§ Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the conveyance of mails for British East Africa still costs £9,000 per annum, although a saving of £7,200 per annum would result from sending the mails by French or German packets; and whether this shipping bounty has the sanction of the Treasury; and, if so, on what grounds?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe net cost of the conveyance of mails for British East Africa is as stated by the Postmaster-General in his reply to the hon. Member on 2nd March last. The present subsidy payment was agreed to by the Treasury in return for very considerable improvements in the service of steamships to the Protectorate. The improvements thus obtained, together with the other advantages attending a service of British vessels, are held to justify the payment of the existing subsidy.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the improvement was in the mail service, accelerating the delivery of the mails, or whether it was merely in order to gratify the shipping companies?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEIt was certainly not to gratify the shipping companies. Whilst, of course, regard must be had to the interests of the taxpayers, the amenities of British Colonies have also to be taken into consideration.
Mr. CATHCART WASONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware there is a direct service of British vessels running out to Mombasa and that this service is absolutely unnecessary either for mails or passengers?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI am afraid I cannot agree with that.
§ Mr. MORRELLCan the right hon. Gentleman tell me when this subsidy was arranged?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI do not like to speak definitely from memory. It is an old-standing contract.
§ Mr. MORRELLWhen will it come up for revision?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI should want notice of that.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDoes the Colony contribute anything to this £7,200?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThese points of detail, if I may say so, had better be put by notice.