§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Whereas it appears by the Navy Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1905, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz:—
- (a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £415,439 18s. 8d., as shown in Column No. 1 of the Schedule hereto appended; while the gross expenditure for other Navy Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £449,539 13s. 1d., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended Schedule, so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Navy Services fell short of the gross estimated expenditure by the net sum of £34,099 14s. 11d.;
- (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain Grants for Navy Services fell short of
570 the total estimated receipts by the sum of £80,479 6s. 10d., as shown in Column No. 3 of the said appended Schedule, while the receipts in aid of other Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £70,198 8s. 9d., as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended Schedule, so that the total actual receipts in aid of the Grants for Navy Services fell short of the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £4,280 18s. 1d. - (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Navy Services and the net expenditure are as follows, viz.—
| £ | s. | d. | |
| Total Surpluses | 455,107 | 18 | 8 |
| Total Deficits | 425,289 | 1 | 10 |
| Net Surplus | £29,818 | 16 | 10 |
§ And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application, in reduction of the net charge on Exchequer Grants for certain Navy Services, of the whole of the sums received in excess of the Estimated Appropriation-in-Aid, in respect of the same services, and have also temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Navy Services as is necessary to cover the said total deficits on other Grants for Navy Services.
§ 1. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the application of such sums be sanctioned: "—(Mr. McKenna.)
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYasked why there had been an excess of expenditure over the estimates of £4,280 for Navy Services.
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON,) Dundeereplied that those figures related to matters which happened two years ago. There were many precedents for the course they were now taking.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD (Liverpool, West Derby)said he was aware that there was a considerable number of precedents for Resolutions of this kind, but nevertheless this course was exceedingly objectionable. The real meaning of it was that in the 571 Navy sums had been spent to the extent of £415,000 over and, above the amount voted. There was an item for £279,000 for contract work which had not been carried out, the expenditure for which had, been authorised by the House. He would, like to have some explanation on that point. Hon. members who were now on the Government side had denounced this system of book-keeping when they were in Opposition. It was absolutely bad and, unsound. One would have thought after the protests made in former years that hon. Gentlemen opposite would, not have come here to do the same sort of financial juggle. He was very much ashamed, when this practice was followed, on his own side, but they made no fantastic attempts to pose as financial purists. Now that great financial reformers had obtained control of affairs this was the sort of thing they did.
§ MR. BOWLES (Lambeth, Norwood)said he wished to associate himself with the argument of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. This was a kind of Resolution which was highly undesirable. The accounts showed, that Vote after Vote in the Admiralty Estimates for the year 1904–5 had. been wrong. [Cries of "Oh!"] He could, assure hon. Gentlemen opposite that he had not the slightest Party motive in making these remarks. His sole concern was to get some assurance from the Government that this matter would have their attention. Vote after Vote showed bad estimating. He knew perfectly well that the Treasury was empowered by the Appropriation Act to do as was now proposed, but he desired to point out that it was a method, which defeated the control of this House over finance.
THE CHAIRMANThe Resolution is merely carrying into effect the Act of Parliament. The hon. Member is not entitled to criticise the Act of Parliament.
§ MR. BOWLESsaid he quite agreed. He was endeavouring to point out the effect of the Resolution they were now asked, to pass. It was a system which weakened, the control this House ought to have over expenditure. He hoped, they might look forward to something being done for the mitigation of the 572 admitted abuses under this system of finance.
§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA,) Monmouthshire, N.said the hon. Gentlemen had correctly stated, that what was now being done was in accordance with Act of Parliament. In order to allay the alarms of which the hon. Gentleman had spoken let him remind, the House that all these surpluses and excesses were dealt with in detail by the Public Accounts Committee, and. that the accounts were not presented to this House until they had been so considered. The Public Accounts Committee was satisfied that this procedure was good procedure. Personally he did not think it was a bad system, and in the interest of economy it was an admirable system. Every item in the accounts now before the Committee had already been considered, and he submitted that it was unnecessary to occupy the time of the Committee in going into them in detail.
§ SIR E. CARSONsaid there was an item of £279,000 in the accounts described as a surplus over the estimate for contract work. Supposing he was of an inquisitive turn of mind, how was he to find out the particulars of that item?
