HC Deb 18 February 1879 vol 243 cc1445-7

Sir WALTER BARTTELOT, Lord FREDERICK CAVENDISH, Mr. CUBITT, Mr. GOLDNEY, nominated Members of the Committee of Public Accounts.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Hankey be one other Member of the said Committee." — (Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson.)

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE

said, he objected to the appointment of the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Hankey), mainly on the ground of the retrograde speech which he had made in the course of the evening; but he would not move the rejection of that Gentleman's name from the list. In his opinion, the Committee was not strong enough, and he thought the names of some of the Members who had shown activity in financial matters should be added to it. He would suggest the appointment of the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands), who was for some years a Member of the Committee.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he entirely supported the views of the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke). The Committee wanted reforming. Several hon. Members below the Gangway were kept off it.

SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON

said, the Committee was not appointed as the ordinary Committees of that House, but under a Standing Order of the House, and which Order limited the number to 11. If it was the wish of the House that the number should be increased, the Standing Order must be first altered. He hoped the House would not delay the appointment of the Committee, as it was important they should at once enter upon their duties.

MR. SERJEANT SHERLOCK

agreed with what had been said by the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury, seeing it was scarcely practicable to alter the Standing Order that night.

MAJOR NOLAN

said, that if these pleas were to be allowed they would never have any change whatsoever. There was no use in beating about the bush. What was wanted was a re-disbution of power on these Committees. It was a fact that those who sat below the Gangway were exactly the Members who were most inclined to economy in the Public Service, and it was they who ought to predominate on the Committee of Public Accounts, because they were the most jealous guardians of the public purse. He hoped the debate would be postponed until an arrangement could be made for enlarging the Committee. So far as he could see, it was the fashion to select these Committees without consulting any but a very small circle; and he thought it would be desirable to make an addition to the present names, and, perhaps, leave some of the present names out.

MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY

said, he thought it was important on a Committee of this kind, which had to investigate Public Accounts, that the Three Kingdoms should be adequately represented, not merely on the principle of equality and fair distribution. Accounts relating to the different parts of the Kingdom came before this Committee, and instead of there being one Irish Member, as at present, he thought it desirable that there should be two, and that those two should be Gentlemen who had knowledge of the country, and who could fix their eyes on any particular Irish matter. Within the last two years they had seen some strange financial transactions in Ireland which had escaped the notice of the Government. In one case an officer in one branch of the Government service was carrying on a fraud— receiving money for a certain purpose and putting it into his pocket—and it was only the other day, after the end of four or five years, that it was discovered, and then under circumstances in which it was possible to prosecute, and the man escaped. Another case which he might mention was that of one of the Boards in Ireland which had lately been the subject of close investigation, not on account of fraud, but for gross mismanagement of public money. Now, if there had been a second Irish Member on this Committee, he would very likely have been able to direct attention to these matters. Besides, there was another principle which ought to be had regard to. As he understood, this Committee was re-appointed from year to year, and nothing short of death, paralysis, or defeat at election would get a Member off. That was an unfortunate thing. He thought new blood ought to be introduced, and that the principle of co-opting Members ought to be abandoned. They ought to encourage rising talent among the young Members, and at the same time have regard to the districts Members came from.

Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present,

House adjourned at a quarter after Nine o'clock.