§ (1) For the purposes of this Act, it shall be lawful for His Majesty by warrant under the sign manual to appoint seven Commissioners, to be styled the Forestry Commissioners, of whom one, to be appointed by His Majesty, shall be chairman.
§ (2) There shall be paid to not more than three of the Forestry Commissioners, in this Act referred to as "the Commissioners," such salaries in each year (not exceeding in the aggregate four thousand five hundred pounds) as the Treasury may direct.
§ (3) Subject to the provisions of this Section, the term of office of a paid Commissioner shall be five years, and the term of office of an un paid Commissioner shall be five years.
§ (4) On a casual vacancy occurring owing to the death, resignation, or incapacity of a Com missioner, the person appointed by His Majesty to fill the vacancy shall continue in office until the date on which the Commissioner in whose place he was appointed would have ceased to hold office.
§ (5) A person who has vacated office as a Commissioner shall be eligible for reappointment.
§ Major COURTHOPEI beg to move, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "seven" ["to appoint seven Commissioners"], and to insert instead thereof the word "eight."
This Amendment will have the effect, if accepted, of increasing the total number of the Forestry Commissioners from seven to eight, and the number of the unpaid Commissioners from four to five. I believe it is the intention, and certainly it seemed on the Second Reading to be the general desire of the House, that one of the unpaid Commissioners should be a Member of this House. I think it is very desirable that there should be not less than four other unpaid Commissioners, so that each part of the United Kingdom, if it is intended to appoint them on a representative basis, may be represented by an unpaid Commissioner. I do not think I need argue the point at greater length; I beg to move.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Arthur Boscawen)I quite understand the object which my hon. Friend has in mind, and also the object which is in the mind of the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine (Lieut.-Colonel A. Murray) in his Amendment which comes next on the. Paper, namely, that there shall be an un paid Forestry Commissioner who shall be a Member of this House, and who shall stand much in the same relation to this 796 House as the unpaid Charity Commissioner does at the present time. With regard to that, I speak with some knowledge, because I was once the unpaid Charity Commissioner. He is a member, not of the Government, but usually of the party to which the Government belongs, and he changes with every change of Government in consequence. He attends the board meetings, and so forth, is cognisant of all that is going on, and answers questions on behalf of the Commissioners. Similarly, when the Estimates come on, although the Financial Secretary, in the case of the Charity Commission, is responsible, the unpaid Commissioner as a rule attends to assist the Financial Secretary. I am quite willing that that plan, which I think works well, shall be adopted here, and for that reason I am willing to accept this Amendment and to add one member to the Commission. He will be a more or less ephemeral person, coining and going with Parliaments and Governments, and, therefore, the total number of seven more or less permanent Commissioners will not be interfered with, but we shall have a link between the Commission and this House. I am, therefore, willing to accept this Amendment, and to move an Amendment lower down to define clearly what the duties of the additional unpaid Commissioner will be.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ 3.0 P.M.
Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAYThe hon. and gallant Gentleman, in the remarks which he has just made, referred to the Amendment which I was proposing to move. I am very glad that he accepted the Amendment of the hon. and gallant Member for Eye. He said that he proposed to move an Amendment further down to say what were to be the duties of the extra Commissioner who was to be a Member of this House, but he did not say whether or not he proposed to accept this Amendment of mine, to insert, at the end of the Subsection, the words "who shall be a Member of the Commons House of Parliament."
Sir A. BOSCAWENPerhaps I may explain. I am quite willing to accept such words as those proposed by my hon. and gallant Friend, but I think they would come in better lower down, and, if my hon. and gallant Friend will not at this point move his Amendment, I will move, at the end of the Clause, to insert as a new Subsection the words
One of the unpaid Commissioners shall be a Member of the Commons House of Parliament.797 These words merely follow the precedent of the Charity Commission Act, and make it clear that the added Commissioner is to be the Parliamentary Commissioner to whom I have alluded.
Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYIn view of what the hon. and gallant Gentleman has said, I do not move my Amendment, I presume that, when he moves the new Sub-section which ho has mentioned, we shall be able to have a short discussion on it. There are one or two points in connection with the duties of the Parliamentary representative which I hope we shall be able to clear up at that stage.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSI beg to move, in Subsection (1), after the word "Chairman," to insert the words "and one at least a person having scientific attainments and a technical knowledge of forestry."
