§ 2. £3,915, Supplementary, Superannuations and Retired Allowances.
§ (5.44.) MR. H. H. FOWLERI wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government have any intention of introducing the Bill with regard to superannuation? It was introduced two years ago, but not last year, and, as a Member of the Royal Commission, which took a great deal of pains to see that superannuation should be put on a proper basis, I am anxious that the question should be properly dealt with.
§ *MR. GOSCHENIt is a source of regret to the Government that they have not been able to deal with this question. I have this year again been over some of the clauses of the Bill, endeavouring to see whether we can secure the most indispensable conditions without putting into the Bill provisions which would excite opposition, such as we might not eventually be able to overcome, and which would greatly delay the progress of the measure. We will endeavour to pass that Bill whenever we see a reasonable chance of making progress with it.
§ *(5.46.) MR. BARTLEY (Islington, N.)Under this Vote is an item of £1,000 as a pension for Sir J. P. Hennessy, granted on account of ill-health. I wish to know whether his Excellency is not well enough to resume his duties; whether he is the same person as the hon. Member for Kilkenny; and how it happens that a pension as ex-Governor does not disqualify for a seat in the House of Commons while a pension in the Civil Service does disqualify? Under what statute is the exception made?
§ (5.47.) MR. LABOUCHEREI would ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he could not bring in some Bill throwing the burden of pensions for ex-Governors upon the colonies? At present, while it is laid down as a principle that we are not to pay the salaries of the Governors of most of our colonies, we are called upon to pay for 1094 their pensions. I always understood that the theory of a pension was that it was deferred salary, and if the colonies pay one portion of the salary, why should they not be called upon to pay the other portion which is given under the guise of superannuation allowances. I have not the slightest doubt that the hon. Member for North Kilkenny is labouring under such ill-health, as, though it permits him to take part in the proceedings of the House of Commons, would not justify him in risking his valuable life in the colonies. I am not in the least complaining of this, still, as there happens to be in this Vote a pension of £1,000 per annum for him, said to have been granted on the ground of ill health, I should like to know what sort of certificates are demanded before Governors obtain these pensions, and how long the certificate remains in force? Does it have to be renewed every year, or does the certificate relieve from service for the future altogether. Possibly, under the influence of the excellent atmosphere of this House, his Excellency's health may so improve as to enable him to again undertake the functions of the Colonial Governor, and I want to know whether it is possible to call upon him to do so? Speaking generally, I think we ought to have some sort of understanding about this matter. I have seen a good many diplomatists, and other Civil servants, going about in what appeared to me to be a most enviable state of health, and yet they have been for many years enjoying pensions.
§ *(5.50.) MR. T. H. BOLTON (St. Pancras, N.)Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will also tell us upon what principle these superannuations are granted. I see that an hon. Member of this House (the Member for North Kilkenny) has obtained a pension of £1,000 a year for 20 years' service upon a salary of £5,000; whereas a very distinguished Colonial Governor—Sir Hercules Robinson—perhaps one of our most distinguished Colonial Governors—has, after a service of 35 years, and after receiving a larger salary of £7,000, only been granted a like amount of pension. That seems to me to be somewhat inconsistent. In one case, I admit, the retirement was on the ground of ill-health, and the other on the ground of 1095 age; but the age of the two retiring Governors did not differ very much, Sir Hercules Robinson being 65 years of age, and the Member for North Kilkenny 56 years. As to the question of ill-health, if an hon. Member can go through an exciting election contest such as took place in North Kilkenny at the end of last year, and can undertake the fatiguing business of this House, I do not think his condition is so serious as would seem to be implied by the granting of a pension of £1,000 a year on the ground of ill-health. There are a few other pensions in this Vote which are open likewise to observation. I see there is one pension of £900 a year granted upon a salary of £1,250, and another pension of £700 only granted upon a salary of £2,000. In the one case there was 31 years' service, and in the other 32 years' service. It is very difficult to understand the principle upon which these superannuations are granted, and I think this Vote, therefore, requires a little explanation. I am not opposing the Vote, nor am I suggesting that the pensions are unjustifiable. I am only asking for information upon the points I have mentioned.
§ *(5.56.) THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON,) Leeds, N.The hon. Member for Islington was wrong in stating that there is any difference between a pension in the Civil Service and one in the Colonial Service. A Civil Service pension does not disqualify for a seat in the House of Commons. The Treasury has the power to call up for service again servants who have retired on a pension on account of ill-health. All these pensions are defined by statute; and, as to the case of Sir H. Robinson, he received the highest pension which the statute provides for ex-Colonial Governors.
§ *(5.58.) MR. BARTLEYI was for over 20 years in the Public Service myself, and when I retired I was told by the Prime Minister of the day that if I had a pension granted to me—which I did not—it would have to be abandoned if I entered the House of Commons. That Prime Minister was a Conservative. I think the general opinion amongst Civil servants is that they cannot retain their pensions and sit in the House of Commons. Surely there ought to be one rule for everyone, and unless I 1096 receive a more satisfactory explanation, I shall move the reduction of the Vote.
§ (5.59.) MR. LABOUCHEREEvidently a Tory Minister has done one good service, because he has saved his country from paying a pension to the hon. Gentleman opposite, who apparently has done very well without it. But the Secretary to the Treasury did not answer my question, namely, why these pensions are not paid by the colonies. I can only repeat my contention that they are a portion of the salary which the colonies are called upon to pay.
§ *MR. JACKSONUntil the hon. Member or someone else alters the law, the Treasury must continue to pay the pensions of Colonial Governors. The duty is imposed by statute. The hon. Member for Islington will find it most distinctly stated in Acts 32 & 33 Vict that Civil Service pensions do not disqualify for seats in the House of Commons.
§ Vote agreed to.