§ Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will approach the railway companies with a view to finding out whether all Members could obtain free passes over the railways of Great Britain and Ireland by the sacrifice of £100 out of their £400 salary; and, if so, whether he will consider making this change in the provision proposed in the Budget for Members?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe Government do not at the present time intend to introduce legislation providing for free passes over the railways for Members of Parliament.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDo not railway directors get free passes over all the railways of the country?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI believe so, but that is quite a different matter.
§ Mr. T. E. HARVEYWill the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries from the Railway Clearing House or in any other way whether he can secure this without legislation?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI should like, first of all, to know whether that is the wish of the House of Commons before making any inquiry.
Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Australia and other countries like that the first thing done is to supply free passes?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI know, but there is this essential difference: In Australia the railways are State railways, and the same thing applies in Germany. In France they have passes over the State railways, but they form a very small proportion of the whole.
§ Mr. ARTHUR LEEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that though Canada only possesses one State railway, free passes are granted to legislators on all the railways of Canada?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe hon. Gentleman knows Canada very well, and he knows that the conditions of the railways in Canada are very different from those in this country. In Canada great grants of land have been made to the railways by the State, and I can understand the State in that case have some kind of call it would not have in this country.
§ Mr. PETOIs there any material difference between sacrificing part of the profits that would otherwise accrue to, the State through State railways and paying a part of the Revenue of the country for free passes?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThere is no difference at all. If Members of Parliament prefer to take their payment partly in the form of railway passes, it is rather a matter for themselves. The railway companies would be only too glad, I am sure.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWAs the right hon. Gentleman leaves it to the House, may I ask him, if we desire to have our salaries doubled, will he agree to it?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEAfter all, the responsibility for the control of finance, as I have tried to impress upon the House, is entirely in the hands of the House, and if Members wish to take that responsibility it is theirs, and not mine.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYArising out of that answer—
§ Mr. SPEAKERHon. Members must defer the rest of this discussion until the Motion for the payment of Members.
§ Mr. FELLasked if, as no attendance at the House of Commons will be necessary, the only qualification for Members to draw their £400 a year will be the taking of the oath and the signing of the roll at the beginning of each Parliament; and if, after doing that, the Member will receive his salary each year until the end of that Parliament unless he resigns his seat or dies?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI will refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave on this subject last Thursday.
Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDHas the right hon. Gentleman received any application to extend the payment of Members to Members of the House of Lords, and, if so, will he consider the advisability of doing so on the condition that these gentlemen go away quietly and propose to lead better lives in the future?
§ Mr. SANDYSasked whether, before the Estimate for the payment of Members is passed, it is the intention of the Government to repeal that portion of the Succession to the Crown Act, 1707, which provides that any person having a new place of profit under the Crown is incapable of being elected, or sitting, or voting in the House of Commons, in order to protect Members from liability to the penalty of £500 provided by the Act?
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith)The statute referred to applies only to places or offices which are in the gift of the Crown, and can have no application to a seat in the House of Commons.
§ Mr. SANDYSIs the right hon. Gentleman aware it was held by a Select Committee in 1839, that the fact that an office was created by Parliament, and not by Royal authority, did not withdraw the office from the operation of the statute?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe seat of a Member of this House is not created by Act of Parliament.