§ Lord ROBERT CECILI beg to ask the Home Secretary a question of which I have given him private notice: Whether he consulted any actuary or other expert not being an employé of the Government before proposing that, in determining the value of the annuities under the suggested Commutation Clause of the Welsh Church Bill, interest should be calculated at the rate of 3½ per cent, per annum; if so, who he was and what was the advice which he gave?
§ Mr. McKENNAI consulted an actuary who is not an employé of the Government before circulating the White Paper containing the proposed commutation scheme in connection with the Welsh Church Bill. It is generally undesirable under any circumstances to disclose the expert advice which a Minister receives in framing the proposals of a Bill, but it would be impossible to do so in the present case, as the particular matter to which the Noble Lord refers was only one of several items which have to be taken into account in forming a conclusion as to what would be a fair proposal in its entirety.
§ Lord ROBERT CECILMay I ask whether the actuary did or did not approve of 3½ per cent.?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir. That would be purporting to give an answer to a question which is incapable of an answer, as actuary never actually expressed any opinion on any single item standing by itself.
§ Lord ROBERT CECILMay I press the right hon. Gentleman to this extent? May the House assume these proposals come before it without the approval of any expert or actuary?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir. I do not think the Noble Lord is justified in assuming that.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENMay I ask the Home Secretary whether he consulted any of the officers of Queen Anne's Bounty or of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners on this subject, and can he state what their opinion was on the matter?
§ Mr. McKENNAPersonally, I did not consult them, but the actuary employed on behalf of the Government consulted with the actuary employed by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and I understand 1516 the actuary employed by them would have preferred 3 per cent, instead of 3½ per cent., and taking the basis at, I think, 5 per cent, instead of 2½ per cent.—I am not sure, but it was certainly more than 2½, per cent.—as the calculation for expenses, but on neither of the two points was I able to agree.
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENWas it merely a preference or was any definite statement made as to the effect of taking 3½ per cent.?
§ Mr. McKENNAIt was certainly contrary to the opinion of the actuary.