HC Deb 01 July 1878 vol 241 cc494-6
SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the payment of ten pence per hour, which is said to have been the scale under which Charles Marvin was lately employed in the Treaty Department of the Foreign Office, is that which prevails for the remuneration of writers in the departments of the Foreign Office; and, whether, if so, he will review the scale of remuneration for persons to whom confidential information is intrusted?

MR. BOURKE

Sir, the Foreign Office, under the direction of the Treasury, apply to the Civil Service Commissioners when they want a writer for supplementary work, and the remuneration of the writer, under these circumstances, is settled by the Commissioners at 10d. per hour, with permission to add special rates for other special duty. The particular writer employed lately in the Treaty department of the Foreign Office received 10d. an hour for copying, and the special rate of 4½d. per folio additional for copying French. He was the only one that has been lately employed in the Foreign Office, although occasionally since the present Government have been in Office writers have been employed in the Consular department as well as in the Passport department. With regard to the last part of the Question, the remuneration being settled by the Civil Service Commissioners, under the instructions of the Treasury, it does not lie with the Foreign Office to re-consider or re-settle the rate of remuneration.

MR. CHILDERS

asked, Whether the employment of writers at 10d. an hour and 4½d. a folio was in accordance with the practice of the Foreign Office for the copying of important and strictly confidential communications?

SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA

desired to give Notice that on an early day he should call the attention of the House to the subject.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

asked, Whether writers of this class were employed in any confidential departments of the Foreign Office, such as the Political department?

MR. BOURKE

Sir, the Question just asked is almost identical with that already put by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Pontefract. As I am not personally responsible for the arrangement of the business of the Foreign Office, it being under the superintendence of the Secretary of State, I do not think the House will expect me to answer the right hon. Gentleman's Question off-hand, as it would be right to communicate with the Secretary of State before doing so; but if the right hon. Gentleman will kindly give Notice of his Question, I will endeavour to answer it on another day.