§ [THIRTY-FOURTH NIGHT.]
499§ Further Consideration of the New Rules of Procedure resumed.
§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That the said Standing Committees do consist of not less than sixty, nor more than eighty, Members, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, who shall have regard to the classes of Bills committed to such Committees, to the composition of the House, and to the qualifications of the Members selected; and shall have power to add and discharge Members from time to time, provided the number of eighty be not exceeded."—(Mr. Dodson.)
§ Amendment made in line 1, by inserting, after the word "That," the words "each of."—(Mr. Dodson.)
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL, in rising to move, in line 1, to leave out from the words "consist of," to the end of the Question, in. order to add the words—
Forty Members, who shall be elected by the whole House by ballot in manner hereinafter prescribed:—1. Mr. Speaker shall prescribe a day during the sitting of the House, of which not less than one week's notice shall be given, at which the election of any Standing Committee ordered by the House shall take place. 2. The time of election shall be on the day so prescribed between the hours of four and six p.m. 3. Each Member shall have the right of voting for one Member only of such Standing Committee 4. The vote of each Member shall be given by his delivering personally to an officer appointed by the Speaker to receive the votes a paper containing his own name and the name of the person voted for. 5. The votes so given shall be cast up under the direction of Mr. Speaker, and the forty Members who have received the greatest number of votes shall be declared elected as Members of the said Standing Committee. 6. Where two or more Members shall have received an equal number of votes, Mr. Speaker, if it be necessary, shall give a casting vote to so many of such Members as shall be required to make up the number of the said Committee. 7. If less than forty Members be voted for, Mr. Speaker shall appoint another day, of which not less than three days' notice shall be given, on which the supplementary number of Members required for the said Committee shall be elected in manner aforesaid,said, he did not know whether it was worth his while to move his Amendment in the absence of the Prime Minister, because he doubted whether the right hon. Gentleman's Colleagues then present on the Ministerial Bench had power to deal with it. No doubt, they had had their answers dictated to them during the morning, and they probably had not any power to deviate from them. He objected to the Grand Committees being appointed by the Committee of Selection, which, from its 500 constitution, was not likely to make appointments which would give satisfaction to all Parties. The Committee of Selection consisted of three Members from the Conservative, and three Members from the Liberal side of the House—namely, Sir John Mowbray, Mr. Cubitt, and Mr. Orr Ewing; and Mr. Whitbread, Sir Charles Forster, and Mr. Mitchell Henry. He believed the only Member on the Committee who would command the confidence of every independent Member of the House was the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread). For his part, he could not feel an exaggerated amount of confidence in the hon. Baronet the Member for Walsall (Sir Charles Forster), whom he was glad to see in his place, because he believed he was attached by too strong ties to the Front Bench behind which he sat. The same remark he would apply to the three Conservative Members of the Committee, who were also penetrated with what he might call an exaggerated idea of the importance of the views of the right hon. Gentlemen who adorned the Front Opposition Bench, and who would be extremely unlikely to place a proper value on the views of hon. Members who sat below the Gangway on the Opposition side. Nor would he feel much confidence in the selections of the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Mitchell Henry). At present the House was without any information as to the mode in which the Committee of Selection performed their duties, and he hoped that the hon. Member for Walsall would enlighten the House on that point. If the very important duty of nominating the Standing Committees were to be intrusted to the Committee of Selection, it would be necessary very seriously to consider the position of the Committee next Session. Select Committees, when very large, did not get through their Business very well. The Railway Rates Committee, which was composed of 27 Members, was an example of that. He held that a Standing Committee of 40 Members elected by the House would be able to discharge the duties intrusted to it satisfactorily. The Liberal Party, he thought, would probably prefer to have in its own hands the nomination of its Representatives on a Standing Committee on an important subject—for example, Criminal Law—instead of leaving the matter in the hands of a Com- 501 mittee of Selection, which did not represent any Party. By his plan, each Party in the House would be represented proportionately. The hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread) had said that on these Standing Committees Parties should be represented according to their strength in the House. With that he cordially agreed; but he failed to see how a Committee of Selection could satisfactorily procure that result. According to his scheme, every Party would have a right to that representation to which its numbers entitled it. For example, in a House of 400 Members, containing 200 Liberals, 150 Conservatives, and 50 Irish Members, the Liberals would have a right to have 20 Members elected by themselves on a Standing Committee, the Conservatives would have a right to have 15, and the Irish Members would have a right to