CLAUSE 1.—(power to Extend Classes of Persons for whose Benefit Osborne House is to be used.) (Hansard, 27 July 1914)

§ Captain LESLIE WILSON
I beg to move to leave out the words "and may from time to time by Order in Council revoke or vary any such Order."
1078 I put down this Amendment in order to call attention to certain things which might happen under this Bill, unless certain provisos are put in. The Act of 1902 laid it down that Osborne House should be for the use of His Majesty's Naval and tary officers, wives, widows, and families, The hon. Gentleman proposes in this Bill to include as beneficiaries other public servants. I do not object to that but I do want to get an assurance that there shall be the same opportunity for naval and military officers, wives, widows, and families, as have been reserved up to the present time and that they will not be in any way under any hardship because this Bill becomes law. If he will give me that assurance I shall be ready to withdraw my Amendment.

§ Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN (Lord of the Treasury)
The intention of the Committee which decides on the applications for beds in the Hospital is that officers of the two Services should have precedence over other applications. The only purpose of this Bill is to fill vacant beds. I think the hon. and 1079 gallant Gentleman may be assured that the officers of the two Services will not suffer.

§ Mr. EYRES-MONSELL
I suggest that you insert the proviso at the end of the Clause, "Provided that the original beneficiaries should have priority of occupation." That would ensure the original Act being carried out. The hon. Gentleman says that is what he intends to do, but that will not be carried out in the Bill before the House. I would like to press the hon. Gentleman to insert some sort of proviso to that effect.

§ Mr. BENN
I do not think it possible to accept such a proviso as suggested. The words original beneficiaries would have no meaning. I do not think the hon. and gallant Gentleman need be under any fear, because the Committee will have an additional soldier and sailor added, so that you will have four Service members out of a committee of about six. I think that is an assurance on the point and I trust we may accept the Bill.

§ Mr. EYRES-MONSELL
I beg to move at the end of the Clause, to add the words, "Provided that the original beneficiaries should have priority of occupation." I am sorry to say I am not quite satisfied.

§ Mr. BENN
I certainly hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman will not press his Amendment. First of all, the words "original beneficiaries" have no sort of meaning, as they would convey the persons who first occupied the place. Secondly, how can you give to the Committee instructions of that kind, which would mean that any soldier or sailor who cares to apply would have priority over any other public servant who had served in the tropics and who might be far more deserving of attention. I am sure the hon. member would not wish that. When I say that there is a committee of eight persons of whom four are members of the Services, hon. Members may be sure that there is no intention whatever of departing from the practice of making this primarily a convalescent home for officers of the Services. If there are not enough to occupy the beds, as there have not been at times, we wish to be able to use them for other persons who have served as public servants in the tropics and deserve and need help of this kind.

§ Sir F. BANBURY
Though the Committee may be constituted in a satisfactory manner now, in twenty years' time it may be constituted quite differently. It may be that the words of my hon. Friend are not the best that could be chosen, but he was in the difficulty that unless some amendment was inserted there would be no Report stage, and consequently a further Amendment could not be considered. I understand that it is the wish of the Government to preserve their rights to the people who were originally supposed to have the benefit of this institution, and only put in other people if the beds are unoccupied. It is best to have that on the statute, and if the hon. Gentleman would promise to insert in another place words to that effect, my hon. Friend would probably be satisfied. It would merely be inserting in the statute what the Government say is their intention.

§ Mr. BENN
I have stated what is the intention of the controllers of this convalescent home, but I am quite prepared to recommend for the favourable consideration of my Noble Friend the suggestion made by the hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. EYRES-MONSELL
In that case I beg to withdraw the Amendment.