The words of this Amendment, as they originally stood on the Paper, were "and one at least having a scientific and technical knowledge of forestry." I have altered the words slightly, because I want it to be understood that one of the Commissioners should be a man of general scientific knowledge, and at the same time should have some technical knowledge of the subject with which he has to deal. I do not think it is necessary that I should speak at any length in urging this Amendment. Everyone will admit that it is of the utmost importance that certainly one member of the Commission should be a man of scientific ability. That is essential not only on account of the importance of the questions bearing upon forestry which will be brought under his notice, but also in order that he may be able to appreciate the various scientific facts that may come under his notice from the committees that will be appointed to indicate the results of the different kinds of research work in connection with forestry. The British Science Guild have issued a short memorandum on this subject from their Parliamentary Committee, in which they point out that there is no statutory acceptance of the obligation that any Forestry Commissioner shall be able to understand or perform any of these duties, or to test the qualifications and administrative value of any Assistant-Commissioner, or to profit by the advice of any consultative committee. With a view of indicating the necessity that one of these Commissioners shall have scientific knowledge, I have put down this Amendment. I should like to point 798 out that the Minister who wound up the Debate on the Second Reading of the Bill—namely, the right hon. Member for the Gorbals Division of Glasgow (Mr. G. N. Barnes) —said that he was quite certain that the Government would give sympathetic consideration to the proposal which I then made.
§ Mr. ACLANDI do not feel that this is really necessary. As a matter of fact, it will, as I have reason to know, be provided for most adequately in the formation of the Commission. I do not know the intentions of the Government with regard to certain members of the Commission, and I do not know if they have decided, but undoubtedly it is essential that there should be a technical member of the Commission having high qualifications in forestry. The gentleman who has been acting in that capacity up to the present will, I know, continue in it, and his qualifications are these. He is a Bachelor of Science of Aberdeen University; he obtained a Rhodes Scholarship and came to Oxford, where he took First Class Honours in the Science School. He is also a Bachelor of Arts, and took the Diploma of Forestry at Oxford, at the head of the list; and he became Burdett-Coutts lie-search scholar of Oxford University. Incidentally, he is a Double Blue; and I think, if it is a man with these qualifications who is to be selected as the technical member of the Commission, the hon. Gentleman (Sir Philip Magnus) might also be satisfied without the insertion of these words.
Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYThat may be so in respect to the present Commissioner, but it might not be so at, some future time—at the end of the period of five years, for instance. I take it that the Amendment is moved in order to secure for all time that on this Commission there should be at least one person having a scientific and technical knowledge of forestry.
Sir A. BOSCAWENI really do not think it is necessary. No one can see any Government setting up a Forestry Commission without appointing, at all events, one member who has scientific knowledge; indeed, it may have exactly the opposite effect to what my hon. Friend suggests. It rather seems to suggest that, so long as there is one who fulfils the necessary obligations, the other seven might be absolute ignoramuses. I think we should do better if we do not accept these 799 words. It rather casts a slur on the Commission when you say one at least shall have technical knowledge.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSI am afraid I must press the Amendment, for the reasons advanced by the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Lieut.-Colonel Murray). It is not a slur upon the Commission, but it might be a slur upon those who may have to appoint Commissioners at some future time, if it is any slur at all, but I do not see that it is any slur. It only indicates what the whole scientific world desires should be done—namely, that it should be a statutory obligation upon the Government to appoint at least one member of the Commission having scientific knowledge.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Major W. MURRAYI beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (1), to add the words "and of whom not less than two shall have special knowledge and experience of plantation and forestry in Scotland."
The object of the Amendment is to secure fair and permanent representation of Scottish forestry on the Commission. Scotland has a very large and a very special interest in this question, and has recently done a good deal of administrative work. It is in order to meet that feeling that I move the Amendment.
Sir A. BOSCAWENThe Government fully recognises the great importance of the work that has been done in Scotland, and for that reason, unless there is any special objection raised in other quarters of the House. I shall be prepared to accept this.
§ Sir P. MAGNUSWhy should this be limited to Scotland? Why should not the same knowledge be required in England? It would be better to put in a Clause which will apply to the whole of the United Kingdom. Why it should be required that one Commissioner should have special knowledge of forestry in Scotland and it should not be necessary that any Commissioner should have special knowledge of forestry in England is certainly something I cannot understand, and I am quite certain scientific men will not understand.