have five. The different Parties could settle beforehand the Members whom they thought ought to serve on a Committee. The service of independent Members on Standing Committees ought not to be a matter settled exclusively by a Committee of Selection, for such Committees often put independent Members with special knowledge aside in order to secure the services of official or ex-official Gentlemen. Scandal had more than once been caused by the present mode of nominating Committees. For example, on the Railway Pates Committee there were seven Railway Directors nominated by the two Whips. As the formation of that Committee amounted practically to an assignment of some of the Railway Companies, these Directors were placed in the position of judges in their own case. There was another objection to the proposal to allow Grand Committees to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. Select Committees nominated by that Committee went through the clauses of a Bill, and afterwards those very clauses could be considered and revised in Committee of the Whole House. In the case of Standing Committees, however, that would not be so; and, therefore, it was very necessary that they should be nominated in such a way as would give general satisfaction to the House. If the proposal of the Government were not changed, a very serious conflict would take place next Session about the composition of the Committee of Selection. At this advanced period of the 502 Session he did not consider it necessary to enter upon any further explanation of the views he held on this subject; but in the interest of private and independent Members he pressed his Amendment upon the consideration of the House.
§
Amendment proposed,
In line 1, to leave out from the words "consist of," to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "forty Members who shall be elected by the whole House by ballot in manner hereinafter prescribed:—
—instead thereof.
§ Question proposed, "That the words 'not less than' stand part of the Question."
§ MR. WHITBREADsaid, that, after the pointed way in which he had been alluded to by the noble Lord, he desired to offer a few observations, so as to clear the ground before they entered upon the discussion as to the best mode of nominating Grand Committees. The noble Lord had mixed up two subjects which were essentially different—namely, the appointment of Select Committees by the House and the appointment of Select Committees by the Committee of Selection. If Select Committees appointed by the House often contained rather a large proportion of official or 503 ex-official Members, the reason was that the Members interested in the questions to be referred to the Committees were generally extremely anxious to have upon those Committees the Gentlemen of the greatest experience and weight in the House. That was why the same names were so often found among the Members of Committees appointed by the House. In the case of Committees appointed by the Committee of Selection, the practice to which he had referred was not so prevalent. He congratulated the noble Lord upon the fact that he and the hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst) had made up thir minds as to which way the wind blew. A short time back the noble Lord told the House that the Members of a Committee of Selection were not sufficiently Party men. A few moments afterwards the hon. and learned Gentleman said that the Members were nominees of the two Front Benches. It would have been as reasonable for the hon. and learned Gentleman to say that a lawyer when he took his seat upon the Bench was a nominee of the Crown. There was nothing so terrible to him about being a nominee of the Front Bench, if he had been one. But if both Front Benches were to combine to interfere with the free and independent action of the Committee of Selection, he had no doubt that the House generally would stand by its Committee. The Committee of Selection was composed of six Gentlemen chosen from different parts of the House, and Party feeling was excluded. The right hon. Baronet (Sir John Mowbray), who presided over that Committee, had been an opponent of the Liberal Party for a vast number of years; but he could pledge himself that he never saw the slightest taint of Party spirit in the discharge of the right hon. Baronet's duties. It was clear that duties of the kind confided to it could not be performed by that Committee if partizanship entered it. The noble Lord must have forgotten that when Members were appointed by the House with a distinct commission and a distinct charge, they met with a loyal determination to do their duty. The noble Lord proposed that the different sections of the House should combine to appoint their proper quota. But how were those sections to be found? How would they guard against having an undue propor- 504 tion of those dreadful people, the Railway Directors? They might have too many Railway Directors or lawyers, or even possibly brewers. The noble Lord said that the task of the Committee of Selection was an invidious one. He agreed in that with the noble Lord. No doubt the questions they had to deal with were very delicate, and the number of threads to be woven so great that they threatened entanglement every moment. The task was of a sort which no one would desire for himself. It brought no laurels with success, and failure would be attended with disgrace. But, though he never minimized the difficulties of the task, there were considerations on the other side. The House itself recognized the difficulties of the task, and would give a generous interpretation to what was done by the Committee. It seemed to be one of the happy fruits of Parliamentary Government in England that they could draw upon a large store of patriotism, not of a brilliant kind, but of a homely order, and not less worthy in the end.
