. His hon. Friend hoped that Votes on account would not be continued; but he forgot the recommendation of his own and other Committees—namely, that the accounts of the Army and Navy should be closed at a particular time, and that, in order to meet the exigencies of the Civil Service, Votes on account should be taken.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

said, there was a third practice to which the right hon. Gentleman should have referred, which was that the Government were falling into the habit, when an awkward question was brought forward by an independent Member, of getting the House counted out. His own case furnished an illustration of the impediments thrown in the way of private Members. Soon after Easter he gave notice of a Motion, and, having balloted, got the first place. On the night when it should have come on, however, the Government, who, as he understood, were opposed to the Motion, hinted that it was desirable there should be no attendance, and so to avoid being counted out he was obliged to postpone his Motion. A second time he understood that he was to be counted out. At last he was able to get a day; and then, to his surprise, he found that the Government were prepared to grant his Motion. In that way much valuable time was lost. The same things happened in other cases, so that although the Government had this Session got an additional night for Supply they seemed to make no additional progress. The right hon. Gentleman had quoted the recommendation of the Committee on Public Moneys. But what they recommended was that the grants for the Civil Service should be made on the same principle as the grants for the Army and Navy, namely, for the supply and service of the year, and not for the money to be spent within the year; and in order to facilitate that arrangement it was thought necessary that the money should be voted on account at an early period of the Session. The old maxim was Qui sentit commodum sentire debet et onus; but here the Government were reaping the advantage without fulfilling the obligation—they were getting money on account without giving to the House the opportunity of granting the Supplies on the principle of the Army and Navy Votes. No Vote was taken on account in the case of Civil Service Estimates, unless on a great emergency. Last year they were told that the circumstances were peculiar, but that it must not be drawn into a precedent. Exactly the same thing was said now; but, if the House were ever to stop the practice, they must make a stand at some time or other, because every year added one to the precedents which would be relied on in favour of this irregular practice. He thought they might most conveniently make such a stand in the present instance. It had been urged that the money was wanted to pay salaries before the 1st or 5th of July, but there was plenty of time to go into Committee of Supply and take the Votes required before that time. Then it was said that the House did not lose its control over the Estimates by adopting this course. In theory this might be so, but in practice the House certainly lost all useful control over expenditure by assenting to such a course—because if the Government had the opportunity of putting off every important matter until the end of the Session, when everybody was out of town, there could be no discussion. Several questions of much interest were to be raised upon these Votes. The hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) had given notice of a Motion on the whole subject of national education. Probably the same thing would happen in this as in the last Session, when his right hon. Friend (Sir John Pakington) gave notice of a Motion on the same subject, but was only able to bring it forward late in August. The hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) intended, upon the Packet Estimates, to bring this subject under notice, and the question was one which ought to be discussed in a full House; but of this, according to present appearances, there was little chance. It was said, "Oh, but the House never reduces these Votes." But if it did not do so its criticism had the effect. of keeping the Government alive to the necessity of reduction and of preventing extravagant Votes. The present system in this House seemed altogether very unsatisfactory. First they voted Ways and Means, then they attended to matters of general legislation, and Supply was left to the fag end of the Session, though this was the most important function of the Commons. If this practice continued the House would gradually lose much of its authority over the national expenditure, and would cease to fulfil one of its most imperative duties.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

