CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY (CONTRACT). (Hansard, 16 August 1889)

* MR. PROVAND&c) (Glasgow, Blackfriars,

I regret that the House should be called upon at this time of the night, and at this period of the Session, to consider this important contract. The House itself is thin, and Members are exhausted. Of course Government can at such a time invariably command a majority, consequently a contract of this nature never receives adequate consideration. It is brought up in accordance with the Standing Order which requires that the approval of this House should be given to these contracts. I am not making complaint particularly against this Government, because ever since this Standing Order was passed, all Governments have acted in precisely the same way. Now this contract is for a fortnightly service between Canada, China, and Japan, 1585 and it is to cost us £60,000 a year. Perhaps, taking it altogether, there is more to be said in its favour and less against it than could have been said of any other contract which has been before the House in recent years. Two years ago there was a contract approved by this House which gave the P. & O. Company a sum of £265,000 a year, for ten years, for carrying the mails to India and China—the service to be a weekly one to India and a fortnightly one to China. Now, dividing this subsidy in proportion to mileage, this would give a cost of £129,000 for the Indian Service, and of £136,000 for the China Service. I pointed out at that time that £136,000 was an excessive sum to pay for carrying the mails to Hong Kong, because a much better and cheaper service could be had by way of Calcutta. I also drew the attention of the House to the fact that this very mail service, the contract for which is now before us, could be conducted much more rapidly for correspondence to China and Japan than by the P. and O. route. The House may remember that the P. & O. Company are only paid to carry the mails to Hong Kong, nevertheless a large quantity of correspondence has to go through to Shanghai and the Northern parts of China, as well as to Japan. Now, I should like to refer to some information which the Secretary to the Treasury in reply to a question last night gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy in reference to the time occupied by these various routes. He said that the mails to Hong Kong, if sent by the P. & O. Company, over what is called the Eastern route, occupied a period in the sending, ranging from 32½ days to 37½ days, or an average of 35 days, while by the Western route the fastest time would be 34 days and the longest 36 days, which also gives an average of 35 days. But to Shanghai, the Eastern route occupies 37½ days at the shortest, and 42½ at the longest; whereas by the Western route the shortest time was 30½ days and the longest 32½ days, thereby giving a saving of from seven to ten days by this route as compared with the P. & O. Company's route. In reference to Yokohama, the saving was even greater, for it amounted to from 15 to 18 days in favour of the Western route. The 1586 P. & O. Company are only paid for carrying correspondence to Hong Kong, but of course a large correspondence is carried which goes on to Shanghai and Yokohama, and for which the Post Office is paid, notwithstanding which there is a heavy loss to our Post Office in connection with this service, because the amount received for postage is nothing like the sum which the Post Office has to pay for the service. When this proposed new contract comes into force, the loss will be very much increased, because a great deal of the correspondence which now goes by the Eastern route will be transferred to the Pacific route. This will be especially the case with correspondence to Shanghai and to Japan. Indeed, a great deal of the work, which the Peninsular and Oriental Company are now receiving $136,000 a year to perform, will be transferred to the new route, for which we are to pay a sum of £45,000 per annum. I have felt it my duty to draw the attention of the House to this matter. I have made no statement of facts about which there can be no dispute. I have merely quoted the reply of the Secretary to the Treasury given last night to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy. I know that in these days there is a tendency to meet statements of this kind by mere contradictions; because as these contracts are not considered in Committee, there is no opportunity for after restatement and proof; but I venture to say that it is impossible for the Government to contradict the statements which I have made. I do not intend to divide the House on this question, and will content myself by giving notice that I intend next Session to place a Motion on the Paper with reference to contracts of this kind, with a view of having them referred to a Select Committee before they are finally accepted by the Treasury, and thus we may relieve the House of the responsibility which now falls upon it.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy)

I entirely disapprove of this contract. I think it is most extravagant and unnecessary. You have already a perfectly good service, and I do not think we want any fresh arrangement. It seems to me that this contract is the 1587 result of pressure which has been brought to bear upon the Government with the view of securing additional traffic for this Canadian Pacific route. I think my hon. Friend was in error when he spoke of it as a fortnightly service. I find on reference to the contract that the sum of £60,000 is to be paid for a monthly mail service to China and Japan, and therefore I am induced to assert that it is the most extravagant contract which the Post Office has ever yet made. Regarding the time which will be occupied by the alternative routes, I think the Secretary to the Treasury must have considerably stretched the matter in favour of the Western route. If he will look at the date at which the Peninsular and Oriental Company have bound themselves to deliver the mail at Hong Kong and Shanghai, I think he will find that I am correct in this suggestion. I fancy, also, that he has only allowed five and a half days for the carriage of the mails across the Atlantic, and he has not taken into consideration the stoppages which are likely to occur there. In fact, to my mind, if this contract is to be carried out in the time he has suggested, it will involve the establishment of a regular service across the Atlantic in connection with it. No doubt the quicker service to Japan will be a considerable advantage, but, after all, it is a comparatively small service, and certainly not worth while our paying £45,000 a year for it. As regards China you have an alternative route for mails, and I do not think you will get them carried a bit quicker than you do now by the Peninsular and Oriental Company. I know we have been told that this new route will be of advantage to us for naval and military purposes, but I ask where does this advantage come in, unless, indeed, we propose to invade Japan, which I hope we shall never attempt? A suggestion has also been made that it affords an alternative route to India. I deny that there would be any advantage in that respect. I think that so long as we retain command of the seas we shall find that the route we possess around the Cape of Good Hope will perfectly well meet all our requirements, and it is utterly absurd and ridiculous to suppose that we should ever require to send 1588 our troops by this new Western route. I think the manner in which this contract has been pressed upon the acceptance of the Government constitutes a great abuse of the Forms of the House, and I think it is also an equal abuse that at this late hour of the night, when we have a rule which stops ordinary business at 12 o'clock, we should be enabled to vote away the money of the nation. We know it is quite impossible to fully discuss these matters at this period of the night, and I desire to enter my very strong protest against the course which has been taken by the Government. I hold this route to be totally unnecessary. We know it is not required for postal purposes; and for naval and military purposes I contend it would be utterly useless, unless we ever intend to invade China and Japan, and that I hope we never shall do.