§ 53. Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Prime Minister whether he authorised the arrangement by which any reduction made in the salary of the Attorney-General would fall on his colleagues; and whether there is any precedent in the history of this House for a salary voted by the House being divided among Ministers?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not quite clear as to the meaning of the hon. Baronet's question. It is within the public knowledge that under the pooling arrangement, to which reference is presumably made, salaries are equalised. Therefore if one Member suffers, all the Members suffer. I know of no law or prescription which forbids any association of men from doing what they will with the salaries which they receive.
§ Sir A. MARKHAMThe question on the Paper is not in the form in which I handed it in at the Table. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Attorney-General stated, in answering a question on this subject, that the fees of his colleagues would be reduced if the House voted a reduction of his salary by £1,000 per annum? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, owing to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dundee leaving the Cabinet, the present total of fees shared by Ministers is larger than before, having regard to the reduction in the Law Officers' salaries?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, they remain just the same, I think.
§ Sir A. MARKHAMHe took £4,250 out of the pool, and the saving on the Law Officers' salaries represents £2,000; so the Cabinet are the gainers.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this proposed arrangement was alleged by the Attorney-General as a reason for making a total change in the method of remuneration?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not aware of that.
§ 54. Mr. COWANasked the Prime Minister whether the salaries and fees attaching to the offices of Attorney-General and Solicitor-General, respectively, are taxed in common with the income of other classes of the community; and, if so, will he state upon what ground 24 the salaries and fees of these public servants are to be reduced, while those of other public servants continue to be paid in full?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The reduction which has been made is a spontaneous act of the present Law Officers.
§ 64. Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Secretary to the Treasury the sums of money paid respectively to Lord Buckmaster and the Home Secretary for the financial year 1914–15?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Montagu)£9,725 and £14,705.