§ MR. RAIKESsaid, that his hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread) had well and justly vindicated the character of the Committee of Selection, and he was sure the House would agree with all his hon. Friend had said with regard to that body. But the hon. Gentleman had not taken quite so wide a view of the question raised by the Amendment as he might have done. Because the noble Lord had come forward with an alternative plan, he opened the door to the consideration of various alternative plans which the hon. Gentleman had not referred to. For instance, Standing Committees might be proposed upon the Motion of an individual Member in the way that Select Committees on public questions were formed, or they might be constituted by comparing particular Members who took a special interest in particular questions, or represented constituencies which did, and wore, anxious to give their services in the Committees. Therefore, it was not merely a question between the proposal of the Government and the Amendment of his noble Friend; the question was, whether the House would do well to consider whether either of these proposals contained the best solution of a very difficult and perplexing question. One alter- 505 native he should be anxious to dismiss at once—namely, that any of these Committees should be formed on the initiative of an individual Member; which, of course, meant an arrangement between the Government and some private Member. He had had some experience, and he believed that of all the bad ways which could be conceived, the very worst was that arrived at by the Secretary to the Treasury on the one side, and the ex-Secretary to the Treasury on the other, proposing a list of Members. Of Hybrid Committees, some Members of which were appointed by the Committee of Selection and others by the House, he was bound to say that while the Committee of Selection always appeared to choose the very best Members available, these were supplemented by Gentlemen suggested on one side or the other whom it was more desirable to keep out of the Committee. Reference had been made to the Railway Committee of the year before last. He had not at that time the honour of a seat in the House; but he saw the list of that Committee with feelings of astonishment, and feared that the result of their deliberations would not be satisfactory. The composition of that Committee could barely have commended itself to the House or the country, although, thanks to the Committee of Selection, or for some other reason, the undesirable elements were neutralized, and the result was better than might have been expected. It seemed to him, if the Committee of Selection had the sole right to arrange the composition of the Grand Committees, that it would probably place nearly all the lawyers in the House on legal Committees, and would have to risk the constant absence of lawyers in practice, while the work would be done by men less eminent in their Profession. And in the same way with regard to trade, it would be found that the great merchants would usually be unable to attend. If, however, the plan were adopted of allowing Members to volunteer their services, much valuable assistance would be obtained. An hon. Member, for instance, representing a manufacturing borough, might not be himself a manufacturer; but, being necessarily in close communication with great manufacturers, he would be able to render better services to the Committee than men who were too busy to attend, or who had something else to occupy them. 506 These were some of the difficulties of dealing with this question. The Government proposal, though it was susceptible of much improvement, would, he hoped, succeed. At any rate, it was the most practical of the proposals before the House. It should be borne in mind that, like the rest of their scheme, it was purely experimental, and that the House did not bind itself not to reconsider the whole subject, if the arrangement was found not to work out for the best interests of the country.
§ SIR CHARLES FORSTERsaid, it was not his intention to enter into a vindication of the Committee of Selection after the remarks of his hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread); and he was content, indeed, to leave to the judgment of the House the manner in which it performed its duties. The noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill), however, had done him the honour to refer to him, and he desired to say a few words on the remarks he had made. The noble Lord said on Monday last that he was not a fair Representative of the advanced views of the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) and his Home Rule Friends; and only that evening he said he was connected by such peculiar ties with the Treasury Bench that he should have no confidence in any decision he might come to. In reply to those remarks, he could tell the noble Lord he denied he was subject to any influence that would prevent him doing his duty. The noble Lord was a young Member of the House, and had yet to learn, perhaps, that the first duty of Members of the Committee of Selection was not to this Bench nor to that Bench. It was not to Party; it was to the House itself. The one consideration that influenced that Committee was to appoint Committees the best qualified for the work which they had to perform.