Sir A. BOSCAWENThe only reason is that more than half the land which is suitable for afforestation is in Scotland, and we thought it only fair to take care that Scotland gets adequate representation. 800 That was the only reason why I accepted it. It was not proposed by me. The Scottish Members put it down, and they have a very good case.
§ Mr. RAWLINSONWould it not be safer to leave out any qualification at all? The whole of the argument of the Government against the Amendment of my hon. Friend (Sir P. Magnus) applies with equal force here. To say that certain members of the Commission are to have special knowledge of one part of the country but need know nothing about another part of the country would surely be a very invidious state of affairs. We may surely trust those who have the appointment of the Commissioners to say that, as the bulk of the forestry will probably occur in Scotland, the people they select shall have special knowledge of the work in Scotland. But it is equally necessary in England. I have frequently come across people who have known forestry in the North pretty well, but show lamentable ignorance if you bring them down to Hampshire and Dorsetshire. It would be most invidious to say so many people should be qualified in the North of England, so many in the South, and so many in Scotland. Surely you ought to trust the people who make these appointments to see that the Commissioners will be men with adequate knowledge, not merely of one special part of the United Kingdom, but shall have a general knowledge of forestry.
§ Colonel GREIGI hope my bon. and gallant Friend (Sir A. Boscawen) will adhere to his acceptance of the Amendment. In Scotland there is very considerable doubt as to the wisdom of a central Commission. I am certain that acceptance by the Government of the Amendment will go a long way to allay that feeling of distrust which is entertained, and, however great the need's of forestry in England and elsewhere, it is in Scotland that the main portion of the work will have to-be done.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Lieut-Commander KENWORTHYI beg to move, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words "not more than three of."
The object of the Amendment is to leave out the obligation to appoint a larger proportion of the Commissioners as unpaid Commissioners. I am very sympathetic to the Government's idea, possibly of economy, in having unpaid Commissioners, 801 but there are certain objections to it which, I think, should be considered. During the War it has been a fact that a number of the unpaid officials have not been sufficiently under the control of the Department to which they should have been answerable, and, although that is only the case in a small degree possibly, nevertheless it is a principle that I think we should recognise. If we can get Commissioners who are prepared to work without a salary I believe it would be possible for them to return, their salaries.
§ Major COURTHOPEIs it in order for a private Member to propose a charge on public funds affecting the payment of certain Commissioners who, according to the Government proposals, are to be unpaid?
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Sir E. Cornwall)I should like to hear the views of the Parliamentary Secretary.
Sir A. BOSCAWENThe effect of this Amendment would be to increase the amount paid in the form of salaries. I do not know that it would increase the total charge, but pro tanto it would diminish the amount that could be spent in afforestation. I do not know whether, as it does not increase the total charge, it could be ruled out of order as being moved by a private Member.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe Financial Resolution says,
That it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of a sum not exceeding £3,500,000 into a Forestry Fund.That would enable the Amendment to be moved.
Lieut.-Commander KEN WORTHYI am alive to the fact that if we pay more in salaries there will be less for planting trees, but, out of the £3,000,000, the amount in salaries is not very great, and I think the advantage of having these Commissioners paid, and all that that means, quite overrides the possible diminution in the amount of money immediately available for tree-planting and other constructive work. The Amendment also includes leaving out the words, "and the term of office of an unpaid Commissioner shall be five years."
Sir A. BOSCAWENI hope the Committee will not support this Amendment. 802 I quite understand the object of the hon. and gallant Member. He thinks that the work would be better done by having a. greater number of paid Commissioners. That is not the view of the Government or of those who have worked on this matter up to date. I believe the scheme we have put forward is a perfectly practicable scheme. We have already three paid Commissioners, and it will be quite easy to find at least four other gentlemen who take great interest in the work and who would do a great deal of work unpaid. I am rather surprised that the hon. Member, who generally is on the side of economy, should propose to increase the bureaucracy by four paid officials at the expense of the work they have to do. I am sure the Friends of the hon. and gallant. Gentleman will not support him.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYAfter the explanation, I bog leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. HOGGEI beg to move, in Subsection (2), to leave out the words "four thousand five hundred pounds," and to insert instead thereof the words'' three thousand pounds."
I propose to reduce the salaries which are to be paid, and I am sorry that one hon. Member who sits on this side should, as a prologue to this discussion, have given an opportunity to the Government to jeer. I am against the proposal to have two types of Commissioners. It is a great mistake, and it means that on this central board the four Commissioners who are unpaid will exercise the same authority, and be able to do the same things as the paid men. I think that is bad at the beginning. If it is possible to get four gentlemen who will render that service unpaid to the State because of their interest in the question, it is surely possible to get seven. We could supply the whole seven from Scotland, which is a most generous country.