§ MR. MCKENNAFrom the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General.
§ LORD R. CECILHas that Report been issued?
§ MR. MCKENNAOn this particular point it has not been issued.
§ LORD R. CECILreferred to the items on page 23 of the Accounts and asked whether the House had really any control whatever over them.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid the control consisted in the powers of the Comptroller and Auditor-General who was an officer of this House. He reported to the Public Accounts Committee. That Committee had expressed their satisfaction with every item of these accounts.
§ LORD R. CECILasked whether it would be possible for any Member of the 573 House who disapproved of any of these items to move a reduction.
§ MR. MCKENNANo.
§ LORD R. CECILsaid the House had no real effective control over the policy of the expenditure of these sums. That was the point to which they desired to address themselves. On the face of it the system appeared to be a very bad one.
§ MR. HARMOOD-BANNER (Liverpool, Everton)said that it seemed to him an extraordinary thing that they should have all sorts of statements made as to this expenditure.
| Schedule. | ||||||||||||||
| Number of Vote. | Navy Services, 1904–5. Votes. | Gross Expenditure. | Appropriations in Aid. | |||||||||||
| Excesses of Actual over Estimated Gross Expenditure. | Surpluses of Estimated over Actual Gross Expenditure. | Deficiencies of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts. | Surpluses of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts. | |||||||||||
| 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | |||||||||||
| £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | |||
| 1 | Wages, &c, of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coast Guard, and Royal Marines | 67,474 | 12 | 8 | — | 27,310 | 2 | 9 | — | |||||
| 2 | Victualling and Clothing for the Navy | — | 4,869 | 8 | 7 | — | 13,100 | 9 | 4 | |||||
| 3 | Medical Establishments and Services | — | 11,525 | 9 | 9 | 1,689 | 19 | 2 | — | |||||
| 4 | Martial Law | — | 1,094 | 17 | 11 | 3 | 17 | 10 | — | |||||
| 5 | Educational Services | — | 12,944 | 6 | 2 | — | 3,310 | 8 | 11 | |||||
| 6 | Scientific Services | 4,167 | 15 | 5 | — | — | 8,634 | 10 | 5 | |||||
| 7 | Royal Naval Reserves | — | 26,290 | 0 | 8 | 669 | 9 | 2 | — | |||||
| 8 | Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, &c.: | |||||||||||||
| Sec. 1 | Personnel | — | 23,824 | 18 | 8 | — | 803 | 14 | 6 | |||||
| Sec. 2 | Materiel | 224,212 | 8 | 9 | — | — | 26,823 | 8 | 1 | |||||
| Sec. 3 | Contract Work | — | 279,759 | 11 | 0 | 37,273 | 4 | 9 | — | |||||
| 9 | Naval Armaments | — | 11,028 | 19 | 9 | — | 19,155 | 8 | 7 | |||||
| 10 | Works, Buildings and Repairs at Home and Abroad | — | 78,202 | 1 | 1 | — | 4,367 | 19 | 8 | |||||
| 11 | Miscellaneous Effective Services | 82,854 | 11 | 5 | — | 3,912 | 19 | 0 | — | |||||
| 12 | Admiralty Office | 1,751 | 7 | 1 | — | — | 2 | 9 | 3 | |||||
| 13 | Half-Pay, Reserved and Retired Pay | 5,584 | 1 | 3 | — | 4,103 | 10 | 6 | — | |||||
| 14 | Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances | 5,604 | 12 | 10 | — | 5,436 | 16 | 9 | — | |||||
| 15 | Civil Pensions and Gratuities | 22,235 | 13 | 11 | — | 79 | 6 | 11 | — | |||||
| Amount written off as irrecoverable | 2,054 | 15 | 4 | — | — | — | ||||||||
| 415,439 | 18 | 8 | 449,539 | 13 | 7 | 80,479 | 6 | 10 | 76,198 | 8 | 9 | |||
| Net Surplus, £34,099 14 11 | Net Deficit, £4,280 18 1 |
§ Whereas it appears by the Army, Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1905, and
574§ MR. HARMOOD-BANNERsaid he would like to point out that the system would not tend to purity of administration—
§ LORD BALCARRES (Lancashire, Chorley)asked if they were to understand that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury approved of this system.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDasked whether this House or a Committee of the House had ever authorised the expenditure of this £224,212 for material.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid that powers were given to the Treasury by Act of Parliament to spend that sum.