agreed with his hon. Friend in thinking it a public inconvenience, and a serious public evil, that the discussion on the Miscellaneous Estimates should be postponed to so late a period of the Session. The subject well deserved consideration, both by the Government and the House, in order that further remedies might, if possible, be applied for the cure of such an inconvenience. But when his hon. Friend talked about the Government having gained so much by an additional night for Supply, he ought to remember that, though this gain had not been without value, its real effect had been exceedingly small. As to the course now proposed, he could not concur in the criticisms which had been passed upon it. His hon. Friend talked about the Government getting into the habit of having the House counted out on Supply nights. Now, he did not know that the Government were any more responsible for "counts out" on such nights than his hon. Friend or any other Member who had Motions on the paper. The fact was that on a single night when Supply was to have come on the House was counted, to the great surprise of the Government themselves; and this solitary instance, with which the Government had nothing to do, was converted by his hon. Friend into "a habit" on the part of the Government in procuring counts out. His hon. Friend thought a stand ought to be made against the practice of demanding Votes on account for miscellaneous services; but the allegation on which he founded his argument failed. He had referred to the Committee on Public Moneys, but it was precisely because of the approximation they had made to the recommendations of that Committee that the Government were now obliged to come for money on account. If they had made no changes in the old system they would have had at this moment such an amount of balances in hand as would have enabled them to go on without difficulty. But the balances had been greatly reduced, with the view to facilitate an approach to a new system, and, therefore, the sole reason why they were now obliged to ask for Votes on account was because an important part of the recommendations of the Committee had been followed. As to the suggestions that the substantive Votes now in question should be taken, that arrangement would be almost inconvenient one, for if they were to take the substantive Votes as the necessity for the money arose, it would be necessary to break up the order of the Estimates, disturb the calculations of the Government as to the time public business would be taken, and throw the whole business of Parliament into confusion. He submitted that this would be a much greater inconvenience than taking these Votes on account. It would be wrong to ask for Votes on account for new services, but as the Vote now required was to carry on the current services and to provide for the current expenditure, with respect to which the differences of opinion were comparatively limited, he thought that it was more expedient to take it in that form than to bring forward ten, twenty, or thirty, and ask the House to agree to them at the fag-end of an evening.

MR. HENLEY

was afraid that the Government were carrying on the old and new systems at the same time. The Committee on Public Moneys recommended that the accounts should be closed; but that had not been done. The right hon. Gentleman said that they were approximating to it, but there was no security that they would not approximate the other way. The right hon. Gentleman might keep oscillating. He did oscillate sometimes. He might take advances when it suited him, and keep the balances when it suited him. They had not even a pledge that the recommendations of the Committee would be entirely carried out. They ought at least to have some such promise. What had happened? The Government had not only asked for money on account, but they had asked for it in driblets. This was the second dose of the same physic which they had had this Session, and there might be a third dose in store for them, It might or it might not be more inconvenient to take the Estimates piecemeal, but he must certainly protest against this mode of carrying on business. The right hon. Gentleman said that the House had only been counted out upon one Supply night, but there had been many nights on which the Government might have put Supply upon the Orders, and had not done so, which came to much the same thing. The House had for one week been engaged in the discussion of a small Reform Bill, the advantage of which was very doubtful, when it might have been much better employed in Committee of Supply.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that he had thought it unnecessary to reiterate the pledge for which the right hon. Gentleman had asked, be- cause it had been given some time ago, and the Government had already taken steps towards its fulfilment by introducing a measure with regard to Exchequer Bills, and moving the appointment of a Committee on Public Accounts, the Report of which would, he trusted, lead to the settlement of one or more of the other recommendations of the Committee but it was impossible to adopt all the recommendations of the Committee at once.

SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY

said, that under existing circumstances the Government was justified in asking for money on account; but he should like to know when the recommendations of the Committee respecting these Estimates would be adopted as a whole? Until it was so adopted there could be no proper system of audit. He hoped the Bill founded on the Report of the Committee would be introduced forthwith. Expenditure could not be discussed in the dog-days, and it was absurd to suppose that Supply could be fairly entertained after a mass of questions had been ventilated, and when the time had arrived that the House ought to be in bed.

MR. PEEL

said, that a Bill had been prepared the object of which was to carry into effect the recommendations of the Public Moneys Committee with regard to the audit of the public accounts, but its introduction had been delayed in consequence of the appointment of the Committee on Public Accounts. That Committee had now nearly terminated its labours, and the Bill would shortly be brought forward.