§ Mr. HOGGEThere is a delusion among Southerners that Scotsmen require to be paid for everything they do. The greatest services to the State are rendered by Scotsmen without any pay. [Hon. Members: "Name !"] On that- point it is a mistake, and it is wrong to have as Commissioners seven men, four of wham are in a different category from the others. Pour of these men are really the masters of the other three, because no man who draws a salary 803 under the Forestry Commission can have the same power and authority in a joint meeting of the seven as the man who does not draw a salary.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYWhat about the Development Commissioners?
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYThey have done a great deal of good work.
§ Mr. HOGGEI have never heard of it. I do not know what they nave done. I see no evidence of it. I shall be glad to have any testimonials in praise of the Development Commissioners. I have seen no evidence anywhere of the work which seems to appeal to hon. and gallant Members. It is a wrong system to combine in a board of this kind, because it really means a board of unpaid and paid men. The second argument is this: We have denied increased salaries to overworked Ministers within the last few days on the grounds of economy. I fit is possible to get four out of seven men to do this work for nothing, surely a £l,000 honorarium for the other three is, quite sufficient Yesterday the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer told us that we were heading straight to bankruptcy. They were repeating what has been said from the beginning by us, and in the same phraseology that we have used. If we are honest on this question of economy, then my hon. Friends will support me in moving this reduction and limiting the salaries to a total of £3,000. I have made it an aggregate salary, because I want to give the Minister in charge perfect freedom to pay any of the three £l,500, or to pay one his travelling expenses and so on. I am giving him the use of £3,000, and I am making no point about the distribution of the money. If you can get four out of seven to do the work for nothing, £3,000 is quite sufficient to cover the other three. Obviously £4,500 is not adequate for three competent well-equipped men. My hon. Friend opposite dealt with the scientific point of view, and he wished to insert some words to make sure that these people would have scientific knowledge. In a decent university no one would ever dream of saying that £1,500 was an adequate salary.
§ Mr. G. MURRAY£1,500 a year?
§ Mr. JOHNSTONEMany professors have less.
§ Mr. HOGGEI am not saying that many have less or that they have more. What I say is that it is not an adequate salary for any man who has to undergo scientific and professional training. With all his expenses and what it costs him to attain his knowledge it is not an adequate salary, and he could not live on it unless he got other work to do. No professor of a university exists on his salary as a professor. It is the other work that comes to him because of his position that enables him to take the post at that amount of money, and here is an unnecessary Act of Parliament—because this Bill is absolutely unnecessary so far as Scotland is concerned; we do not want—
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYYou should say, "I do not want it."
§ Mr. HOGGEI will say "I" do not want it. I always understood that in the House of Commons, when we say "we," we use it in an editorial sense.
§ Mr. G. MURRAYYou spoke on behalf of Scotland.
§ Mr. HOGGELet the hon. Member go to his constituents on the question of taking away from Scotland her powers with regard to forestry. In this matter he would not have any "coupon" to help him into this House. Where is the Secretary for Scotland? He has never been present at any of these Debates.
§ Colonel GREIGI am told that he is ill.
§ Mr. HOGGEHe was not ill when we were discussing this matter before. He is not here because lie is not in favour of this Bill.
§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI may remind the hon. Member that the Amendment is, to leave out the words "four thousand five hundred," and to insert instead thereof the words "three thousand." Because it is a manuscript Amendment it is, perhaps, rather difficult for the Committee so far to understand what the Amendment is.
§ Mr. HOGGEIf the Committee had left me alone, I could have made my speech quite short. If hon. Members object to my phraseology, surely they do not 805 expect me to take all I get without giving something back! My point is economy. If you have seven members of a Commission, four of whom are unpaid, it is a waste of public money to give £1,500 a year to each of the other three, particularly as those of us who represent Scotland—I am speaking for myself in this particular instance—are strongly of opinion that the people of Scotland do not want this Bill. They never asked for it, and they object to this waste of public money.
§ Major COURTHOPEI beg to move, in Sub-section (3), to leave out the word "paid" ["term of office of a paid Commissioner."].
