HC Deb 24 February 1870 vol 199 cc779-87

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time.—(Mr. Cardwell.)

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

I do not rise to offer any opposition to the second reading of this Bill, but to ask the right hon. Gentleman to explain the position and duties of the two new officers he proposes to create, seeing they are to be called by the names that existed in former times—namely, Clerk of the Ordnance and Financial Secretary, and whether he intends that the latter officer shall represent in this House the position which former Secretaries of War held, that of Financial Secretary. It is desirable that the exact duties which these two officers have to perform should be fully stated to the House, and how far they will interfere with or alter the functions and position of the Secretary of State for War. Another point upon which information would be acceptable is whether, in the event of the Secretary for War having a seat in the other House of Parliament, the Under Secretary would sit in this House, and who in that ease would represent the War Department here—the Under Secretary or one of the newly-appointed officials? I quite recognize the necessity of giving assistance to the Secretary of State, but we should be better able to judge as to the expediency of the arrangement proposed if my right hon. Friend would give us some further and more precise information as to the functions of the several officers.

MR. CARDWELL

I am much obliged to my right hon. Friend for the very candid manner in which he receives the Bill, and I am most anxious to afford him and the House all the information in my power in addition to what I stated the other evening. In the first place, with regard to the number of officers of the War Department qualified to sit in this House, I may state that a Return moved for by the right hon. Member for Devonshire (Sir Stafford Northcote) shows that of late years there has been a considerable, or, at least, some diminution in the number of Members of the Government, as a whole, who can sit in the House; and, as regards the War Department, there has been a signal diminution, for, as I stated the other night, the War Department was represented in this House when I first entered Parliament by the Colonial Secretary, the late Lord Derby, Lord Hardinge, and an Under Secretary; General Peel and Colonel Boldero representing the Board of Ordnance; the Militia was under the control of the Home Office; the Commissariat was in the hands of the Treasury, and there were no Volunteers. I do not propose to return to the Parliamentary strength of the Department in former times; but it is very important to divide the business of the War Department under three heads, the chief of which should be the military, for which, of course, the Secrecretary of State for War will be particularly responsible, and which will be represented in the House in which he does not sit by the Parliamentary Under Secretary, whose position I do not at all intend by this Bill in any way to diminish or impair. In all probability, in the majority of cases the Secretary of State will sit in the House of Commons, considering what great public expenditure the War Office is responsible for. There is no intention on our part to diminish in the slightest degree the responsibility of the Secretary of State; our desire is to divide only the labour of superintendence. We wish to combine division of labour with unity of responsibility. It is absolutely impossible for anybody to be in the full sense of the word responsible for such a Department unless he has responsible assistants to carry on the business for which he is reponsible; and I think that when the organization of the War Department was reduced to the appointment of a single Secretary of State and Parliamentary Under Secretary, the principle of consolidation was carried further than good sense required. This House cannot have proper control over the War Department when the Secretary of State stands by himself, and there is no one to represent the great manufacturing departments, and none to assist him in finance. In former times the Secretary at War had great responsibilities, and was not unfrequently a Member of the Cabinet. I have not sought to create an appointment of that importance, because I have not the smallest desire to relieve myself of any of the responsibility which ought to belong to the Secretary of State; but any one acquainted with the work of the War Office must be perfectly aware that financial details should be controlled immediately by a Parliamentary officer, because proper attention cannot be given to the multifarious financial details by one having to control the whole policy of the War Department. Taking these points into consideration, I desire to appoint a Clerk of the Ordnance, and I have chosen the title "Clerk of the Ordnance" in preference to "Surveyor," because I think it more indicative of the financial character of the work he would undertake. He would be directly responsible for the preparation of the Estimates of this great Department, and he would combine in his own person the responsibilities and duties that formerly devolved upon the Surveyor General and the Clerk of the Ordnance, except that they had a more independent character in their relation to the Secretary of State.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

As I understand it, he would have the control of the manufacturing departments.

