§ EARL RUSSELL rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether there is an Advisory Committee in connection with the Post Office; if so, of whom it is constituted, what are its functions, and whether it has any initiative. The noble Earl said: My Lords, I make no apology for rising to put my Question at this hour, because some of your Lordships, I think, will recollect a small Committee which sat recently on the business of the House, in which the virtuous view was very strongly expressed that it was the duty of this House to sit, if necessary, till eight o'clock and clear up the business on the Paper, and it is still a good long way from that hour. At any rate, I will not detain your Lordships very long.
§ I raised a Question in connection with Post Office administration the other day, and I think it would, perhaps, be fair to take this opportunity of saying that the Postmaster-General has been good enough to communicate with me with regard to 1078 many of the points I then raised. I think that in most instances he has made out a very good case, much better, of course, than his representative was able to make out, without notice, when I raised the points. There were one or two noble Lords opposite who caused some little amusement on that occasion—on which the Rules of Order in this House did not permit me to reply—on the ground that as a member of tie Socialist Party I suggested that business methods should be applied in Government institutions. That was entirely misconceived, because, so far as I am aware, the Party to which I belong has never suggested that business, whether public or private, should be run in an unbusinesslike way. The matter caused amusement among members of the Government, but the point was a false one.
§ On that occasion Lord Burnham made an interjection towards the end of the discussion, and said that we already had an Advisory Committee. I rather understood him to mean that there was an Advisory Committee to which it would have been proper and suitable to refer the points raised in the discussion. I think your Lordships were aware, from what had appeared in the public Press, that there was an Advisory Committee on some matters, which the noble Viscount opposite and Sir Alfred Mond left with explosive feelings, because it was of no use. That Advisory Committee, as I have hitherto understood, was limited to advice with regard to wireless and particularly Imperial wireless, and what I want to ask about to-day is whether there is an Advisory Committee in existence, of whom it is constituted, and what its functions are; that is to say, what matters are normally to be referred to it, and whether it has any initiative, by which I mean whether it is in a position to make suggestions of its own motion to the Postmaster-General, or whether it merely meets to consider proposals and suggestions put before it by the Postmaster-General. I am merely asking for information, and not like Rosa Dartle, but in the most honest circumstances.
§ THF EARL OF LUCANMy Lords, I can answer the Question put by the noble Earl very shortly. He has asked as to the Advisory Council, and as to whether they are limited merely to wireless, and also whether the members of the Council have any initiative to raise points. The 1079 answer of the Post Office is that the Advisory Council was originally constituted in 1021, and has been re-appointed by successive Postmasters-General since that date. The Council at present consists of sixteen members, and I can give the noble Earl their names if he wishes.
§ THF EARL OF LUCANBy the Postmaster-General, I understand, and the functions of the Council are to tender advice to the Postmaster-General on any question which he may submit to them. It is open to any member of the Council to suggest to the Postmaster-General any subject which it is desired to bring up for discussion by the Council, and such questions are usually placed upon the agenda.
§ THF EARL OF LUCANI have not that information.
§ VISCOUNT BURNHAMMy Lords, it was not my intention to address your Lordships on this subject, because I am carrying on a certain amount of controversy elsewhere with the Postmaster General, and I do not think it is fair to him that he should not be able to answer either in person, or, if I may say so, by deputy, with regard to the Post Office. I think that while we have great respect for the Lords-in-Waiting, it is a little hard on them that they should have, one after another, to answer for Departments with the work of which they cannot be familiar. Perhaps I can give the information which is desired by the noble Earl opposite.
The Advisory Committee was set up four or five years ago. It is constituted of those who are supposed to be men of business in many walks of life, although they do not represent any particular federation or association, either of employers or employed. Each one, I think, was asked individually to join, because it was thought, I imagine, that he might be of some service to the State by reason of his knowledge and experience in one or more of the trades of the country. No fixed time was settled for the meetings of this Committee. It 1080 was entirely at the option of the Postmaster-General for the time being, and I think I am right in saying that the Postmaster-General in the last Government did not summon the Committee at all. The agenda is drawn up by the Permanent Secretary of the Post Office, but it has been open to any member to draw-attention to any particular subject, and to ask that it should be put on the agenda. The discussions have been short and, as I venture to say—though I am not here to air my grievance—not very effective.
If I may give your Lordships a clue to what this Committee was, or what it was not, I may say that during the whole of the five years it never had before it the question of wireless telegraphy—it was excluded altogether from its survey. It is almost inconceivable to those outside the Post Office that that great question, which has occupied business men in relation to postal business during all this period, and for many years before, should not have been before this Committee Two or three Committees were appointed to deal with it, but the business Committee, so far as I recollect, and I think I am right, never had an opportunity of dealing with the matter in any shape whatever.
It is a strictly Advisory Committee. It set up various sub-committees on matters of Post Office business, and I had the honour of presiding over one dealing with telegraphy, but I cannot say that our recommendations met with much favour, or went much further than the pigeonholes of the Post Office, so far as I know. However, this Committee existed in name, and met in a certain number of cases, and was always treated with the utmost courtesy by all the officials of the Post Office. I always felt that it provided a very convenient buffer between the Post Office and the public. The Postmaster-General, in the House of Commons, was always able to say: "I have taken the advice upon this point" of the Advisory Committee, composed, as the House knew, of business men whose names were fairly well known to the public at large. On the other hand, I do not think it fulfilled the hopes of a good many of us, and I cannot say that it has taken an effective share in the administration of the affairs of the Post Office. Whether it will do so in future, of course, I cannot prophesy.
1081 I had to refuse the invitation to serve again, because I felt that it was hardly right to give a public appearance of efficiency to a body which had not been very seriously treated. I quite admit the difficulty of a consultative body of this kind. It is not really part of the machinery of State, it interferes at every turn, if it does its work constantly and in detail, with the permanent officials, and in the case of the Post Office, which is a vast business organisation, it would have, if it wished to do much good, to take a continuous part in public administration. I submit that a body which only has met, I should think, an average of two or three times in the year for an hour and a half at a time cannot do anything of the kind. It may be in the future that it will be used to better advantage.
I only wished to correct an impression which my noble friend below me (the Earl of Lucan) I think, gave, that this body had anything to do with wireless or had ever been consulted on wireless. It never has. It has passed its time, I am bound to say, pleasantly, so far as I was concerned, at the Post Office, it has seen something of the working there, and it has doubtless greatly strengthened the permanent officials, because they were able to say that, so far from being tied by official red tape, they were helped in solving all the problems put to them by those who were supposed to have the business brains of the country. I will not detain your Lordships longer, but I thought I could answer my noble friend opposite in a way that he would entirely understand.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I think we are very much obliged to my noble friend Lord Burnham for having supplemented the information given by the representative of the Post Office in answer to the noble Earl, and, indeed, we have every reason to be grateful to my noble friend because he has, with the greatest public spirit, helped successive Governments both in this Department and in other Departments, for which the country is very grateful. At the same time, I think the House might be left under a misapprehension if I did not say one word. I think the best testimony to this Advisory Committee is that successive Postmasters-General have, with very rare exceptions, always 1082 adopted its recommendations. It may be that it does not operate as much as it ought to do, but at any rate that broad fact remains, and, though I am quite sure your Lordships will have listened to my noble friend Lord Burnham with the greatest possible respect, yet I think I ought to say that I do not think his opinion is universally held by his colleagues and by the Postmaster-General. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships may be a little reassured on that subject.