This Amendment, and one which follows, are mere drafting Amendments. They arose from alterations made in the Bill in another place. As the Bill was originally
Sir A. BOSCAWENI need not occupy the time of the Committee for a single moment. I cannot accept this Amendment. This matter has been very carefully-thought out, and the salaries proposed, we believe, are reasonable.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 119; Noes, 14.
805| Division No. 91.] | AYES. | [3.31 p.m. |
| Acland, Rt. Hon. Francis Dyke | Greig, Colonel James William | Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. (Exeter) |
| Baldwin, Stanley | Griggs, sir Peter | Norris, Sir Henry G. |
| Balfour, George (Hampstead) | Gritten, W. G. Howard | Oman, C. W. C. |
| Barnston, Major Harry | Hacking, Captain D. H. | Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William |
| Barrand, A. R. | Hailwood, A. | Parker, James |
| Beck, Arthur Cecil | Henry, Denis S. (Londonderry, S.) | Parry, Lt.-Colonel Thomas Henry |
| Bennett, T. J. | Herbert, Denniss (Hertford) | Perkins, Walter Frank |
| Blair, Major Reginald | Hewart, Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon | Pollack, Sir Ernest Murray |
| Bascawen, Sir Arthur Griffith- | Hilder, Lieut.-Col. F. | Pratt, John William |
| Bowyer, Captain G. W. E. | Hills, Major J. W. (Durham) | Pulley, Charles Thornton |
| Buchanan, Lieut.-Col. A. L. H. | Hope, Lt.-Col. Sir J. (Midlothian) | Purchase, H. G. |
| Buckley, Lt.-Col. A. | Hopkins, J. W. W. | Raw, Lieut.-Colonel Dr. N. |
| Burn, Colonel C. R. (Torquay) | Howard, Major S. G. | Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel |
| Cautley, Henry Strother | Hughes, Spencer Leigh | Rees, Sir J. D. |
| Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lard R. (Hitchin) | Hume-Williams, Sir Wm. Ellis | Richardson, Alex. (Gravesend) |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Birm., W.) | Hunter, Gen. Sir A. (Lancaster) | Robinson, T. (Stretford, Lanes.) |
| Cobb, Sir Cyril | Hurd, P. A. | Roundell, Lieutenant-Colonel R. F. |
| Cockerill, Brig.-Gen. G. K. | Jameson, Major J. G. | Scott, A. M. (Glas., Bridgeton) |
| Colfox, Major W. P. | Jesson, C. | Seddon, J. A. |
| Courthope, Major George Loyd | Jodrell, N. P. | Seely, Maj.-Gen. Rt. Hon. John |
| Cowan, D. M. (Scottish University) | Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington) | Shortt, Rt. Hon. E. (N'castle-on-T., W.) |
| Craig, Col. Sir James (Down, Mid.) | Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen) | Sprot, Colonel Sir Alexander |
| Craik, Right Hon. Sir Henry | Jones, William Kennedy (Hornsey) | Stanley, Colonel Hon. G. F. (Preston) |
| Curzon, Commander Viscount | Kellaway, Frederick George | Stevens, Marshall |
| Dawes, J. A. | Lane-Fox, Major G. R. | Surtees, Brig.-General H. C. |
| Doyle, N. Grattan | Law, Right Hon. A. Bonar (Glasgow) | Talbot, Rt. Hon. Lord E. (Chichester) |
| Edwards, Major J. (Aberavon) | Lewis, T. A. (Pontypridd, Glam.) | Talbot, G. A. (Hemel Hempstead) |
| Edwards, J. H. (Glam., Neath) | Lindsay, William Arthur | Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.) |
| Elliot, Capt. W. E. (Lanark) | Lorden, John William | Wheler, Colonel Granville C. H. |
| Elliott, Lt.-Col. Sir G. (Islington, W.) | Macdonald, Rt. Hon. J. M. (Stirling) | White, Col. G. D. (Southport) |
| Farquharson, Major A. C. | M'Laren, R. (Lanark, N.) | Wigan, Brigadler-General John Tyson |
| Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue | Macmaster, Donald | Wild, Sir Ernest Edward |
| Forestier-Walker, L. | McMicking, Major Gilbert | Williams, A. (Consett, Durham) |
| Fraser, Major Sir Keith | Malone, Col. C. L. (Leyton. E.) | Wilson, Rt. Hon. J. W. (Stourbridge) |
| Ganzoni, Captain F. C. | Marks, Sir George Croydon | Winterton, Major Earl |
| Gardiner, J. (Parth) | Morden, Col. H. Grant | Woolcock, W. J. U. |
| Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham | Mosley, Oswald | Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L. |
| Gilmour, Lieut-Colonel John. | Mount, William Arthur | |
| Green, A. (Derby) | Murray, Lt.-Col. Hon. A. C. (Aberdeen) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Capt. |
| Green, J. F. (Leicester) | Murray, Hon. G. (St. Rollox) | Guest and Com. Eyres-Monsell. |
| Greene, Lt.-Col. W. (Hackny, N.) | Murray, William (Dumtries) |
| NOES. | ||
| Bowerman, Right Hon. C. W. | Roberts, F. O. (W. Bromwich) | Thomas, Brig.-Gen. Sir O. (Anglesey) |
| Davison, J. E. (Smethwick) | Rose, Frank H. | Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton) |
| Griffiths, T. (Pontypool) | Short, A. (Wednesbury) | |
| Harmsworth, Sir R. L. (Caithness-shire) | Smith, W. (Wellingborough) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. |
