HC Deb 25 April 1884 vol 287 cc647-9
SIR, ROBERT PEEL

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Who are the members of the General Committee, and by whom appointed, referred to in the Report which has been presented to Parliament, of the executive Committee on the decoration of the new place at Hyde Park Corner; and. to what extent the Chief Commissioner has delegated his authority to the said General Committee? The right hon. Baronet said, he saw by the Report which had been laid upon the Table that the Executive Committee appointed by the General Committee were in a position to make their Report to the General Committee; that they had carefully weighed all the suggestions made by the General Committee; and that the Executive Committee were prepared to give their decision to the General Committee, and strongly recommended that the latter should give their adhesion to the conclusions to which the Executive Committee had been guided.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

Will the right hon. Gentleman state if there is any precedent for presenting as a Parliamentary Paper the Report of a private Body not being a Department of the State?

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

The General Committee consisted of a considerable number of distinguished persons, whom the Prince of Wales invited to confer with him on the subject. I think they numbered about 85 in all. I shall be quite prepared to supply the right hon. Baronet with the names, but I do not think it is necessary to give them to the public generally. I have delegated none of my powers either to the General Committee or to the Executive Committee, and I am responsible alone for anything that may be done hereafter in the matter. In reply to the Question of the noble Lord, I am not aware that there is any precedent one way or the other; but I was asked by some hon. Member to issue this document, and I agreed to do it.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

Was it printed by Order of the House?

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

Yes, it was.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

Who moved for it?

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

I did. No; it was moved by the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands).

MR. GORST

asked whether the Notice for the production of the Report was given by the hon. Member for Burnley in the usual way, and whether it appeared on the Papers of the House?

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

asked whether the matter came before the Printing Committee over which the Speaker presided?

MR. SPEAKER

said, that a Motion for the production of the Report must have been made; but he could not recall the actual date when it was made.

SIR ROBERT PEEL

observed that the Return was made according to an Order of the House of Commons, dated April 8.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

subsequently asked whether a Minister could obtain from the House, without Notice, an Order for the printing of a document which was neither Departmental nor Ministerial, nor a command paper, but simply a private document? If a Minister could do so, he might have his speech to his constituents printed, or his election address, or any other frivolity of that kind.

MR. SPEAKER

The noble Lord is, undoubtedly, referring to a Paper presented by the Chief Commissioner of Works, a Paper relating to his Department, which was presented by him in his quality of Minister without Notice. The right hon. Gentleman, in the course which he took, was only following a precedent which is constantly acted upon.

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

The Question arose out of an answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands). I quoted in my answer a Paper, and the hon. Member asked me to lay it before the House. I believe that a Minister who has quoted a document in the House is bound to lay it before the House.