§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDsaid, that great practical difficulties were involved in the proposal of the noble Lord. A proposal that altogether failed to maintain the relative strength of Parties on the Committee was not likely to result in an equitable selection.
§ COLONEL MAKINSsaid, he was bound to protest against the remark of the noble Lord that the composition of the Select Committee on Railways amounted to a public scandal. He was not a 507 Member of that Committee; but be did not think it right that such a statement should go forth to the country unchallenged. In his (Colonel Makins') opinion, if several Railway Directors bad not been on that Committee, and if, so to speak, the incriminated parties bad not been represented, the whole object of the Committee would have been frustrated. As this was a difficult question, perhaps it would be better to give the plan of the Government a trial than to attempt to elaborate a plan which would give all sections of the House a voice in the constitution of the Committees.
§ MR. DODSONsaid, he could assure the House that the Government cordially concurred in the view which had been expressed by the right hon. Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Raikes); they recognized that this was an experiment, which they asked the House to try. The noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill) had, in a clear and interesting manner, proposed an ingenious and elaborate scheme, the merits of which he would abstain from discussing only because he gathered that the noble Lord was not inclined to press it at present. He could assure the House that the Government had proposed this particular scheme for the appointment of these Committees because the machinery was one which the House was fully acquainted with, and that the Committee of Selection were quite competent to perform the duties which would be placed upon them. He had never heard of any complaint against the Committee of Selection.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLThey only selected Private Committees.
§ MR. DODSONThey did very much more than that. They selected Members for the Hybrid Committees, and were not unfrequently requested to add Members on other Committees. He believed that, however much Members might be at times partizans when they were selected to act in a quasi- judicial capacity, they, like most of their countrymen, subordinated their partizanship and performed their duties well and efficiently. As, however, he gathered that it was not the desire of the noble Lord to press his Amendment, he would not detain the House any longer.
§ MR. SEXTONsaid, that, when he first read the plan of the noble Lord, he 508 thought it a great improvement on that of the Government, and his opinion had not been altered by what he bad now heard. The condemnation by the right hon. Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Raikes) of the plan pursued in the constitution of Select Committees was a healthy contribution to the formation of public opinion. Experience did not seem to dim the original freshness of the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread) if he supposed the House would support the Committee of Selection against the two Front Benches. The Government had been unhappy in their choice of a number in the constitution of a Grand Committee; it was too large for a Committee and toe small for a Parliament. But the noble Lord had made a happier choice, for 40 was a quorum of the House; and if that number was large enough for the transaction of the Business of the House, surely it ought to be large enough for a Committee. Then it was better that the whole House should elect a Committee than that it should be constituted by a method which would give the Government power without responsibility. It seemed to be the policy of the Government to shift from itself the responsibility for public acts. The action of the Committee of Selection could not meet with universal approval, and he would rather that the Committees should be openly nominated by the Government on their own responsibility. The nomination of Committees so important as these would be should not be placed in the hands of six Gentlemen who were practically officials. The Irish Party was unrepresented amongst these six Gentlemen; and, indeed, there was only one of them who represented an Irish constituency. He considered that the scheme of election by ballot, as proposed by the noble Lord, would be far superior to the proposal of the Government, because it would enable hon. Members to vote for the men they thought best without fear or favour.