§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That Mr. Anstruther be a Member of the Select Committee on Superannuation."—(Mr. Akers-Douglas.)
§ MR. STOREY (Sunderland)I wish to call the attention of the House to the peculiar position in which we are placed with regard to this Bill. Its principle has never been discussed.
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! The hon. Gentleman can only object to the names of the Committee, and cannot refer to the merits of the Bill.
§ MR. STOREYMy argument is that, as the principle of the Bill has not been discussed at any of its stages through the House, it is extremely important that the Committee which has to consider it should be more liberally constituted than it is at the present moment. Therefore, I object to the first name. There has been no explanation given of the Bill—
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! That is no reason why the name of the hon. Gentleman in question should be objected to. The Question is, "That Mr. Anstruther be a Member of the Committee."
§ MR. STOREYI object to the name of Mr. Anstruther being added to the Committee, because the Committee as proposed will give a preponderance to one set of opinions and make the decision of the Committee practically settled before it meets. As proposed, there will only be three independent Liberal Members upon the Committee and one Irish Member; while, on the other hand, there are seven Members who have practically made up their minds on the subject, four of them being more or less officials. It would be extremely inconvenient and unfair that this Committee should be thus constituted. Instead of Mr. Anstruther, I contend there should be placed on the Committee another Member of the minority in the House, so that there should be some fair sort of discussion. I shall vote against the name of Mr. Anstruther being added to the Committee.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.I hope the hon. Member will not persist in his opposition. The Government, as a matter of fact, instead of being over-represented, are under-represented on the Committee, and have a majority of only one. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that our only desire with regard to this Bill is that it should be amply discussed in Committee.
§ (6.30.) Question put.
§ The House divided: — Ayes 248; Noes 76.—(Div. List, No. 146).
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Bristowe be a Member of the said Committee."
§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)I venture to suggest to the First Lord of the Treasury the desirability of adding two other Members to this Committee. My hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland (Mr. Storey) takes great interest in this question, and he has shown that interest during all the stages of the Bill. I think he ought therefore to be included in the Committee. If the right hon. Gentleman will to-morrow or the next day add two more members the question might probably be settled.
§ MR. AKERS-DOUGLASThe First Lord of the Treasury would have no objection to add two Members to the Committee. I should, however, like to point out that the Committee was constituted a small Committee at the request of hon. Members on that side of the House.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Mr. Craig, Mr. John Ellis, Sir John Gorst, Mr. Henry H. Fowler, Mr. Hunter, Mr. King, Mr. Jackson, Mr. MacNeill, and Sir Matthew White Ridley nominated other Members of the Committee.
§ Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.
§ Ordered, That Five be the quorum.