THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANSHIP. (Hansard, 13 February 1902)

§ (12.30.) MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donega, S.)
I am sorry to see that the First Lord of the Treasury is not in his place. The first Lord is rarely in his place. [Cries of "Order."] I have never 1379 for many years spoken on the Motion for the adjournment of the House, but at this time I regard it as my duty to do so. The House will probably recollect that this afternoon I asked the First Lord a question, which I think I was perfectly and more than justified in asking—I asked him to give us across the Table the name of the Gentleman whom he said he should propose as the Deputy Chairman tomorrow. Having regard to the powers to be vested in the Deputy Chairman—powers that have never yet been vested in the Speaker, I say that it is an absolutely monstrous thing that the right hon. Gentleman should not tell us who this gentleman is, in order that we may know whether it is a satisfactory appointment or not. If it is satisfactory, of course no one can say anything, but if it is unsatisfactory of course it is our bounden duty to oppose that appointment by every form of the House. Every one of the Ministers must know the name of the gentleman and I must ask that the name should be given to us. Or are we to hear it to-morrow morning by reading it in The Times. People here seem to regard a communication to The Times as a medium of communication to this House. The First Lord is not respectful to the House in not being here when a matter of the most drastic importance in relation to this House is discussed—a matter which is an organised attack on the Irish Party. The First Lord is bound to be here. I know that the Leader of the Irish Party docs not know the name of the gentleman who is to be appointed. Has ever the Leader of the Opposition been told? Or is it that Mr. So-and-So is to be proposed to take the Chair of the House, and that the gentleman elected will be invested with powers for the rest of Parliament by which he will be able to order us motu proprio? I am only making a supposition. That man will carry on the work of the Government with his eyes fixed on the Treasury Bench. We are bound to have a man we can rely on, and in whom we have confidence. I say it is simply a monstrous thing that we should not know the name. I am surprised the subordinates of the First Lord did not send for him. I must say that I think a very grave liberty has been 1380 taken with the House of Commons. It shows the absolute slight of the House of Commons, which has become a second nature with the First Lord, if he is permitted to foist upon us a man who may be the despot and the master of the House of Commons. I will ask the Whip of the party—for the Whip knows all about this arrangement—to tell us the name.

§ (12.35.) Mr. DILLON (Mayo, E)
I am very glad that my hon. friend has raised this point. There is another reason which my hon. friend did not state. The matter is one which naturally creates the greatest interest on these benches. We are not only not told the name of the Gentleman who is to be appointed, but we are left in considerable doubt as to the procedure by which he is to be appointed. The only precedent we have is that according to which the Chairman is appointed at the commencement of Parliament, and so far as I recollect that procedure is that on the first night on which we go into Committee of Supply we do so with nobody in the Chair. A Motion is made that Mr. So-and-So take the Chair. Now that is a very serious matter. The thing is done all in a hurry without explanation and without an opportunity offered for proper debate. [An Hon. Member: "The Speaker is in the Chair."] I think the Speaker has left the Chair before the Motion is made to take the Chair. Well it is quite possible—I do not know in the least—that the Motion for the appointment of the Deputy Chairman will lead to a somewhat prolonged discussion, and I agree with my hon. friend that it would be only fair in the peculiar circumstances of the creation of a new office to give the Members of the Opposition some notice of the name of the person whom it is intended to propose. When it is proposed to appoint a Speaker of the House, the name of the candidate who is going to be proposed is a matter of public knowledge, although it is not publicly announced to the House, and it is canvassed on all sides of the House, so that hon. Members may have an opportunity of making up their minds as to how they will receive the Motion. As far as I am aware it is the practice for the Government of the day, when it is proposed to appoint 1381 a Speaker, to enter into communication with the Leader of the Opposition, in order, if possible, to arrive at some general understanding. I think that is so in the case of every one of those high officials who have control over the liberty of debate. Under the new Rules the liberty of those sitting in this House and the rights of constituencies are involved, and I think it ought to be a matter of considerable deliberation and consultation. It would have been of great importance if the First Lord of the Treasury had, not only this morning but two or three days or a week previous to the making of the Motion, consulted the Leaders of the Opposition so that the Opposition Party might have had an opportunity of considering the name in question, and ascertaining whether he could have election from the House. I am perfectly sure that nothing would have been more easy than to select from the party opposite many men who would be elected unanimously, men in whose partiality we have confidence. But I frankly own that there are many men on that side in whom I have no confidence, and it would be an unfortunate interlude in the course of the discussion of the new Rules, if the first step taken under them in connection with the appointment of an Officer of the House, were to lead to an angry personal debate, and if the gentleman proposed was to be canvassed in the House by those who would have to sit under his mercy. I think the First Lord should have announced the name in the interest of good order itself, and in the interest of that respect which in my opinion will never be adequately secured by Draconian laws or rules for punishment so effectively as by cultivating good temper, good feeling, and the confidence of the House. I say deliberately, and I have the authority of Mr. Speaker Brand for it, that if the Irish Members get fair play, and if they have confidence in the Chair, they are as easy to deal with as any other Members, but if they do not get fair play they are likely to be troublesome.

§ THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GRANT LAWSON,) Yorkshire, N. R., Thirsk
The hon. Member for South Donegal has 1382 complained of the First Lord of the Treasury. I would ask the hon. Member whether it is quite fair to the First Lord of the Treasury to bring this matter forward now without notice.

§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL
Yes. (Cries of "Order.") He asked me the question. I could not imagine that the First Lord would be absent.

§ MR. GRANT LAWSON
As a matter of fact my right hon. friend left the House immediately after the last division. All I can say is that the name of a very well-known Gentleman will be proposed to the House [cries of "When?"] tomorrow. It is not likely that anybody will be proposed whom the House does not know. I am quite sure the name will be acceptable to the House. I hope that hon. Members will not be in any way hampered by the fact that they do not know the name at this time of the night. I must tell you frankly that I do not know it myself.

§ MR. JOSEPH A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden)
The feeling on this side of the House has been aroused, and we are inclined to protest, because it is proposed under the new rule to place plenary powers in the hands of an unknown Gentleman—powers which have never been placed in the hands of the Speaker or the Chairman before.

§ MR. T. W RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)
Will the Motion be made to-morrow with you, Sir, in the Chair?

§ * MR. SPEAKER
I can only understand what is intended from what has passed in the House in answer to a question—namely, that it is proposed to move the Deputy Chairman into the chair in the same way as at the beginning of a Parliament the Chairman of Ways and Means is appointed. The procedure is, when the order for Committee of Supply is called for, the Speaker steps out of his chair and immediately the Leader of the House moves the Gentleman who is to be Chairman into the Chair. On some occasions debate has arisen—there were one or two debates some years ago—and the Speaker has stepped back into the Chair to give the House the opportunity of debate.

§ MR. DALZIEL
I assume the House may divide on the question of adjournment now before us?

§ * MR. SPEAKER
The House can decide not to adjourn now, and, if it should so decide, debate may continue till one o'clock.

§ * MR. SPEAKER
said: I find upon inquiry that this question has been considered before, and it was the opinion of Mr. Speaker Peel that there could be no division after twelve o'clock on this question and that opinion I adopt. There will be no division.

§ (12.48.) Mr. DALZIEL
On a point of order—It was on account of your ruling that I waived my right to speak. I presume that the Motion is now before the House.

§ * MR. SPEAKER
assented.

§ MR. DALZIEL
said that this was one of the most extraordinary occasions the House had witnessed for some time. It was a good illustration of the way in which this House was managed. They would have asked this day to elect to the office of Deputy Speaker a gentleman of whom they actually knew nothing whatever. What was all this mystery about? It seemed to him that they were entitled to some notice who the Gentleman was. There had been no defence offered for this mystery at all. The Government were not treating the House with respect when there was no person of authority present to represent them. [An Hon. Member: "Yes, the Secretary for War".] They were delighted to see the Secretary for War. The right hon. Gentleman had perhaps been brought back by the division bell when he was hurrying through Palace Yard.

§ (12.52.) MR. CHANNING (Northamptonshire, E.)
said it was unfortunate and regrettable that the First Lord had with- 1384 drawn from the House. He asked the Secretary of State for War to give the name of the gentleman whom it was proposed to elect as Deputy Chairman, and also whether they would have a full opportunity of discussing his claims for the position.

§ MR. CREMER (Shoreditch, Haggerston)
stated that a Select Committee reported on the accommodation of the House in 1894. The Committee found that the Clerk of the House had 28 rooms, of which 12 were bedrooms, exclusively at his disposal. They recommended that when a change occurred a certain number of these rooms should be taken and given for the accommodation of others who were at present inadequately provided for. He asked whether effect was to be given to that recommendation.

§ MR. O'SHEE (Waterford, W.)
said the hon. Member for South Donegal was perfectly justified in the action he had taken, because the First Lord of the Treasury when asked in the afternoon declined to give the information in regard to the gentleman to be proposed as Deputy Chairman.

§ MR. REGINALD LUCAS (Portsmouth)
said it would not be reasonable to expect a Cabinet Minister to give the information which had been asked. During the last twenty minutes they saw the way some hon. Members regarded the business of the House. The Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Irish Party were both absent, and he considered the proceedings in which hon. Gentlemen opposite were now engaged were a farce and nothing more.