NOMINATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 25 February 1878)

MR. GOLDSMID

said, that on Friday, in the previous week, he had made some observations with regard to the selection of Members to serve on Committees, and he found that those observations had been acknowledged by being totally ignored. On the former occasion, he had pointed out that, however capable, and however able, some hon. Members might be, they had not yet accomplished the feat of being in two or three different places at the same time. There were in the House many hon. Members who, thought they election had been comparatively recent, were still men of ability and intelligence, and were anxious to bear their fair share in the Business of the House. That was a fact which the Government, in nominating Committees, ought to bear in mind, and he thought they should take care that upon every Committee, more or less, some few young Members were placed. But instead of that, he saw the changes were rung upon the same names over and over again; the willing horse was over-burdened; and Members, whom they all respected and admired, were put on more Committees than it was possible for them to attend. He did not make that assertion without some reason. Before mentioning the first name, he begged to say that he had spoken upon the subject to the hon. and gallant Member to whom he was about to refer. He had himself had a seat -in the House for nearly 11 years, but a much older Member than himself was the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter Barttelot), one whom they all respected, and who had always taken an active part in the Business of the House. But if the House agreed to nominate the two Committees, which were to be proposed that night, he found that his hon. and gallant Friend would in that case be asked to attend, at the same time, no fewer than five Committees. Two of these were the Royal Artillery Engineers Officers (Arrears of Pay) Committee, which sat last year, and the termination of whose labours this Session had not been fixed; 359 and the Irish Land Act Committee, which had been re-appointed for the present Session, and which he was informed was not likely to be short in its deliberations. Besides these, his hon. and gallant Friend was an active and useful Member of the Committee on Public Accounts, which had constant work to do during the Session, involving the sacrifice, on the part of its Members, of a great deal of time, attention, and energy; and now it was proposed that the same hon. and gallant Gentleman's name should be placed on two of the most important Committees of the Session—namely, that upon Commons, and that upon Public Business. If appointed to these two last, the hon. and gallant Member would have to serve altogether upon five Committees sitting at the same time. There was another hon. Member of marked ability, whom they had known in that House for many years, the hon. Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney), who, if elected as proposed, would also have to serve on five Committees. The hon. Member was already serving upon the Committee on the Lunacy Laws, the Committee on Public Accounts, the Committee on the Metropolis Management and Buildings Acts, and upon the Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms Committee. It was difficult to imagine how the hon. Gentleman could discharge such onerous duties. The hon. Member for Youghal (Sir Joseph M'Kenna), an active and zealous Representative, was a Member of the Irish Land Act Committee, the Public Works (East India) Committee, and the Local Taxation Committee. He could give the House several other instances, but he did not wish to weary hon. Members. Those he had already given, he thought, were sufficient to show that this manner of placing an hon. Member on several Committees, sitting at the same time, was not satisfactory. If he were asked to name some amongst the older Members to serve on Select Committees, who did not already serve upon them, he might mention the hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle (Sir Wilfrid Lawson). If they wanted a Member on the other side of the House, there was the hon. and gallant Admiral (Admiral Sir William Edmonstone) who sat behind the Ministerial Bench, and whose name was remarkable by its absence from the list of Select Committees. There were many new Members, 360 capable, and, he believed, willing to devote their time to public matters, and ready to learn the Business of the House. He had just said to one that he would mention his name to the House, who had begged him not to do so; he referred to the noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill), a young Member who had shown an active and intelligent interest in the Business of the House. He could not find that Member's name on any Committees; and there were other young Members, perfectly competent to serve on Committees, whose names were never brought forward. What, therefore, he contended was, that the Government, in preparing these lists of Committees, ought not to overtax the experienced Members of the House, and ought not to put any one Member, however active and willing, to serve upon five Committees at the same time. They ought to select, in conjunction with the older Members, some few Members of less experience, who might learn the Business of the House, and hereafter make themselves as able and as useful as his hon. and gallant Friend opposite (Sir Walter Barttelot), who sat upon five Committees. Therefore, in order to give the Government a little time to consider the nomination of this Committee on Commons, and the one to follow on Public Business, he moved that the debate be adjourned.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

expressed a hope that the House would not think it necessary to adjourn the appointment of this Committee. He understood his hon. Friend (Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson) to move it in the nature almost of a standing Committee; because it was one to be appointed for the purpose of taking cognizance of any Bills which might be introduced under the description of Commons. For some time that Committee would not have much to do, and his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Walter Barttelot) would be usefully employed in finishing up the business of the other Committees on which his name had been placed. With regard to the Public Accounts Committee, that, again, was one which, though it sat all the Session, only met once a week—namely, on Wednesdays, when hon. Gentlemen 361 were not usually engaged on other Committee business. It was perfectly true that there were several Gentlemen serving upon one, two, or more Committees; but generally those selections were made either because the Member had some special cognizance of the subject, or because it was necessary to get a Gentleman to serve whose attendance could be relied upon. His hon. and gallant Friend was one of those who were always ready to give the necessary attendance; and he believed his hon. and gallant Friend would not have undertaken to serve upon these Committees unless he felt he was competent to give his attention and attendance. Of course, no Gentleman was asked to serve, except with his consent; and from the fact that he had consented, it might be inferred that, if placed upon the Committee, he would do his duty as one of its Members. He trusted that the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Goldsmid) would not think it necessary to adjourn the nomination of this Committee on Commons.