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFsaid, he thought that the proposal of his noble Friend had been dismissed rather summarily by the President of the Local Government Board. He submitted that in a Committee of 40 they could carry on the Business before them in a better manner—in a more conversational mode—than if it consisted of 80 or more. 509 He had nothing to say against the Committee of Selection, and he had a high respect for the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread)—its moving spirit; but heretofore the principal duties of the Committee of Selection had been to select the Committees which examined Private Bills, as to which there was no Party question; and although they would, no doubt, endeavour to separate themselves from any political bias, yet a political element did enter into those Grand Committees, which could not enter into Private Bill Committees. The great point, however, now to be borne in mind was that, by the creation of those Grand Committees, they were really parting with a portion of their legislative functions. Instead of hon. Members themselves discussing as heretofore, everyone for his constituency, matters of detail connected with particular classes of Bills, they were practically delegating that duty to Grand Committees, and those Grand Committees they were not to elect themselves, but their election was to be intrusted to the Committee of Selection, so that, in fact, there would be in that case a double process of delegation. Therefore, he thought it would be better if the election were made by the House instead of by the Committee of Selection, because it should be remembered that they were not only parting with their rights, but relinquishing a portion of their duties. Although the proposal of the Government was an experimental one and confined merely to the next Session, by the end of which the House would probably be able to judge how the plan worked, he must protest against the relinquishment by the House and by Members of the House of any part of their duties. It was their duty to examine Bills in their details as well as in their principles, and they appeared to be giving up an important part of that duty by delegating to a very small portion of the House the choice of those who were to exercise functions which they were sent there to discharge, and which often seriously affected the best interests of their constituents.
§ MR. RYLANDSsaid, he thought that if the proposal of the Government were one of a permanent character, there might have been great force in the ingenious speech of the noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph 510 Churchill); and in supporting their scheme he desired to guard himself by doing so entirely on the ground which the Government themselves had taken. They did not pretend that it was a perfectly thought out scheme, but rather regarded it as a somewhat crude and undigested proposal which they placed on the Table, in order that the House, by experience of its working in the next Session, might be able to determine whether it should be got rid of altogether, or should be further developed. He did not disguise that the scheme of the Government in its present shape was open to serious question. The duties of the Committee of Selection had hitherto been of a very formal and limited character, as compared with those now about to be cast upon them; and unless they exercised very great caution in selecting the Grand Committees, the decisions of the Grand Committees would not command the confidence of the House, and a great deal of the time of the House would be occupied on Report. He had every respect for the Committee of Selection; but he was afraid they were imposing on them an almost impossible task, and he believed that the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread) thought so himself. While he looked on the scheme of the Government, therefore, with grave doubts, he still held their objects to be most desirable; and, if they could, by the division of labour, secure greater efficiency in the House as an instrument of legislation, a very great advantage would be gained for the country.
§ MR. WARTONsaid, he was persuaded that the scheme of the Government would not work satisfactorily. It was quite clear that the Government could not have contemplated the operation of the 8th Resolution. Not having heard from them that even a day's notice was to be given, he would like some assurance from the Government that an adequate notice was contemplated.
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, in reference to the question of notice, he did not think any matter was likely to escape the vigilance of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Warton). He thought, however, the matter was deserving of consideration. With regard to the plan of the noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill), he observed that it closely 511 resembled one proposed by Mr. Frederic Harrison in the January number, of The Nineteenth, Century. It was a plan which had a good deal to recommend it; and in the event of the proposal of the Government proving unsuccessful, he thought the plan of the noble Lord might then come in for consideration as an alternative plan. No doubt, the Government might have to consider the question of electing Members of the Committees, for they might find that five or six Members who were considered by the House the most eligible persons for serving upon a certain Committee had received all the votes, thereby obliging the Government to suggest that hon. Members should vote for such and such a man—a species of caucusing the House which they had no desire to practise. At the same time, the plan proposed by the Government had been resorted to with advantage by the House, even when matters of great delicacy were concerned. It was clear, however, that such an Amendment as that of the noble Lord, involving a large amount of consideration, could not, at what he hoped was the supreme hour of Parliament, be accepted.