| Hodge, Rt. Hon. John | Spoor, B. G | Hoggs and Mr. Neil M'Lean. |
| Johnstone, J. | Swan, J. E. C. |
§ introduced there were two periods of office, five years and ten years. The Amendment will make it five years in both cases. Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. HOGGEI (beg to move, in Sub-section (3), to leave out the word "five" ["paid Commissioners shall be five years"], and to insert instead thereof the word "three."
807 If the Government do not give us a little more time to consider Amendments on this Bill we cannot do better than hand in manuscript Amendments. I will attempt to hand copies of such Amendments to the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill and to the Chairman. As to this particular Amendment, five years governs the period of an ordinary normal Parliament. We want to devise some method of controlling not only the paid, but the unpaid Commissioners.
Sir A. BOSCAWENI hope the hon. Member will not press this Amendment. It is really important, having regard to the greatness of this work, that as far as possible there should be continuity of policy. If I were to criticise, I should say that five years was rather too short a period. I am quite certain that three years is much too short. We really want to initiate a big policy and we want continuity of policy. You are not likely to attain those ends if you limit the tenure of office to so short a period.
§ Mr. HOGGEI do not see the force of the hon. Gentleman's argument. I would be quite willing to withdraw my Amendments if he could convince me by argument that they were wrong. He first of all says this is not his Bill and that he is only in charge of it, and that if it had been his Bill the period we are discussing would have been a much longer period. What difference can there be in continuity of policy if three years was substituted for five year? I am asking him to agree to the shorter period because there is not agreement as to the large policy that he says ought to be initiated. Opportunity ought to be given to this House to review the appointments at the stated times I suggest. I think the hon. Member ought to make some concession to us on a Bill as to which we have never been consulted.
§ Mr. ACLANDI do not think the Amendment is designed to improve the Bill. My hon. Friend (Mr. Hogge) would have no forestry whatever in Scotland rather than have any control of policy by a body on which Scotland is to be strongly represented. I hope the Government will not give way to Amendments moved in that spirit, which will make it much more difficult for us to get the Amendments we want.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYI hope the Government will not accept this Amendment. It is about time something was said by a representative of a rural constituency and a constituency which has the largest 808 potential timber-growing area in Scotland. When the hon. Member says that Scotland does not want this Bill, he may bespeaking for Edinburgh, but he is certainly not speaking for the constituency I. represent. If this Bill, with its defects removed, is passed, I am perfectly certain that my Constituents, whom I have consulted very closely on the matter, will welcome the Bill.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Amendment made: In Sub-section (3). leave out the words "and the term of office of an unpaid Commissioner shall be five years."—;[Major Courthope.]
§ Mr. G. MURRAYI beg to move, at the end, to add
(6) One of the unpaid Commissioners shall be a Member of Parliament who shall be answer able to Parliament for all acts and deeds of the Forestry Commission.The language- of this Amendment is not perhaps in legal phraseology, but there has been very little time to prepare Amendments. I understand the Parliamentary Secretary is prepared to accept an Amendment in this form: "One of the unpaid Commissioners shall be a Member of the Commons House of Parliament." He explained to us that the Charity Commissioners were represented in the House By an unpaid member and who acted as expert adviser to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on all questions which arose in connection with charity matters. But he has not told us that the Financial Secretary would represent the Forestry Commission in this House directly. Until we know that, I do not feel inclined to withdraw. I think it is important we should have Parliamentary control of expenditure and of policy, so far as possible, under this Bill. I think the discussions to-day and on the Second Reading show that there is some opinion in the country which is not favourably disposed to the Bill.