§ the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz. —
575- (a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Army Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £256,367 3s. 3d., as shown in Column No. 1 of the Schedule hereto appended; while the gross expenditure for other Army Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £365,574 5s. 6d., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended Schedule; so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Army Services fell short of the gross estimated expenditure by the net sum of £109,207 2s. 3d.
- (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain Army Services fell short of the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £8,475 7s. 10d., as shown in Column No. 3 of the said appended Schedule; while the receipts in aid of other Army Services exceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £383,643 16s. 2d. as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended Schedule; so that the total actual receipts in aid of the Grants for Army Services exceeded the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £375,168 8s. 4d.
- (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Army Services and the net expenditure are as follows, viz.:—
| £ | s. | d. | |
| Total Surpluses | 701,636 | 8 | 5 |
| Total Deficits | 217,260 | 17 | 10 |
| Net Surplus | £484,375 | 10 | 7 |
§ And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application, in reduction of the net charge on Exchequer Grants for certain Army Services, of the whole of the sums received in excess of the estimated Appropriation-in-Aid, in respect of the same services, and have also temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Army Services as is necessary to cover the said total deficits on other Grants for Army Services.
§ 2. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the application of such sums be sanctioned."—(Mr. McKenna.)
576§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid he gathered from the so-called explanation given by the Secretary to the Treasury that the Public Accounts Committee had investigated these items and made a Report. In these Army accounts there was a sum of £256,367 which had been spent without the authority of this House or of a Committee of this House. Then there was one item consisting of £12,562 spent upon the Volunteers. He wanted to know on what branch of the Volunteers that money was spent. He wanted some explanation also about the expenditure for provisions, forage, and other supplies, of £115,062. Why should that money be spent before authority had been received from this House to spend it? The Public Accounts Committee said two years ago—
THE CHAIRMANsaid that the Report of the Public Accounts Committee two years ago was not before the House. Besides, it could have no bearing on the question before the Committee.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid that with deference to the Chairman he would like to read an extract to show that this practice was objected to by the Public Accounts Committee.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid the practice was enjoined by Act of Parliament.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid that if this particular Resolution was imposed when there was a war going on, or when they were winding up a war, then he could understand it. There were circumstances under which this kind of practice might be resorted to; but there was no emergency now.
THE CHAIRMANsaid that he had already ruled two or three times that the hon. Gentleman was out of order.
§ SIR E. CARSONcalled attention to the fact that the Public Accounts Committee had not published their Report in reference to this matter.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid it had been pointed out that this expenditure was controlled in two ways—firstly, by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, and, secondly, by the Public Accounts Committee. It was clear that the Public 577 Accounts Committee had not rendered to the House of Commons their Report on the matter, and as the House was deprived of this safeguard he begged to move to report progress.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report progres; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Claude Hay.)
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,) Haddingtonsaid this matter had been investigated by a Committee presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Derbyshire, than whom, he ventured to say, there was no more trusted Member of this House. He wished to know from that right hon. Gentleman whether the only reason why the Report had not been published was that one of the members of the Committee was ill, and that had delayed the publication of their Report. He would also ask whether these items had not been investigated by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. Was the suggestion that these items were new when they were part of the accounts of 1905–6? As to the amount required in regard to provisions, forage and other supplies, the Comptroller and Auditor-General pointed out that the number of soldiers on the establishment during the current year was in excess of what was estimated for, and further provision had to be made which amounted to £59,000 out of £119,000. There were also a number of mules which had to be provided for.
§ MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH (Derbyshire, W.)said it was most unfortunate that they should have to take this appropriation prior to the Report of the Public Accounts Committee, but owing to the illness of an official they were compelled to do so.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDobjected to passing these proposals without the protection of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee. He supported the Motion to report progress.
§ MR. MCKENNAsaid the hon. Gentleman might take it from him that the Public Accounts Committee had passed every one of these items.
§ SIR E. CARSONinquired if there was any precedent for passing these Resolutions before the presentation of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee.
