ROYAL PARKS AND PLEASURE GARDENS.—Class II. (Hansard, 15 April 1915)

§ Sir F. BANBURY
I would like to draw the attention of the Minister in charge of this Vote to the large number of men at work in the Royal Parks. Yesterday, 51 in passing through the Green Park, I saw men digging holes round the roots of trees which I think they were going to move to some other place. At the present time, when we are all asked to do what we can to aid recruiting, it seems to me rather absurd to keep large numbers of men in the parks moving trees. I have also seen them moving earth from one side of a walk to the other. From the way in which some of these men work I should think that they were employed because they were unemployable, and because it was necessary to find as much work as possible for as large a number of men as possible. It seems to me that the Government should set an example, and that all unnecessary work in the public parks should be postponed. I noticed at one particular place near the Lodge at the Serpentine that large quantities of earth were being taken away from one part of the park, to the depth of about 6 inches, and were being laid in another part of the park. That may be all right in time of peace, but it is quite unnecessary now, and it is taking a large number of men and horses, and the horses are just the sort that are required for use at the front. I hope that we shall have some explanation from the Government of what is, I think, a totally unnecessary work which is being carried on at the present time.

§ Sir W. BYLES
I desire to ask a question in reference to Kew Gardens. I raised the question of the wages of the gardeners there, and I wish to know whether those who are employed there at present are satisfied with their wages and conditions of employment?

§ Mr. HOGGE
I desire to ask the hon. Member who represents the Office of Works, in reference to the men employed at Holyrood Park, in Edinburgh, whether some of them are paid at a rate as low as 22s. per week? I desire also to ask if he will give us any information with regard to that portion of Holyrood Park which is being set apart for the statue in memory of King Edward VII.? For some time in that park there has been erected a temporary structure showing how this new statue to the late King would appear, and how it would fit in with the surrounding conditions. I have seen a model and, so far as I am able to ascertain, it is altogether out of keeping with the architecture of Holyrood Place, and with the architecture of Canongate, which is close by. I would like to know in what position 52 we are with regard to the erection of that statue? It is being erected by public subscription. Therefore I have nothing to do with the statue, but the ground on which the statue is to stand is within the park, and is being granted for the purpose of its erection. I would be very much obliged to the hon. Member if he will tell us exactly how the matter stands, and when the statue is to be proceeded with, and if it is to be proceeded with in the way in which the model is erected, and in the position in which it stands now, and in the style of architecture of which the model is intended to give us an example?

§ Mr. BOYTON
I would like to ask the hon. Member whether it is the policy of his Department, and have they taken it into account as part of their policy, to make any increase in the wages of the park-keepers and others employed in connection with the parks in order to meet the increased cost of living, and, if so, whether those increases will be limited to those who are not of military age?

§ Mr. BECK (Lord of the Treasury)
In answer to the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury) I may say that an attempt is being made to keep down all unnecessary work in the Royal Parks, but it has been found necessary to remove some trees in order to make room for some temporary buildings which are being used for military purposes in the park, and, in addition, some elms have been blown down which have had to be cleared away; but I shall certainly do my utmost to point out to the Office of Works the necessity which exists of keeping down all unnecessary work. As regards the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Sir W. Byles), I regret that I cannot give him the information for which he asks, as the wages to which he refers come under the Board of Agriculture. In reference to the workmen employed in Holyrood Park, it is true that the lowest wages are 22s., but wages have been increased, and the Office of Works endeavours to keep the wages up to the standard of good employment. In reference to the question of the statue to the memory of King Edward VII., I must throw myself on the indulgence of my hon. Friend, as I do not at present possess the information for which he has asked.

§ Sir W. BYLES
May I point out to the hon. Gentleman that there is here an item of £335 for salaries and wages at Kew Gardens?

§ Mr. BECK
That would not be for the staff at Kew Gardens, which must represent a much larger sum than that, and which comes under the Board of Agriculture. I am glad to say that I have discovered from a reliable source within the last few moments that the question of Holyrood is still under careful consideration, in reference to the statute to King Edward VII., and that there is a considerable divergence of opinion. On the question of the increase of wages to meet the increased cost of living I think that the hon. Member for Marylebone (Mr. Boyton) has adumbrated the policy of the Office of Works. We are trying to increase the wages so as to meet the increased cost of living, caused to the older men by the War. The whole question is one of some difficulty, but the policy is to try to meet all reasonable demands of those in the employment of the Department.

§ Mr. HOGGE
I am not quite satisfied with the reply of the hon. Gentleman in reference to Holyrood. He has himself admitted that the wages paid there are 22s. a week.

§ Mr. BECK
That is the lowest.

§ Mr. HOGGE
That is for working men, and is for a 48 hours week. It is less than 6d. an hour. If my hon. Friend will investigate the terms of service at Holy-rood Park he will find that it takes these men a considerable number of years to reach anything like a living wage. My hon. Friend knows that every class of society at the present moment has been making demands on the Treasury and on employers for an increase in wages on account of the increased cost of living. I hope that my hon. Friend will bear in mind those few men with only 22s. a week, and that he will do more than say that their case is being considered, but that he will see that their wages are raised. That is the kind of thing that a young Minister fresh in his post ought to do. It shows that he is able to take his courage in both hands, and to meet adequately the point that is put to him.

§ Mr. BARNES
I desire to support the appeal of the hon. Member for East Edinburgh on the question of wages. The point is one of the utmost importance, Among the items of which he spoke I find that £7,818 for this year, being £22 less than last year, is down for the wages of these lower paid workmen. I have 54 been trying to get some satisfaction for a long time as to the wages of these men, and I had a certain promise given by a Cabinet Minister last November in regard to some of them, which promise has not been fulfilled. I cannot do less on this occasion than back up my hon. Friend and others who have raised this matter. It is a scandal that the Government are giving bonuses and increased wages to men in the dockyards and arsenals who are in a position to enforce those wages, but are giving nothing to these lower paid men in the parks, pensioned messengers in Government offices, and all sorts of men who are working at scandalously low wages. Included in that category is this considerable number, I say considerable, having regard to the amount, £8,718, who are being paid, not 22s. a week, which my hon. Friend says they are getting in Edinburgh, but 20s. a week. I hope we shall have some better and more satisfactory pledge, before we pass this Vote, than that which has been given.

§ Mr. BECK
I am sorry that it is quite impossible for me to go beyond what I have already stated. I have been only a few weeks in my present position and, not being the Minister concerned, I have no responsibility whatever in regard to questions of administration by the Department, and it will be seen, therefore, that I am not in a position to give such a pledge as my hon. Friend asks. I am, however, allowed to say, and I have already intimated as much, that the whole question of wages is under most careful and active consideration by the Office of Works, and they are trying to do their very best to meet the extra expenditure which is thrown upon the workmen by the War. I am informed, and I ought to have mentioned it before, that the point as regards military age is being carefully borne in mind.