MR. CARDWELL

He would be regarded within the office as head, tinder the Secretary of State, of the manufacturing departments. Then with regard to the financial officer, I propose that he should assist the Secretary of State in that complete and minute control of the financial arrangement of the office which I believe it is the pleasure of Parliament that the Secretary of State should exercise, and I trust it will be also the pleasure of Parliament that he should have assistance to enable him to execute it satisfactorily. With regard to the details of the duties of this officer I may mention that he would review all the Estimates as the assistant of the Secretary of State, that every proposed change in those Estimates would be brought by him under the notice of the Secretary of State; that every proposed change in establishment, in regulation, or warrants affecting in any way the expenditure of the Department would be within his province, together with all questions of allowance; and that, in fact, he would be in all respects the responsible financial official under the Secretary of State.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

I presume the Control Department would be under the Clerk of the Ordnance.

MR. CARDWELL

The Clerk of the Ordnance would be the superintendent of everything that is now under the Controller-in-Chief, and I should hope in a short time that the office of Controller-in-Chief would be only temporary as a separate office.

MR. WHITE

said, it was obvious that the consolidation of the War Department had been carried too far, for whereas before we had a Secretary of State for War the normal expenditure on account of the Army did not exceed some £9,000,000 or £10,000,000 it had increased some 50 per cent of late. Now, when the Consolidation Act of 1863 was passed he deemed it expedient, considering the confusion which had arisen in consequence of the authority being so much divided, that the responsibility in regard to the whole of the Department should be centred in some one person. He confessed, however, that he then entertained great doubts as to whether the responsible official ought, ex officio, to be a member of the Cabinet. In former times the Master of the Ordnance and the Secretary at War were sometimes members of the Cabinet; but, in his judgment, it was not, as a rule, desirable that the Secretary who administered the military affairs of this country should be one of Her Majesty's principal Secretaries of State. If he were made more dependent than at present on the Chancellor of the Exchequer there would not be so much reckless expenditure. It would not be desirable to revert to the old system in its entirety, but when the War Department was reconstituted he should be pleased to see the great talents of the right hon. Gentleman transferred to some position which he might adorn without any loss of rank, and that we should revert to that rule of the old system whereby the War Secretary was not, by virtue of his office, a member of the Cabinet.

MR. HUNT

rose to elicit a further explanation with regard to the Clerk of the Ordnance. From the right hon. Gentleman's last answer to his right hon. Friend near him he was led to look forward to a time, and at no distant date, when the office of Controller-in-Chief would be merged in that of Clerk of the Ordnance. Now, when the office of Controller-in-Chief was instituted it was intended that he should be a permanent officer, and not go out with the Government. If, however, the office were to be merged in that of the Clerk of the Ordnance, who was to have a seat in Parliament, he would change with the Government. He therefore wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it was intended that there should be in the War Office a permanent officer subordinate to the Clerk of the Ordnance.

MR. CARDWELL

, in reply, said, he anticipated that when the Control system was completed—and he was looking forward to that—it would in all probability be unnecessary to retain both the offices of Controller-in-Chief and Clerk of the Ordnance. If two permanent officers were appointed—one for supply and transport, and the other for munitions and stores—there would, he thought, be a better discharge of duties. This, however, was a matter which did not form part of the present Bill.

MR. HERMON

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would state what the salaries of these new officers would be. The 5th clause of the Bill left that matter wholly undecided; but he thought the House ought to have some control over the amount of emolument to be given to the officers.