MR. GORSTsaid, he must dissent from the view of the Home Secretary, that the hour was a supreme one, because there remained on the Paper three Resolutions and a number of Amendments. He must confess he was astonished at the great contrast between the glowing speech of the Prime Minister, who introduced the Resolution, and the miserable manner in which the discussion was being carried on by a House rapidly dwindling away. He did not often compliment the Home Secretary; but he must, on that occasion, pay him the compliment of being the only Member of the Government who had given a reason for objecting to the Amendment—though he was bound to add that that reason was a very bad one. He was surprised at the extraordinary shyness exhibited by the right hon. and learned Gentleman at the idea of the Caucus; and he might point out to him that the present scheme secured to so small a number as 10 Members a Representative upon any Committee. Of course, if any Party in the House was so small that it could not muster more than six or five or four Members, it would not be able to do so. It did not follow that, because 512 hon. Members were qualified to serve on Select Committees, they would necessarily be fitted to serve on these Standing Committees. He was afraid that the great and grand view entertained of these Grand Committees by the Prime Minister when he first laid this scheme before the House was no longer believed in either by himself or his followers. The Grand Committees had lost all their grandeur, and were now nothing more than large Select Committees. Indeed, the Prime Minister seemed to think that it had been a mistake to keep the House together so long for the purpose of considering this part of his proposal, and he now asked them to adopt the proposal, as a sort of experiment, exactly in the form in which it was made by the Government. He was afraid that, when they met again next Session, they would have all their work to do over again.
§ COLONEL NOLANpointed out that, whereas it was absolutely necessary to have impartial Members placed on Private Committees, it would be necessary to have interested Members placed on these large Standing Committees, which would be political bodies. He was afraid that the scheme of the Government would entirely change the manner of the election of Committees, and small Parties of the House would be entirely thrown over by the Committee of Selection.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. NORWOODsaid, he begged to move an Amendment, providing that, though the Committee of Selection should be charged with the selection of the Grand Committees, they should submit their nominations to the House for adoption by Motion in the usual way. He thought it was important that the House should not lose its control over the constitution of the Committees.
§
Amendment proposed,
In line 2, to leave out the word "nominated," and insert the words "selected and submitted by Motion to the House,"—(Mr. Norwood,)
—instead thereof.
§ Question proposed, "That the word 'nominated' stand part of the Question."
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the Government were unable to ac- 513 cept the Amendment. The effect would be that they would have interminable debates on the appointments to these Committees.
§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, that, while sympathizing with the object the hon. Member had in view, he agreed with the noble Marquess that it would be impossible to accept the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. STANLEY LEIGHTONbegged to move, in line 2, after "Members," to insert "who shall not be capable of voting unless they have been present during the whole of the discussion."
§ [The Amendment, not being seconded, could not be put.]
§
Amendments made, in line 5, by leaving out the words "add and;" and in line 6, by leaving out from the word "time," to the end of the Question, and by adding the words—
And to appoint others in substitution for those so discharged. The Committee of Selection shall also have power to add not more than fifteen Members to a Standing Committee in respect of any Bill referred to it to serve on the Committee during the consideration of such Bill,"—(The Marquess of Hartington,)
—instead thereof.
§
Amendment proposed,
At the end of the Question, to add the words "and such Members shall be relieved from attendance on Private Bill Committees, and on Select Committees, so long as they shall continue to servo on a Standing Committee."—(Mr. William Henry Smith.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONthought it would be much better to leave the question to the Committee of Selection.
§ MR. WHITBREADsaid, he considered that great inconvenience would arise from a hard-and-fast line of this sort.
§ MR. DODSONsaid, he thought they might leave it to the Committee of Selection to arrange that the duties of Members on different Committees would not clash with each other.
§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsuggested that words should be inserted to carry out that idea.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
514
§
Main Question, as amended, put.
(2.) Resolved, That each of the said Standing Committees do consist of not less than sixty, nor more than eighty, Members, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, who shall have regard to the classes of Bills committed to such Committees, to the composition of the House, and to the qualifications of the Members selected; and shall have power to discharge Members from time to time, and to appoint others in substitution for those so discharged. The Committee of Selection shall also have power to add not more than fifteen Members to a Standing Committee in respect of any Bill referred to it to serve on the Committee during the consideration of such Bill.