§ Motion made, and Question proposed,
§ 7. "That a sum, not exceeding £18,568, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st 1187 day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the General Board of Control for Scotland." [NOTE.—£10,000 has been voted on account.]
§ Mr. HOGGEThere is an item in this Vote which requires some explanation. Why are the provisions towards the expenses of local authorities so largely increased? There is an increase of £11,400. Is this due to the treatment of cases among the soldiers, or is it due to any other reason which is local or national?
§ Mr. PRINGLEIn order to enable my right hon. Friend to refresh himself from the usual sources of information, I wish to ask the attention of the Committee to this very large increase. I notice from the Vote that of these contributions in the year 1915-16 only £7,250 was voted, and that this year we are called upon to vote the largely increased sum of £18,650; that is an increase of £11,400. We have more than doubled the contributions towards the expenses of local authorities. I am not quite clear at this moment whether certain Sections of the Mental Deficiency Act, of unhappy memory—
§ Mr. TENNANTOh!
§ Mr. PRINGLEYes; your predecessor had a very unhappy time over it. I am not sure whether those Sections are regarded as a justification for this expenditure. I have no doubt that the Statutory provisions have made it necessary. Those of us who were severe critics of that particular Act on the ground of the enormous burdens it was likely to impose upon the local authorities and the Imperial Exchequer are justified in the criticisms we then made in view of the heavy charge which is now put upon the Estimates. If I recollect the matter aright, the Imperial contributions are pound for pound with those of the local authorities under those Sections, so that if the Imperial contribution has increased from £7,250 to £18,650 in a certain year, we may take it that the burden upon local ratepayers has been increased in a similar proportion. In these circumstances, those of us who criticised it as a piece of unnecessary and wasteful so-called social reform, which was only advocated by cranks like the hon. Member for Stirlingshire (Major Chapple), who had quaint ideas about methods of dealing with the unfit population, and was adopted to gratify those cranks who formed a Royal Commission some years ago, are now 1188 justified in the criticisms we then made. The financial situation with which we are now faced justifies all that was said by us at that time in trying to prevent that measure being passed.
§ Mr. TENNANTI am informed that the increase of expenditure is due to the administration of the Mental Deficiency Act. I am pleased to be able to confirm my hon. Friends in their determination to justify the attitude which they adopted some years ago when that measure was passing through this House. To my mind, it does not at all follow that, because there is a considerable expenditure upon the administration of this Act, it was necessarily an improper expenditure of public money. I did not follow the matter at that time because I was engaged in the administration of the War Office. I hope I may be absolved from having neglected my duties in that respect. I only cautiously and tentatively warn my hon. Friends that there may be an increased expenditure of public money upon administration which may be valuable to the State, and may be money expended very well. It may be in excess of what was anticipated at the time, but it does not follow from that that the money expended is necessarily wasted. That is the only contention I would put forward. I would confirm my hon. Friends in the correctness of their prophecy that there would be a certain amount of money which would necessarily be expended.
§ Question put, and agreed to.