HC Deb 05 April 1892 vol 3 cc685-8
DR. TANNER

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether it has been conceded by the Post Office that the interval between receiving and posting given at Cork on arrival of mails (less than an hour) is insufficient and unsatisfactory; whether the acceleration of the service which the Great Southern and Western Railway Company of Ireland are willing to carry out has been settled on terms acknowledged by the Post Office to be reasonable and moderate, and whether the only opposition to the conclusion of the acceleration of the Cork and American mails has been from the Treasury, who state they could not authorise the expenditure at the present time; whether this expenditure has been recommended by the Post Office to the Treasury; and why and for what reason, under existing circumstances, this Irish and American benefit, having been recommended by the Post Office, is opposed by the Treasury?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

The hon. Member's statement is substantially accurate.

DR. TANNER

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last paragraph, as to whether there is a conflict between the Treasury and the Post Office?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

The hon. Gentleman has put down a question to the Treasury on precisely the same subject, and I prefer to leave it to the Treasury to answer.

DR. TANNER

I ask if there is a conflict between the Post Office and the Treasury? I shall call attention to the matter on the Estimates.

DR. TANNER

I beg to ask the Postmaster General what is the difference between the delivery and time given for answering mails in Cork and Belfast; and whether the Great Southern and Western Railway Company have offered any advantages to secure quicker delivery and return?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

Between the time fixed for beginning the delivery of the English letters at Cork and the time for closing the letter box for outward mail there is an interval of 1 hr. 20 min. At Belfast the interval is five hours.

DR. TANNER

I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to reply to the second paragraph.

MR. SEXTON

For what sum of money have the Great Southern and Western Railway Company agreed to carry out this improved service?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

I do not think I can answer that offhand. I have said that it was a question of money.

MR. MAURICE HEALY

Has the right hon. Gentleman abandoned his efforts to induce the Treasury to come to his view on the matter.

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

It is well understood that Her Majesty's Government acts as a whole, and if it has not been thought proper to increase the subsidy to the Railway Company for the service it must be taken to be the decision of the Government generally.

MR. MAURICE HEALY

If the right hon. Gentleman did not intend to improve the service in some way what was the object of entering into negotiations with the Great Southern and Western Railway at all?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

We did not initiate negotiations, but we desire to improve the service as much as possible.

DR. TANNER

Have the Railway Company been offered any advantages to secure a quicker delivery and return?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

They are treated in the same way as any other Railway Company carrying mails, and we are prepared to give them the same advantages. We made them no offer, but they made one to us.

DR. TANNER

What is the character of these advantages?

MR. MAURICE HEALY

May I ask if it is a fact that the Post Office have approached the Great Southern and Western Railway Company with the object of improving the service, and that negotiations have taken place between them with the object of improving the mail service, and what is the basis of these negotiations? Was it not the payment of an increased sum to the Company?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

That is the purport of what I have already stated.

DR. TANNER

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will explain why the Treasury has refused to authorise increased expenditure for conveyance of American mails viâa Dublin and Queenstown; and whether, said expenditure has been recommended by another Government Department?

MR. GOSCHEN

Perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to answer this question? I think I have only seen the question to-day, and have not been able to examine into it. On the question generally I can only repeat the words of my right hon. Friend the Postmaster General, that the Government look into these matters as a whole, and it would be most inconvenient that any differences of opinion in a Department should be made a matter of political discussion. The Government acted on the whole case, and the decision of the Treasury or Post Office, as it might be, is final.

MR. SEXTON

Will the right hon. Gentleman supplement the defective information of the Postmaster General by telling us what sum is now paid to the Railway Company, and for what increased sum they will grant an improved service?

MR. GOSCHEN

I have only seen the question on the Paper to-day, and cannot answer that question.

MR. SEXTON

I shall ask it again on Thursday.

MR. MAURICE HEALY

Can the Postmaster General say why, if the Government acted in this matter as a whole, and the Post Office entered into negotiations with the Railway Company with a view of increasing the subsidy to the Company, that when the Railway Company acceded to their demand the Treasury refused to carry out what the Post Office proposed?

MR. GOSCHEN

I suppose they negotiated like anybody else would, and that when too much was asked the negotiations were broken off.

MR. MAURICE HEALY

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Postmaster General said that the demand of the Great Southern and Western Railway Company was most moderate?

MR. WEBSTER (St. Pancras, E.)

I rise to a point of Order. I should like to know if hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway have a right to ask six supplementary questions to every question they have on the Paper?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

I should like to reply to the question of the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. M. Healy). It is quite true that when I had a meeting with the representatives of the Railway Company and others on this question I said that, in my opinion, if the service was to be paid for the demand of the Railway Company was moderate, but whether it could be done or not was a matter for consideration.

MR. MAURICE HEALY

This is a very important matter. What I want to know is this: what was the object of the Post Office in approaching the Great Southern and Western Railway at all if, when that Company acceded to their views and asked what is admittedly a most moderate sum, they turned round and said that the Company should have nothing?

* SIR J. FERGUSSON

I did not approach them, they approached me.