PREMIUM BONDS. (Hansard, 12 November 1917)

§ Mr. KING
I am sorry that this Motion is down upon the Paper, because it seems to me that it is quite unnecessary and very ill-advised. The proposal has been before the public now for a considerable 184 time that money for the purposes of the War should be raised by lottery or premium bonds. There are a number of people who seem to think that if you introduce into our financial system the element of chance or, as I prefer to call it, the elements of gambling, millions of money will come in which is now withheld. I totally disagree. I believe that those persons who are best able to judge are agreed that this method will only raise a small sum compared with our enormous commitment and necessities. I further disagree with this principle because it is going back to a method we discussed eighty years ago. In bygone times, even in the times of Elizabeth, there were methods of raising money for the purposes of the Exchequer by means of lotteries, and, later, till the times—

§ Mr. SPEAKER
We are not discussing the subject of premium bonds now. We are only discussing the question whether a Committee should be appointed to inquire into the subject. The hon. Member must limit his observations to the question of the appointment of the Committee.

§ Mr. KING
I shall be very glad to do so. I want to point out that the whole method of introducing lottery or premium bonds would not raise the money we want I think it is legitimate on this Motion to point out that no other Government either in Europe, Asia, or America, has raised money in this way. I understand that the only country in recent times which has raised money by lottery or premium bonds is Serbia, and that only to a very small extent. It was practically given up there, and was not proceeded with to any large extent.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member appears to take a delight in disregarding my ruling. I have already pointed out that we are not discussing the subject of premium bonds. We are discussing the question of appointing a Committee to consider it. This is the second occasion on which I have warned the hon. Member to be more relevant

§ Mr. KING
I am extremely sorry to appear even for a moment to disregard your ruling, Sir, and I beg to apologise. I have certainly no desire to disregard any of the forms or Rules of the House. This is certainly relevant. To-day I asked the Prime Minister whether any advice had been taken upon this subject from the Treasury, and whether the. 185 Treasury and the War Savings Committee had been asked for their opinion upon this matter. The answer I got was rather characteristic. It declined to face the question at all. It gave me no information whether the Treasury or the War Savings Committee had been consulted as to whether or not an issue of premium bonds should be made. If I were on the Treasury Bench and if I were Chancellor of the Exchequer I have no doubt I should do things differently from the present occupants of those posts. Possibly I should not do the things so well. I doubt very often if I should do them any worse. This I certainly would do: I would ask the advice of people who knew better than myself, of people who were engaged in large financial undertakings and were accustomed to questions of raising money. If I were advised to take up the issue of premium or lottery 186 bonds, the first thing I should do would be to ask the Treasury what they thought. You have there men of the highest reputation and experience, who, apparently, have not been consulted at all. The next thing I should do after consulting the Treasury would be to consult the War Savings Committee. Of all the undertakings of the Government during this War nothing has been so admirable as the work of the War Savings Committee.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I call the attention of the House to the continued irrelevance of the hon. Member, and ask him to resume his seat.