§ MR. MCKENNAcould not say whether there was or not, but at all events he pointed out that the Committee had before it the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General.
§ MR. HICKS BEACH (Gloucestershire, Tewkesbury)said a similar point was taken against these Resolutions last year by the then Opposition.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYthought the Committee should agree to his Motion to report progress.
§ Question put.
§ The. Committee divided:—Ayes, 32; Noes, 252. (Division List No. 285.)
581| AYES. | ||
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Courthope, G. Loyd | O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens |
| Ashley, W. W. | Craig, Chas Curtis (Antrim, S.) | Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall) |
| Balcarres, Lord | Dalrymple, Viscount | Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool) |
| Banner, John S. Harmood- | Fetherstonhaugh, Godfrey | Starkey, John R. |
| Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.) | Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. | Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark |
| Beach,Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks | Forster, Henry William | Walrond, Hon. Lionel |
| Bottomley, Horatio | Hamilton, Marquess of | Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm |
| Bridgeman, W. Clive | Hervey, F. W. F. (BuryS. Edm' ds | Younger, George |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.) | |
| Castlereagh, Viscount | Lane-Fox, G. R. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. |
| Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.) | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter(Dublin, S.) | Claude Hay and Mr. Bowles. |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Marks, H. H. (Kent) | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland, Francis Dyke | Barnard, E. B. | Berridge, T. H. D. |
| Ainsworth, John Stirling | Barran, Rowland Hirst | Bertram, Julius |
| Allen, A.Acland(Christchurch) | Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Billson, Alfred |
| Allen, Charles P. (Stroud) | Beale, W. P. | Black,Athur W. (Bedfordshire) |
| Astbury, John Meir | Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham) | Boland, John |
| Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury,E.) | Beck, A. Cecil | Brace, William |
| Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight) | Benn,SirJ.Williams(Devopn'rt) | Bramsdon, T. A. |
| Barlow, Percy (Bedford) | Benn, W. (T'w'rHamlets,S. Geo.) | Brodie, H. C. |
| Brunner, J.F.L.(Lancs., Leigh) | Haslam, James (Derbyshire) | Norman, Henry |
| Bryce,Rt.Hn.James(Aberdeen) | Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth) | Norton, Capt. Cecil William |
| Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn | Haworth, Arthur A. | Nuttall, Harry |
| Burnyeat, W. J. D. | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid |
| Buxton, Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles | Hazleton, Richard | O'Connor, James(Wicklow, W.) |
| Byles, William Pollard | Hedges, A. Paget | O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) |
| Carr-Gomm, H. W. | Helme, Norval Watson | O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) |
| Causton,Rt. Hn. RichardKnight | Henderson, Arthur (Durham) | O'Doherty, Philip |
| Cheetham, John Frederick | Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.) | O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.) |
| Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. | Henry, Charles S. | O'Dowd, John |
| Churchill, Winston Spencer | Herbert, Col. Ivor (Mon., S.) | O'Grady, J. |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Higham, John Sharp | O'Hare, Patrick |
| Clarke, C. Goddard | Hobart, Sir Robert | O'Malley, William |
| Clough, W. | Hodge, John | O'Mara, James |
| Cogan, Denis J. | Hogan, Michael | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) | Hope,W.Bateman(Somerset,N. | Paul, Herbert |
| Collins,SirWm.J.(S,Pancras.W) | Horniman, Emslie John | Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek) |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Howard, Hon. Geoffrey | Philipps,Col. Ivor (S'thampt'n) |
| Cooper, G. J. | Hudson, Walter | Pirie, Duncan V. |
| Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) | Hyde, Clarendon | Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh.Central) |
| Corbett, C.H(Sussex,E.Grints'd | Illingworth, Percy H. | Priestley, W.E.B. (Bradford.F. |
| Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. | Jardine, Sir J. | Radford, G. H. |
| Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) | Jenkins, J. | Rainy, A. Rolland |
