CLAUSE 1.—(Administrative Expenses of Local and District Committees.) (Hansard, 20 March 1917)

§ Mr. BARNES
I beg to move, in Subsection (2), to leave, out the word "one-half"["one-half of the expenses"], and to insert instead thereof the words "two-thirds."

§ Mr. HARDY
I should like to thank the right hon. Gentleman for the way in which he has taken this matter up. Although I desired to sec the Treasury paying three-fourths, I am quite sure that the Committee generally will agree that the right hon. Gentleman has done all he can to meet us, and we should very gratefully accept the proposition he makes, that the Treasury should pay two-thirds, and leave one-third to be paid by the local authority. I should like to call attention to one matter which perhaps he may bring before the Statutory Committee, which body will now, I think, be more under his control, and that is that the local committees in the counties feel that if the demands that are being made upon them at the present time in connection with some of the circulars which are being sent down are con- 718 tinued, there will undoubtedly be a very large increase in the administrative expenses. Circular 30, in connection with records and cases, has been sent down requiring monthly returns and three-monthly returns and an enormous number of returns which, when sent from the local committees to the sub-committees, although there are a large number of voluntary helpers, will inevitably lead to paid assistants in all the sub-committee districts. If you are to have this paid assistance forced upon you in connection with demands made from the central office, undoubtedly the administrative expenses will largely increase, with a consequent higher demand upon the rates and taxes. As the Minister of Pensions has taken this matter up, I hope that he will take steps to see that no more returns than are absolutely necessary are required. I think the monthly returns represent an excessive demand, and I hope that some means will be taken to limit what must become a considerable source of expense.

§ Mr. WATT
I desire to express regret that the right hon. Gentleman has accepted the Amendment pressed upon him in Committee. He has fallen into the error of imagining that the speakers in this House always express the views of the House. He has forgotten that there are many silent Members, and on the occasion in question the silent Members were backing him up in the position which he orignally took up, namely, that this expense should be divided half-and-half between the Treasury and the local authority. He ought to have discounted, with his knowledge of affairs, a good deal of what was said on that occasion, because each of the hon. Members who spoke visibly and audibly spoke from a brief. They had all got some brief from their local authority. Naturally the local authorities were very anxious that the expenses of this measure should be taken off their shoulders and put upon the Treasury. I do not believe that the hon. Members who stated those views believed in their heart of hearts that it was wise that the local authority should have very little expense and that the Treasury should have most of it. As my right hon. Friend said, when he brought in this half-and-half principle, there must be a check upon the expenditure of local authorities. Every one of us who has had any experience of local authorities knows that if there is not a sufficient check on them 719 their expenditure is lavish and not as economical as it ought to be. I think that the idea was to stick to the half-and-half arrangement in most cases, but in the case of poor counties such as some in Ireland and in Scotland—I suppose there is no such thing as a poor county in England— there ought to be some prevision whereby the half payable by the county might be reduced and the balance borne by the Treasury. I hope that my right hon. Friend will remember in future that a majority of those who are silent in the House differ in view very often from those who speak.