COLONEL BARTTELOT

said, he thought the question respecting the salaries to be given to these gentlemen was comparatively unimportant, because if these extra appointments were made it might be fairly expected that there would be a more economical management of the War Department. Up to the present time economy had not been sufficiently attended to, many things having been done on a most extravagant scale. Merely as an ousider, he thought he might say, without any reflection on his right hon. Friend, that, looking at the Estimates, economy had been carried out much more satisfactorily in the Navy than in the Army. In the Army, there had been a mere cutting down of the number of men, whereas, in the Navy, it appeared to him that many gross anomalies and excrescences had been cut off. In future, he hoped we might look forward to a more satisfactory Return respecting Army expenditure. He was going to put upon the Paper a Notice to the effect that he should, on Monday next, ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would lay upon the table of the House a tabular statement of the sums expended for experimental trials of ordnance during the last ten years, and a similar Return as to small arms; also a Return of the sums paid to inventors by way of reward during the same period. This subject, which would henceforward come under the notice of the Clerk of Ordnance, was one with which the country was not at all satisfied, and he trusted that in future the accounts with regard to it would be better kept, and that the expenditure would be less.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, he did not rise for the purpose of opposing the Bill, or of denying that there was a necessity for the proposed changes. But if he understood the matter rightly, the new Clerk of the Ordnance would have the control of the largest manufacturing and the largest purchasing department in the world. The question therefore was, not what salary he should receive, but whether he would be a fit man to discharge the duties of the office. A military officer, however gallant and skilled in his profession he might be, could not be expected to watch over and control efficiently the large purchases made by the War Department, any more than he could be expected to manage one of the large manufacturing concerns in the North of England or the City of London. There was no Department of Her Majesty's service so badly and unsatisfactorily managed as the Department of the Ordnance. No doubt all the civil servants who were under the right hon. Gentleman were honourable men. He (Mr. Mundella) would not suppose for a moment that there could be any persons in that Department who could be suspected of any practices such as had been found in the Navy, though, at the same time, he did not know why human nature should be different in the Departments connected with the Army from what they were in the Navy. It was a popular belief that there was gross mismanagement and gross bungling in that Department, and no manufacturer could be satisfied with what went on. He had had abundance of proof of it again and again. And however active the right hon. Gentleman might be it was impossible for him to superintend it, control it, and keep it in subjection to him, for he would be deceived under his very eyes, because he did not possess the necessary knowledge to keep it under proper control. In regard to purchasing supplies for the British Army, it was a question far more of getting the right man than of the salary that was given him. If they succeeded in getting the light man, though they paid him ten times the amount the House would be willing to give, they would save a hundred times what he was paid, while the service would be much more efficient than at present.

LORD ELCHO

said, he thought the object aimed at by his right hon. Friend in the appointment of these two officers was a division of labour accompanied by unity of responsibility; but if the position of these officers was to be considered as in any way equivalent to the independent position formerly held by the Clerk of the Ordnance and the Secretary of State for War, the House ought to proceed with great caution, or we might drift back into the divided responsibility which existed at that time. He presumed that the object of the House in sanctioning a Bill of this kind was to provide that the Secretary of State for War should have undivided responsibility, and also that he should have assistance such as was necessary and desirable, and such as was given by the different officers who under the old system occupied seats in the House. Supposing, however, that these new officers were appointed, and an hon. Member wished to ask a question concerning artillery, small arms, camp duty, or a matter of finance, to whom was he to address it? For his own part, he should be disposed in such a case not to address his question either to the Clerk of the Ordnance or the Financial Secretary, but directly to the Secretary of State for War. As the House was aware, questions relating to the Admiralty were addressed not to the Secre- tary to the Admiralty nor to the First Sea Lord, but were put direct to the First Lord. If, therefore, the practice grew up of asking questions of the Financial Secretary and of the Clerk of the Ordnance he feared something like divided responsibility would exist, and the object of tins measure be to a great extent defeated. Then, with regard to the Clerk of the Ordnance, why should he be so called? The former officer was no designated because he really was Clerk of the Ordnance, at that time a separate Department, for which he annually moved the Estimate. He apprehended, however, that after this Bill passed the Secretary of State for War would continue to move the Estimates, although in passing them through the House he would, of course, have the assistance of the two new officers.

MR. STANSFELD

, in reply to a question which had been asked, stated that in the organization proposed there would be a complete subordination of the two new offices to the Secretary of State. The salaries under the Bill, he added, were to be £1,500 a year; but if the Controller were also Clerk of the Ordnance, he would have a professional salary of £2,000 a year. An hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Barttelot) had expressed an opinion to the effect that the organization and economies of the Admiralty were more satisfactory than those which had as yet been accomplished by the War Department, and his right hon. Friend was not disposed to question for a moment the accuracy of that statement, but the answer to it was that the First Lord of the Admiralty entered upon the duties of his office, not only familiar, as he was by previous experience, with all questions of Admiralty organization, but surrounded by Colleagues who were entirely at one with him, and able to carry out his views. Now, the Secretary of War came and asked hon. Members to provide him, too, with Colleagues, in order to place him in a position to carry out those reforms which had been effected in the sister service with so much success. He might further observe that, pending the decision of the House on the matter, his right hon. Friend had not failed to consider very closely the question of War Office organization even in its details, and had submitted the subject to the investigation of a Committee, of which he himself had the honour to be a Member. The points which had been submitted to them that Committee had considered with great care and labour for several months, and their Reports had boon presented to his right hon. Friend, and when they were made public they would, he trusted, be found to be satisfactory.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.