| Crean, Eugene | Johnson, John (Gateshead) | Raphael, Herbert |
| Crooks, William | Johnson, W. (Nuneaton) | Redmond,John E. (Waterford) |
| Crossley, William J. | Jones, Leif (Appleby) | Redmond, William (Clare) |
| Cullinan, J. | Jones, William(Carnarvonshire) | Rees, J. D. |
| Davies, Timothy (Fulham) | Jowett, F. W. | Rendall, Athelstan |
| Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.) | Joyce, Michael | Richards,Thomas (W.Monm'th |
| Delany, William | Kennedy, Vincent Paul | Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln) |
| Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.) | Kincaid-Smith, Captain | Roberts, G. H. (Norwich) |
| Dolan, Charles Joseph | Laidlaw, Robert | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) |
| Duckworth, James | Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester) | Robinson, S. |
| Duffy, William J. | Lambert, George | Rogers, F. E. Newman |
| Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne) | Lamont, Norman | Russell, T. W. |
| Dunne,MajorE.Martin(Walsall) | Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) | Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland) |
| Edwards, Clement (Denbigh) | Leese, SirJosephF.(Accrington) | Scott,A.H.(Ashton underLyne) |
| Edwards, Enoch (Hanley) | Lehmann, R. C. | Seely, Major J. B. |
| Edwards, Frank (Radnor) | Levy, Maurice | Shackleton, David James |
| Elibank, Master of | Lewis, John Herbert | Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick,B.) |
| Erskine, David C. | Lough, Thomas | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel |
| Essex, R. W. | Lundon, W. | Sheehy, David |
| Everett, R. Lacey | Lupton, Arnold | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Farrell, James Patrick | Lyell, Charles Henry | Silcock, Thomas Ball |
| Fenwick, Charles | Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester) | Simon, John Allsebrook |
| Ferens, T. R. | Maclean, Donald | Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John |
| Ffreneh, Peter | Macpherson, J. T. | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Field, William | MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down,S.) | Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie |
| Fiennes, Hon. Eustace | MacVeigh, Chas. (Donegal, E.) | Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.) |
| Findlay, Alexander | M'Callum, John M. | Spicer, Sir Albert |
| Flavin, Michael Joseph | M'Hugh, Patrick A. | Stanley,Hon.A.Lyulph(Chesh.) |
| Freeman-Thomas, Freeman | M'Kenna, Reginald | Straus, B. S. (Mile End) |
| Fuller, John Michael F. | M'Killop, W. | Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon) |
| Fullerton, Hugh | M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.) | Stuart, James (Sunderland) |
| Gibb, James (Harrow) | M'Micking, Major G. | Sullivan, Donal |
| Gill, A. H. | Manfield, Harry (Northants) | Sutherland, J. E. |
| Ginnell, L. | Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln) | Tennant, Sir E. (Salisbury) |
| Gladstone, Rt. Hn. HerbertJohn | Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston) | Toulmin, George |
| Glendinning, R. G. | Meagher, Michael | Ure, Alexander |
| Glover, Thomas | Menzies, Walter | Verney, F. W. |
| Goddard, Daniel Ford | Mond, A. | Villiers, Ernest Amherst |
| Gooch, George Peabody | Montagu, E. S. | Walsh, Stephen |
| Greenwood, G. (Peterborough) | Montgomery, H. G. | Walters, John Tudor |
| Gulland, John W. | Mooney, J. J. | Ward,W.Dudley(Southampton |
| Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton | Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall) | Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney) |
| Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B. | Morse, L. L. | Watt, H. Anderson |
| Halpin, J. | Morton, Alpheus Cleophas | Wedgwood, Josiah C. |
| Hammond, John | Murnaghan, George | Weir, James Galloway |
| Hardie,J.Keir(Merthyr Tydvil) | Murphy, John | Whitbread, Howard |
| Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) | Nannetti, Joseph P. | White, George (Norfolk) |
| Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r) | Nicholls, George | White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire) |
| Harrington, Timothy | Nicholson, Chas.N. (Doncast'r) | White, Luke (York, E.R.) |
| Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale) | Nolan, Joseph | White, Patrick (Meath, North) |
| Whitehead, Rowland |
| Whitley, J. H. (Halifax) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. |
| Wilkie, Alexander | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) | Whiteley and Mr. J. A. |
| Williams, J. (Glamorgan) | Winfrey, E. | Pease |
| Williamson, A. | Wodehouse,Lord(Norfolk, Mid) |
Bill read the third time and passed.
