REVENUE DEPARTMENTS. (Hansard, 6 September 1887)

§ MR. SEXTON
I hope the Government will not proceed with this Vote to-night. I have a most important question with reference to the constituency which I represent, which cannot be properly discussed at this hour.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, 1485 Westminster)
I hope the hon. Member will allow us to proceed. If we cannot conclude these Votes to-night the close of the Session will be delayed, and I do not think he desires that. We will endeavour to give the hon. Gentleman an answer to all the questions he may wish to raise with reference to the constituency he represents. I do not think it advisable that we should postpone this Vote, although the hour is undoubtedly late.

MR. HUNTER
If that is so, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will say that the Scotch Bills on the Order Paper will not be taken to-night, so that the Scotch Members may not have to wait in vain.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
Yes, Sir. They will not be taken to-night.

§ MR. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.:)
I should like to remark, in corroboration of what my hon. Friend (Mr. Sexton) has said, that I also have an important question to bring forward on this Vote. It affects the tobacco roll industry, to which a great injustice has been done by the action of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

§ MR. JACKSON
Considering the period of the Session, I think we might discuss both these questions. I hope now that we are so near the end of the Civil Service Votes we shall be allowed to make progress with them, and conclude them.

§ MR. SHAW LEFEVRE (Bradford, Central)
If the Vote were taken to-night, could not some opportunity be given on Report for the discussion of those subjects?

§ MR. JACKSON
Certainly.

§ MR. CLANCY
I have to draw attention to the case of the roll-tobacco manufacture in Ireland—one of the few important and successful industries in Ireland now remaining—against which a blow has been recently struck by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. What opportunities shall we have if we give up our chances now? Will the Government say that the Report of this Vote will not be taken in the few minutes at the end of to-morrow's Sitting?

§ MR. SEXTON
The question whether we shall discuss now these two points— the question of my hon. Friend (Mr. Clancy), affecting a very important industry in Ireland, and my own question, relating to the commerce of the City which I have the honour to repre- 1486 sent—must be determined by the nature of the subsequent opportunities which will be afforded to us. Unless we have some guarantee that the Report of this Vote will not be taken at the end of tomorrow's Sitting, or at such an hour on Thursday as will render discussion impossible, I think it is better to proceed at once.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
There will be two opportunities, and if the first is not sufficient for the hon. Member's purpose he may avail himself of the second. First, there will be the opportunity afforded on the consideration of the Report of the Supply Resolution; and if he objects to that being taken to-morrow, why then it may stand over to Thursday. Further than that, there will be full opportunity upon the Appropriation Bill, on the three stages of which he may raise questions.

§ MR. SEXTON
The discussion on the Appropriation Bill may be taken up for other purposes. I will ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will give an undertaking that the Report of Supply shall be taken on Thursday at an hour convenient for discussion?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
I will make the best arrangement in my power. The hon. Member will follow me when I say that the arrangements are that the Civil Service Votes shall be taken this evening, the Navy Votes to-morrow, and the remaining Army Votes on Thursday. When these are disposed of the Report will be taken; it is quite impossible to say whether at an early hour; but I hope the hon. Member will find the opportunity he desires.

§ MR. SEXTON
I shall be satisfied if the Secretary to the Treasury will consider the question of the Fort of Belfast in the meanwhile.

§ MR. JACKSON
Certainly. I may say that I have considered it, and I have furnished the hon. Member with Returns and statistics upon which he probably founds his case, and I shall be prepared to answer that when I hear it.

§ MR. CONYBEARE
Is it settled that the Indian Budget will be taken on Friday or Saturday?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
I have already answered the hon. Member for Northampton. If by good fortune we finish the Estimates to-morrow, then the Indian Budget will be taken on Thursday, if not on Friday.

§ SIR RICHARD TEMPLE (Worcester, Evesham)
I suppose there is practically no chance of it being taken on Thursday?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
I am not sanguine, Sir.

MR; CLANCY
I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will undertake to be in the House when the question in reference to tobacco is raised?

§ MR. GOSCHEN
Yes, Sir. I am generally in the House when any question affecting my Department is raised.

§ MR. SEXTON
I would ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the scheme of re-organization in regard to out-door assistants has come into operation? Communications have been made to me by various persons disclosing the fact that very keen dissatisfaction is felt with the scheme. Up to a recent period promotion to the rank of "ride" officer was obtained after four or five years' service. It is now calculated that, inconsequence of the increase in the lower class of assistants and the decrease in the upper, the rate of promotion will be greatly reduced. I am given to understand that two years ago an assistant from the second class would reach the position of "ride" officer after an average of four or five years' service; but now that the numbers of the upper class are reduced to 70, and the lower class to 800, the higher position is not reached for 10 years. The question I ask is, are you going to offer any compensation, by higher salary or otherwise, on this account. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that among the 800 there is grave dissatisfaction, I might almost say despair, felt at the breakdown of their prospect of promotion; and it is a serious question, well worth consideration, whether some compensation should be given to the lower class, to place them in as good a position as they expected to hold when they joined the Public Service.

§ MR. JACKSON
No doubt there is always considerable disappointment felt on the part of every individual who occupies a position on the Establishment when for any reason changes are made in the Department detrimental to his prospects of promotion. But I am sure the hon. 1488 Member would not desire that the administration of the Public Service should be carried on simply for the convenience of those who occupy posts therein if, by reason of improved organization, their numbers are largely increased. It is clearly the duty of those in charge to carry out the organization. It is an essential part of the scheme that, concurrently with the reduction in numbers, there has been an increase in the work thrown upon some, giving them larger areas, and it is part of the scheme to improve the salaries of men of all grades who may remain in the Service. But I will make further inquiries and acquaint myself with the facts, and I believe I shall be able to show that the question has been very carefully considered, and that an essential part of the scheme of the Treasury is to improve the salaries.

§ MR. SEXTON
Of course, I agree that the Public Service should be conducted with the greatest amount of economy compatible with efficiency; but when a man by exceptional education prepares himself and joins the Service upon a certain condition of things, and with reasonable hope of promotion within a given time, and you suddenly spring a system of re-organization that increases the number of lower places and decreases the number in the higher, he has some cause for complaint, and the Government would do well to ease the dissatisfaction that exists, if there is ground for it.

§ MR. GOSCHEN
Certainly, it cannot be said that this scheme of re-organization has been sprung upon them. The re-organization of the Department has been for a long time under consideration. I entirely agree that every effort should be made to satisfy public servants side by side with economical and efficient administration. Certainly, I was under the impression that the scheme did not cause dissatisfaction, and it was suggested by hon. Members interested in the Service. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government do attach great importance to the contentment of its public servants.