§ MR. BUCHANAN (Aberdeenshire, E.)As the right honourable Gentleman has given notice of his intention to suspend the Twelve o'clock Rule to-night, may I ask that Vote 10 in the Navy Estimates, which contain for the first time a demand for money for Wei-hai-Wei, should not be taken after, say, half-past ten?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Stirling Burghs)Is this the proper time to ask as to the course of business and as to the Adjournment for Easter. Also how long the Adjournment will be for?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYAs regards the question put to me by the honourable Member for Aberdeenshire, I beg to say that it is perfectly true that Vote 10 contains an item for Wei-hai-Wei, but that has nothing to do with the fortification of Wei-hai-Wei. It is a Vote merely for a coal-pier and a coal-shed, as I understand it. I think that a more fitting opportunity for discussing the question will be when the Vote for expenditure on fortifications arises, and that must come on during the present Session. Perhaps the House will consent to the discussion taking place on that Vote rather than upon this Vote, seeing that quite apart from the special exigencies of Supply, which are pressing at the moment, the discussion would then come in more appropriately. I hope we shall not have a late sitting to-night, but I think the House is aware of the reasons why I am making this extra demand on its time. What we have to get before Easter in the way of Supply are Navy Votes A, 1, and 10, and, I should hope, some non-effective Votes, and Army Votes 1, 14, 15, and 16, and the Vote on Account. I propose to take the Vote on Account on Monday, unless such progress is made with Supply to-night that that Vote can be taken to-morrow. On Tuesday I propose to take the Report of Supply, and on Thursday we ought to make some progress with the Second Reading of the Private Bill Procedure (Scotland) Bill, and on Friday I propose to get the Speaker out of the Chair on the Civil Service Estimates. That must 990 be done on Friday in order that we may proceed regularly with our Friday work of Supply. I do not know what time the right honourable Gentleman desires for the Second Reading of the London Government Bill, but I propose to take it on Monday week, and go on with it until it is finished, and to adjourn for the holidays immediately afterwards. I hope that that will be convenient to the House.
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANThe right honourable Gentleman has made a proposal which I do not think will be acceptable to any part of the House. The idea of the House commencing discussion on the Second Reading of the London Government Bill on the Monday in Passion week, and going on with it until it is finished, I can hardly believe to be a conception of business which is seriously put forward by the right honourable Gentleman. If the Second Reading of the Bill is to be taken before Easter, then I would; respectfully suggest that the Debate should be commenced not later than Thursday in next week, so that there may be adequate opportunity for the discussion of a Bill of such immense importance.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYNo doubt the right honourable Gentleman will assist the Government on Tuesday in getting through the business, and, of course, I shall be glad to meet his views on the London Government Bill. But I think that we ought to get the Second Reading of the Scotch Bill and of the London Bill before Easter.
§ *MR. WEIRWill the right honour able Gentleman reconsider his decision, and not take Vote 14 at a late hour?
§ SIR H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton, E.)I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury what is the reason that for the first time it is necessary to take more than one Vote for the Army and Navy for the Appropriation Bill presented before March 31? It has hitherto been usual to take Vote A, which settles the number of men for the year, and Vote 1, which gives enough money to go on with until after Easter It is an entirely new practice to put down other 991 Votes, and, as a matter of fact, it is not necessary to have the Vote for money at all.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI do not think that the practice is as new as the right honourable Gentleman supposes. We have now only one Vote on Account, and in order to get sufficient money to go on with to the end of Supply it is necessary to take other Votes besides Vote 1.
§ SIR H. FOWLERBut the Government are going to ask for the largest Vote on Account which has ever been presented before Easter, and the whole of the Army and Navy wages.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYThe right honourable Gentleman is casting his mind back to the period before the new practice obtained. Formerly Votes on Account were taken for two months; but under the new Rules we have only one Vote on Account to carry us on till August. Otherwise one of the counting days of Supply, which might be devoted to a special matter of policy, is occupied with the miscellaneous discussion of a Vote on Account.
§ SHI H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANIf the right honourable gentleman takes so large a sum for the Army and the Navy as is represented by the Votes which he now proposes to take—one-fifth of the whole expenditure of the year—I hope he will at least put himself under some explicit obligation not to huddle the remaining Votes on to the end of the Session. The right honourable Gentleman will see that by giving so largo a sum as that the House parts with its control over the discussion of the Army and Navy Votes.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI do not think that the House does part with its control. The appeal of the right honourable Gentleman to me not to huddle the remaining Votes to the end of the Session hardly does justice to the effort which I have constantly made to allocate Fridays exactly as the right honourable Gentleman desires. What I was reproached for by the right honourable Member for Wolverhampton, when the Order was under discussion, was giving too much 992 weight to the opinion of the Leader of the Opposition in the allocation of Fridays. I am only too anxious to take the advice (which I regard as of the highest value) of the right honourable Gentleman in the distribution of the Estimates; and any appeal he makes for a particular subject to be discussed on a particular Friday will always meet with favourable consideration, as it did in the days of his predecessor.
§ SIR H. FOWLERThe right honourable Gentleman has not answered my Question as to why it is necessary before 3lst March to take more than the two first Votes for the Army and Navy.
§ MR. HANBURYIf the right honourable Gentleman will allow me I will explain. We want to avoid a second Consolidated Fund Bill, and the amount we shall require to carry us on until August 12th is £29,000,000. By the Vote on Account we take about £15,000,000. Vote 1 of the Army and Vote 1 of the Navy give us only another £12,000,000. That is about £2,000,000 short, and we propose to make it up by taking the other Votes.
§ SIR H. FOWLERThat is on the assumption that no Votes will be taken between now and 29th March. There is, moreover, power with Army and Navy Votes to transfer money from one Vote to another, and yet the right honourable Gentleman is going to put the House to this great trouble just to avoid the inconvenience to the Treasury of a second Consolidated Fund Bill.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYWhat trouble am I putting the House to?
§ SIR H. FOWLERThese long sittings.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYThese Army Votes 14, 15, and 10 are not controversial Votes. With regard to Vote 10, that stands on a different footing, and we do not ask for that from the point of view of money. From that point of view, I would rather get the Navy non-effective votes. But I am informed by the Admiralty that it is very important for them to begin all the new works belonging to the year, and unless they get Parliamentary sane- 993 tion by this Vote they cannot begin. Therefore Vote 10 is asked for on different grounds from Votes 14, 15, and 16, which are uncontroversial.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)The right honourable Gentleman has suggested that the policy of converting Wei-hai-Wei into a naval station might better be discussed on the Army Votes for fortifications instead of on Vote 10. Can the right honourable Gentleman undertake that honourable Members will not be precluded from discussing the question on the Army Votes?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI am reluctant to answer a question which trespasses on the domain of order, of which I am not the judge. But if what the honourable Member wishes to discuss is the fortification of Wei-hai-Wei as a military base, the Vote for fortifications and not the Vote for a coal-shed would form the more appropriate occasion for such a discussion.
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANIn the midst of this anxious series of interrogatories, the right honourable Gentleman has forgotten to answer what was, perhaps, the most important of all the questions—that relating to the holidays.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI hope that in any case we shall not have to meet before the Monday week after Easter.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLWill the right honourable Gentleman undertake not to take Vote 1 of the Army Estimates after midnight if it is not reached before midnight?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYThe House will see that to-day and to-morrow are allocated to business which ought very easily to be got into the compass of those two days, especially if the Twelve o'clock Rule is suspended, so that the honourable Member will probably have an opportunity of bringing on the subject early.