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYdrew attention to the item of £39,458 excess over estimated gross expenditure on War Office salaries and miscellaneous charges, and asked the Secretary of State for War if he would give some explanation. He also expressed the hope that this very large figure would not reappear in the Estimates, because if such a large excess were allowed to arise on this item there must be even worse organisation at headquarters than the House had been led to think.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid if the hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble he could easily have ascertained the cause of this excess. The late House of Commons resolved to reorganise the War Office and for that purpose appointed the Esher Committee, which made certain suggestions as to departmental changes, the carrying out of which required new
| Schedule. | |||||||||||||
| Number of Vote | Army Services, 1904–1005. Vote. | Gross Expenditure. | Appropriations in Aid | ||||||||||
| Excesses of Actual over Estimated Gross Expenditure | Surpluses of Estimated over Actual Gross Expenditure. | Deficiencies of Actual as compared with Estimated Keieipts. | Surpluses of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts. | ||||||||||
| 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | ||||||||||
| £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | £ | s | d. | ||
| l | Pay, &c, of Army (General Staff Regiments, Reserve, and Department.) | — | 166,856 | 6 | 11 | — | 7,751 | 1 | 11 | ||||
| 2 | Medical Establishments: Pay, &. | — | 223 | 19 | 2 | — | 5,037 | 6 | 7 | ||||
| 3 | Militia: Pay, Bounty, &c. | — | 58,279 | 1 | 9 | 2,527 | 15 | 9 | — | ||||
| 4 | Imperial Yeomanry: Pay and Allowances | — | 46,175 | 10 | 3 | — | 770 | 11 | 2 | ||||
| 5 | Volunteer Corps: Pay and Allowances | 12,502 | 16 | 5 | — | — | 567 | 5 | 8 | ||||
| 6 | Transport and Remounts | — | 2,777 | 12 | 6 | — | 269,809 | 12 | 1 | ||||
| 7 | Provisions, Forage, and other Supplies | 115,062 | 16 | 11 | — | — | 15,128 | 14 | 8 | ||||
| 8 | Clothing Establishments, and Services | — | 22,939 | 19 | 10 | — | 1,968 | 3 | 8 | ||||
| 9 | Warlike and other Stores: Supply and Repair | 10,285 | 12 | 6 | — | — | 31,117 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 10 | Works, Buildings, and Repairs: Coat, including Staff for Engineer Service | — | 33,771 | 18 | 3 | — | 22,350 | 11 | 8 | ||||
| 11 | Establishments for Military Education | 2,211 | 14 | 11 | — | 4,527 | 10 | 8 | — | ||||
| 12 | Miscellaneous Effective Services | 7,617 | 12 | 3 | — | — | 2,647 | 11 | 9 | ||||
| 13 | War Office: Salaries and Miscellaneous Charges | 39,458 | 7 | 8 | — | 1,357 | 7 | 8 | — | ||||
| 14 | Non-effective Charges for Officers &c. | — | 24,735 | 1 | 8 | — | 10,133 | 15 | 7 | ||||
| 15 | Non-effective Charges for Men, &c. | 35,675 | 15 | 9 | — | — | 16,361 | 19 | 2 | ||||
| 16 | Civil Superannuation, Compensation, and Compassionate Allowances | — | 4,814 | 15 | 2 | 62 | 13 | 9 | — | ||||
| Balances irrecoverable | 33,492 | 6 | 10 | — | — | — | |||||||
| 256,367 | 3 | 3 | 365,574 | 5 | 6 | 8,475 | 7 | 10 | 383,643 | 16 | 2 | ||
| Net Surplus £ 100,207 2 3 | Net Surplus. £375,168 8 4 |
§ Resolutions to be reported this day.
582§ offices and a fresh staff. The cost was nearly £40,000. The changes were directed to be made by the late Government, and were provided for by transfers which the accounts now regularised.
§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDthought the right hon. Gentleman was rather unfair to his hon. friend, who, of course, was not receiving a salary in connection with the Department. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would be good enough to explain how the sum of £33,492, balances irrecoverable, came about.
§ MR. HALDANEsaid the Appropriation Account for 1904–5, which was accessible to every hon. Member in the Library, showed on page 112, details of the balances irrecoverable and claims abandoned or insufficiently accounted for during the War in South Africa.