HC Deb 30 July 1889 vol 338 cc1722-5

Order for Committee read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Order for Committee be discharged, and that the Bill be committed to the Standing Committee on Trade, &c."—(Mr. Arthur Balfour.)

MR. STOREY

I did not understand that this proposal would be made tonight, or I might have spent a little more time in discussing other matters. I did hear the Chief Secretary say the other day that he proposed to move the discharge of the Order, in order that the Bill might be sent to the Grand Committee, but to that course a considerable number of hon. Members on this side of the House entertain strong objection; and I did hope that as we have now by the magnanimous course we have pursued provided time for the Government this afternoon, they would at once have proceeded to consider this Bill in Committee of the Whole House. That is what we think ought to be done in the case of a Bill of this nature. It is not the kind of measure which ought to be sent to a Grand Committee, because it deals with large sums of public money, which it is deliberately proposed to give away, and it raises questions which are seriously contested by a considerable section of the House. Everybody knows that the Bill proposes to hand over £600,000 to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Board of Works, and the Treasury, for the purpose of expending that money in Ireland—where and how we know not.

* MR. SPEAKER

I must remind the hon. Gentleman that the only Question before the House is whether the Order for the committal of the Bill shall be discharged, and the Bill referred to the Grand Committee on Trade.

MR. STOREY

I bow to your ruling, Sir. I will only say that I think it has always been the practice of this House, whenever a Bill of a contentious character, or raising large questions of public policy, has been introduced to consider it in Committee of the Whole House, and not to refer it to a Grand Committee. If the Government persist in their Motion, I shall certainly take the liberty of resisting it.

* THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH,) Strand, Westminster

Notice was given of this Motion some time ago, and no serious objection was taken at the time, provided hon. Gentlemen interested and Irish Members were added to the Grand Committee by the Committee of Selection for the purpose of considering the Bill. The principle of the Bill has been affirmed by the House, and it is such a measure as can be more usefully considered by a Standing Committee than by a Committee of the Whole House. I think the course proposed to be taken is not only in accord with the practice of the House, but with the feeling of hon. Members who desire that the question should be dealt with fully and fairly.

* MR. W. P. SINCLAIR (Falkirk Burghs)

I think that the experience of those who have served on the Grand Committees would bear out the admirable nature of those tribunals for dealing with the details of a Measure of this kind. The hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Storey) says that the Bill is of a contentious character, and would not have been referred in former times to a Committee upstairs. No doubt that was so formerly, but at that time Standing Committees had not been instituted.

MR. COSSHAM (Bristol, E.)

I am certainly of opinion that we ought not to part with any portion of our control over the expenditure of the public money. This Bill involves a very large expenditure, and therefore I think that the details of the measure ought to be considered by a Committee of the Whole House. If the Government persist with the Motion I shall vote with my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland.

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

Can the Government give an assurance on the part of the Committee of Selection that steps will be taken to secure that among the 15 additional Members a reasonable number of Irish Members connected with the districts affected by the Bill will be included?

THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Sir M. HICKS BEACH,) Bristol, W.

I think I can speak with some experience on that point, having had to take charge of several Bills which have been referred to Grand Committees. The Government have no right, nor have they ever attempted, to interfere with the Committee of Selection in the choice of the 15 Members who are to be added to the Grand Committees for the consideration of any particular Bill. I think that I may appeal with some confidence to hon. Members who have served on the Committee of Selection whether in all cases the Committee have not exercised their power of adding Members with great care and to the satisfaction of all concerned? I have no doubt that they will pursue the same course now.

MR. CRAIG (Newcastle-upon-Tyne)

When do the Government propose that the Grand Committee should meet?

SIR M. HICKS BEACH

It will meet as soon as the 15 Members have been added, and this will depend on the Committee of Selection.

MR. WHITBREAD (Bedford)

As soon as the order is given by the House the Committee of Selection will be prepared to act.

The House divided.—Ayes 231; Noes 60.—(Div. List, No. 262.)

MR. O'DOHERTY (Donegal, N.)

I beg to move the Instruction which stands in my name. The effect of its adoption would be to enable the promoters of a light railway in certain cases to save a large sum of money by the purchase or hire of steamers in cases where, by reason of intervening arms of the sea, the length of the line and the cost of the construction would be excessive. Take, for instance, the case of Loch Swilly. A railway is projected from Gweedore to Londonderry, and between these two places is Loch Swilly, which runs in 30 miles from the Atlantic. About eight or nine miles up the loch is exceedingly calm, almost like an inland lake, and I think it would be infinitely better to enable the promoters, in cases where they satisfy the Government they can make a reasonable arrangement, to come to some terms for the use of steamers to carry their traffic across the lake instead of running their line all round the coast. I hope, under the circumstances, the Chief Secretary will accept the Instruction which stands in my name.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That it be an Instruction to the said Committee that they have power to insert Clauses in the said Bill enabling the promoters of a Light Railway in proper cases to use their capital in construction of piers and in the purchase or hire of proper steamers in cases where otherwise, by reason of intervening arms of the sea, the length of the line and the cost of construction would be excessive or the lines of railway might be required."—(Mr. O'Doherty.)

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.

I take it that the object of the hon. Member is to enable the use in connection with the new lines of steamers for a short route of sea transit with a view of rendering unnecessary the construction of a long length of railway, and I understand that the hon. Member is desirous of enabling the Railway Company to have facilities for making such arrangements. I imagine there would be very few cases in which an opportunity would arise for doing this, but on behalf of the Government I am quite prepared to accept the Instruction.

Question put, and agreed to.

* MR. SPEAKER

As to the Instructions standing in the name of the Member for North Cork, I rule that they are out of order, inasmuch as it would not be necessary to give the Committee such Instructions in a matter which they have already power to deal with.