MR. DISRAELI

said, that last year he called the attention of the Committee to the Vote on account which was then proposed. The feeling of the House was that that mode of proceeding was very objectionable; and the Vote was agreed to under a general protest. That Vote, however, was granted under very different circumstances from those under which this one was now asked for. Last year the Government asked for money on account, because it had laid before the House some "large and comprehensive measures," These measures were a Reform Bill and a Commercial Treaty, and it was clear that there must be considerable delay in getting through the Committees of Supply. This year no one would pretend that there had been introduced any large or comprehensive measures which could at all have retarded the progress of Supply, if the business of the House had been arranged with that adroitness and good management which the House had a right to expect; That was the opinion of the Government themselves, because in the middle of February his hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck) asked when the Miscellaneous Estimates would be produced?—and he was assured by the right hon. Gentleman opposite with some self-complacency that they would be introduced almost immediately. What else had happened this year? Almost as soon as the House met a Committee was appointed to consider the arrangements as to the transaction of public business, and, if possible, to facilitate its progress. There might be some controversy as to the recommendations of the Committee, but hot). Members on both sides of the House would admit that the desire of that Committee was to further the progress of public business and to give every possible facility to the Government. Another day in the week was given to them; and other regulations were made, the sole object of which was to facilitate the progress of public business. The Government had not brought forward any large measures, and, though the House had given them additional facilities, the House yet found itself in this unpleasant position. It, therefore, became the Committee to consider what course they would take to prevent a repetition of a proceeding which a moment's reflection would show to be rife with most injurious consequences to the public welfare. By agreeing systematically to vote money on account the Committee could not conceal from itself that practically it was putting an end to all control over the public expenditure. Except Her Majesty's Government would reconsider their course and withdraw this proposition, which he hoped they would see the propriety of doing, there was nothing left for the Committed but to express its opinion distinctly by its vote. It would not be at all difficult for Her Majesty's Government to make the arrangements necessary for procuring the Supply which they required in due course and time. He trusted the Committee would feel that they had a responsible Office to perform, and unless they did so they must make up their minds, in the words of his hon. Friend the Member for Stamford, that they were relinquishing some of the most important functions which they were called on to discharge.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

hoped the House would not agree to the Motion for reporting Progress. The Government were quite aware of the inconvenience of postponing the Estimates to a late period of the Session; but, really, if the Committee would look back to the mode in which the time of the House had been occupied, it would be seen that the request which the Government now made was not owing to any indifference on their part, or to any disposition to postpone the Estimates to a late period. Take, for instance, the last night of Supply; twenty-nine Notices were given of subjects to be discussed before the Speaker left the chair; about four of these were got through, and, no doubt, notice of the remainder would be renewed for some future evening. It was only aggravating the evil of which the hon. Member complained to refuse this Vote. It would only entail great inconvenience on innocent persons—namely, public servants for whose pay the money was required, and it would answer no other purpose whatever. The Government were exceedingly anxious to get on with business, but he could not take upon himself to ask Gentlemen to postpone all their Notices till Tuesday. The Government were accused of allowed the House to be counted out; but that occurrence had usually happened on Tuesday nights, when, if forty Gentlemen who were interested in Motions that had been put down for that evening bad been in their places to watch them, no "count out" could possibly have occurred. The Government were not bound to keep a House against the wishes of Members when there was no business before it. To show that they were in earnest, they proposed to avail themselves of the new regulations proposed by the Committee, and to take Supply as the first order to-morrow.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

said, the Committee on Public Business had recommended that Government should have the power of putting down Supply on Tuesday nights; yet this was the first instance in which they had availed themselves of the privilege. The effect of the course taken by Government in not trying to forward business on Tuesday evenings, and in allowing the House to be counted out was that Members were obliged to put down their notices for Supply nights, thereby causing the inconvenience which was now complained of.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 99; Noes 148: Majority 49.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

In reply to Mr. CHILDERS,

MR. PEEL

admitted that the balances remaining of Votes formerly granted were very considerable.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

asked for information respecting the time when the Miscellaneous Estimates would be brought on for discussion, and the order in which they would be taken?

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

It is impossible to say when, but as soon as possible. We must first dispose of the Army Estimates.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.