HC Deb 27 July 1910 vol 19 cc2277-80

(1) The Treasury may undertake the payment of any retired allowances granted by His late Majesty and paid as part of the expenditure under class 2 of His Civil List.

(2) The Treasury may also in the case of any retired allowance which may be granted by His present Majesty to persons who have been for a longer period than ten years in the Royal service under Her Majesty Queen Victoria or His late Majesty, undertake the payment of any part of that allowances which is in their opinion attributable to that service.

(3) The amount paid by the Treasury in respect of payments undertaken under this section shall not exceed the sum of £18,000 in any year.

(4) The Treasury shall keep a register of all allowances which are paid by them either in whole or in part under this section.

Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Mr. POINTER

I rise for the purpose of objecting to this Clause. We do so not because we are against the principle of paying retired allowances or pensions to the various officers and others of the Royal household. I think everyone will understand that belonging as we do to a party who think that a man should, when he retires from active duty, be provided with a pension or retired allowance, we could not logically raise any objection on the general question in regard to these pensions. But what we want is a little more information in regard to this question. I would like to say in passing that the hon. Gentleman representing one of the divisions of Bethnal Green who has spoken made a suggestion, or rather a direct statement, that a very full statement of everything was given, and that all the information required for the discussion of this Question was to be obtained in the Report of the Committee. I will only point out that there is not the slightest information given as to the expenditure of the money that is put down under this head, and I read in the Report that the pensions paid in the late reign amounted to £9,000 a year. We have no suggestion as to how that money is expended, to whom it is paid, what is the character of the people to whom it is paid, or anything regarding it.

Whether these pensions are paid to the servants strictly so called, or whether they are paid to those decorative officers of which we have a list in the Report is a thing which is totally outside our knowledge so far as the Report is concerned. In looking over the Report of the Debate which took place on last Friday, I notice that the hon. Member for Blackfriars (Mr. Barnes) makes a rather significant statement. He tells us quite clearly that a certain officer in the service of the late King was receiving £1,500 a year, or rather he is still receiving for these services a pension of £1,500 a year, and that now he has been reappointed to a similar position under the present King. I think that is a matter this Committee ought to enquire about. This particular gentleman is supposed to have discharged some duty under the late King, and is retired with a pension. Now he is back again in the service of the present monarch presumably, I suppose, drawing a pension. The point I would like to put is—is this particular gentleman going to continue drawing his £1,500 per annum pension in addition to a salary for services he is rendering to the present monarch? Over and above that, I think we ought to have some indication as to the general manner in which this money is expended. Is any great proportion of it being given to those decorative officers who are well paid? I do not want to be disrespectful, but it is very hard to define their duties and say they do not perform the usual functions whereby the State is the better of their duties. I think we ought to know to what extent and what proportion of that money is being expended in what may be called distinct from legitimate pensions—pensions of those doing actual work in the Royal household. I think we ought to have that information, and it will depend upon whether the information is given fully and freely and to our satisfaction as to whether we divide the Committee or not.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

As far as these pensions are concerned, the proportion which goes to the officers whom the hon. Gentleman has described as decorative and not useful, would be an exceedingly small one. The bulk of this money goes to old servants of the Royal household. A question has been put by the hon. Gentleman about an allowance of £1,500 a year given to an officer. I do not know how the hon. Gentleman got his information. He wants to know whether a salary is given in addition to the pension. It is really not a pension at all. This officer is giving services—very valuable and responsible services which he renders with very great discretion. In fact, throughout the whole of his life he has rendered these services. I am perfectly certain the hon. Gentleman would be the last person in the world to drop these pensions if he knew the facts,

Mr. BARNES

I would like to make a statement in regard to this gentleman who has got a £1,500 pension. I think it is due to myself and the Committee that I should do so. Last Friday I made the statement, on the strength of a statement I read in one of the daily newspapers, and upon it my hon. Friend has now made a further statement. So far as that particular pension is made I think the explanation given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer is fairly satisfactory. [Laughter.] That is my way of putting it. I am sure hon. Gentlemen across the floor could put it much more fluently than I can. I accept the explanation as fairly satisfactory. In regard to the remainder of the statement I think it is just as unsatisfactory. What my hon. Friend asked for, and what he is entitled to get, is some indication as to how much of this £18,000 goes to officers of the Household—I mean gentlemen on high salaries—and how much goes to what might without disrespect be called the servants of the lower order. I was told that these pensions were going to domestic servants performing manual and menial work. It was only at the last moment I saw that the proposal was nothing of the sort, and that the large proportion is going to those who have got large salaries. I do not propose to offer names. I know that would be invidious, but I think the House is entitled to know how much of the £18,000 is paid per officer and how much goes to the manual servants.