COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 25 July 1887)

§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)
In deference to the wish of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian, I did not press my opposition to this Resolution on a former occasion, and I do not intend to move the adjournment now; but I do want to know, if we allow the Speaker to leave the Chair, shall we be allowed to report Progress immediately? Will the Government insist most unreasonably in taking the two stages now? The proposal is to enable the Government to pay certain charges out of the public funds for the payment of assistants of the County Court Judges in reference to the Bankruptcy Clauses of the Land Act before we know what the scope of the proposed changes in that Bill are to be. Why should we be called upon to make provision for these changes in respect to the administration of the Bankruptcy Clauses when, as we understand, those clauses are to be dropped? Can the Government give us any reason for this? They sometimes have reasons, though they do not always remove our objections, and if they will state them I will not persist in my opposition; but I cannot understand their reason for obtaining power to provide the salaries of officials whom they are not going to appoint.

§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON) (Leeds, N.)
It was explained a few days ago by the Leader of the House, and also by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian, that unless this Resolution is taken it is quite impossible to deal with any clause in Committee which relates to or affects the expenditure of public money in any degree. It is not only in regard to the salaries to which the hon. and learned Gentleman refers; but no charge could be made under the provisions of the Bill. As a matter of fact, and as the Chairman of Committees would point out, the Committee would be unable to proceed with the consideration of any clause that involved expenditure unless the House had passed this Resolution. It may be remembered that on one occasion proceedings in 2008 Committee had to be stopped because the Committee came to a clause involving expenditure for which preparation had not been made by such a Resolution as this.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
My point is this. If you are going to drop the Bankruptcy Clauses, why proceed with this, which is to provide for assistance to County Court Judges?

§ MR. JACKSON
If the clauses are dropped after this Resolution is taken that will not affect the case at all. Except you pass this Resolution you cannot deal with the clauses in Committee, while, if the clauses drop, then the Resolution drops with it. The question of the retention of the clauses in the Bill is not affected in any way, while you cannot deal with the clauses at all, even by omitting them, without such a stage as this. I am sure every hon. Member of experience in these matters will agree that the Resolution is both reasonable and necessary.