HC Deb 17 August 1883 vol 283 cc1087-90

(41.) £4,000, Supplementary, Royal Palaces.

(42.) £4,895, Supplementary, Houses of Parliament.

(43.) £5,323, Supplementary, Harbours under the Board of Trade.

(44.) £500, Supplementary, House of Commons Offices.

MR. SHEIL

said, he thought the Committee were entitled to some explanation of this Vote. He protested against the charge of £500 if it related to the Kitchen Department.

LORD KENSINGTON

said, he regretted the absence of the right hon. Gentleman the Chairman of the Kitchen Committee on that occasion; but would himself endeavour to give an account of the circumstances which had led to the present Supplementary Vote being presented. It had been alleged that during the course of last Session the receipts of the contractors had greatly fallen off, and that they were, in consequence, out of pocket by the arrangement into which they had entered. A Sub-Committee was appointed, who went into the contractors' accounts; and, after a full and careful investigation of the whole matter, they reported that there was a serious loss. That loss was considered to be due to two causes. In the first place, the great number of Morning Sittings which were held last Session had largely decreased the number of dinners sent down; and, secondly, the extra accommodation provided in the Dining Room and new Smoking Room had necessitated the employment of a larger staff of attendants. The Committee, under the circumstances, recommended that the extra sum of £500 should be granted to the contractor. The Committee had issued two Reports on the subject, one in August last year, in which they said that a large increase of expense had been entailed on the contractor, although they made no recommendation; the other at the commencement of the present Session, in which there was a recommendation for this increased grant. He begged to assure hon. Members that the Kitchen Committee had gone carefully into the whole subject, and in this they were greatly assisted by the Sub-Committee to which he had alluded. He might just mention, in connection with the first cause of the deficiency—namely, the falling-off in the number of dinners consequent upon the Morning Sittings—that whereas the number of dinners supplied in 1881 was 10,500, it fell in 1882 to 6,100, and again in the present year to 5,600, the luncheons served having been on the same diminishing scale. He believed that several hon. Members would bear him out in the expression of his personal opinion that the amount of the proposed grant would barely cover the loss incurred by the contractors.

MR. CAINE

asked if the whole refreshment department of the House came within the statement of the noble Lord?

LORD KENSINGTON

replied, that it related to the refreshments served in all the saloons, and at the bars up-

MR. CAINE

said, he thought the sooner the House took the matter into its own hands the better. If they did so, there would be a saving of money, and a lower tariff than there was at present. It was most objectionable that Members should have to pay 9d. for a cup of tea that they could get in any club-house for 4d. He should feel it his duty, on another occasion, to move the reduction of the Vote.

Vote agreed, to.

MR. SHEIL

said, he begged to second the Motion of the hon. Member opposite.

MR. COURTNEY

said, the hon. Gentleman had not moved.

MR. SHEIL

said, he had understood the hon. Member to move the rejection of the Vote. He entirely agreed with the view taken of this question by the hon. Member, who had expressed a great deal of what he himself had intended to say. He brought no charge against the Kitchen Committee, nor did he wish to make any against the contractor, who, he was willing to admit, had done his duty towards the House; but he contended that, in view of the large allowance received and the high prices charged, the profits must be considerable. He understood the noble Lord to say that the Chairman of the Sub-Committee was not present; and, that being so, hon. Members were left practically in the dark as to how the Sub-Committee had been guided to the conclusion they had arrived at.

LORD KENSINGTON

I think I stated that the Sub-Committee made a most careful investigation of the whole matter, the contractor's books having been examined.

MR. SHEIL

said, it was unfortunate that the Chairman of the Sub-Committee was not present, because the noble Lord was not as well acquainted with the facts as the Committee would have liked. He pointed out that in the case of all the Select Committees of the House a shorthand writer was employed, who took down everything that was said, and from his notes a Report was made to the House, which was then able to form its own opinion. He thought the same plan should have been adopted in the present instance. They were told by the noble Lord that the contractor's accounts were examined; but there was nothing to show that the accounts had been properly kept. He begged to move the rejection of the Vote.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, that the Motion could not be put, as the Vote had been passed. The hon. Member could move on Report.

MR. SHEIL

said he would avail himself of the opportunity suggested by the Chairman.