Sir A. BOSCAWENAs I have already indicated, I am substantially in agreement with the views of my hon Friend, and I am willing to accept the Amendment in the form he mentioned. I could not accept the additional words "who shall be answerable to Parliament for all acts and deeds of the Forestry Commission," as they would make the unpaid Forestry Commissioner a member of the Government. What I understand to be the general wish is that, without having a separate Minister in this House, there should be a link be- 809 tween the House and the Forestry Commission, as in the case or the Charity Commissioners and, I think, the Development Commissioners. That means that the unpaid member attends the ordinary meetings of the Commissioners and is cognisant of all that goes on, and when questions are put in the House referring to the work he answers those questions. I myself was an unpaid Charity Commissioner for five years, and I answered a good many questions. When the Estimates came up for consideration they were in charge of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and it was always the unpaid Commissioner who made the explanations necessary to obtain the Vote. In the case of the Charity Commissioners, the only words used are those I suggest. There is nothing said in the Charity Commission Act about the unpaid Commissioner being responsible to Parliament for the acts of the Commissioners. My belief is that the system I have described has worked well and the words indicated will carry it out.
§ Mr. HOGGEI cannot agree with that. I have also had experience of the operations of the Charity Commissioners. I have heard questions replied to by the Charity Commissioner who happened to be in the House. The Charity Commission is in a very different category from the Forestry Commission, because we have agreed by the Financial Resolution to take £3,500,000 out of the Consolidated Fund for this particular object. The Parliamentary Secretary gave us an assurance earlier that he was going to suggest the arrangement later on that there would still be Estimates submitted in the House from year to year as to the expenditure of these large sums of money. This does not provide for responsibility.
Sir A. BOSCAWENYes, it does. The actual responsibility for the Vote will rest with the Financial Secretary. That is the case with the Charity Commissioners at the present time, and will be so with these Commissioners.
§ Mr. HOGGEThat is quite true, but the actual spending of the money can be raised on a Vote which may or may not be discussed during one of the twenty allotted days of Supply in this House. The chance's of a, discussion of that kind are remote and are governed very largely by the larger political issues which arise at any one time. To take only one example, we have listened to Debates on the Colonial Office 810 Vote in which the question raised had practically nothing to do with the money which we were actually discussing on the particular allotted clay. What I think my hon. Friend wants to get by this Amendment, and what I want to secure, is that we shall be able from day to day, it we choose, to put questions to somebody who will be responsible for the Forestry Commission in this House, just as now I, for instance, can ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland questions in regard to forestry. I can put a question any day I like on the Paper to the Secretary for Scotland asking him with regard to the progress of afforestation in any particular district, and I can follow that up with supplementaries or can raise it on the Adjournment at eleven o'clock. What I want in the House so far as Scotland is concerned is the ability to raise those same questions when they are taken away from the administrative office of the Secretary for Scotland and put in charge of the Commissioners. I am sure my hon. and gallant Friend cannot but feel that I am. entitled to get the same kind of satisfaction from the new office that is being set up as I could in the past, and if he meets us on that point I shall have no objection.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYOne way to accede to the request of the hon. Member would be to appoint a new Minister with the necessary staff to carry out the duties of the office, but I presume he would not like that.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYHo would oppose it, but what then does he suggest? So far as I can see, the only alternative is that the financial responsibility must rest with the Financial Secretary, but it will quite clearly be advantageous to this House that one of the Forestry Commissioners should be a Member of this House. If the Committee accepts this Amendment, that one of the unpaid Commissioners shall be a Member of the Commons House of Parliament, it does not necessarily mean, that that Member shall answer questions for the Forestry Commission. The hon. and gallant Gentleman suggested that he could do so, but there is no obligation.
§ 4.0 P.M.
§ Mr. HOGGEI have no objection to one of the Commissioners being a Member of the House of Commons, but I think we have a right to see that the House of Commons has the opportunity, if and when it wants it—I am not saying we shall want 811 it every day—but I think the House of Commons should have a regular opporunity from day to day of raising questions connected with forestry just as they do in regard to any other office.
Sir A. BOSCAWENIt would be open to any Member of Parliament to put down a question at any time he likes, either to the Financial Secretary or to the unpaid Forestry Commissioners; and in the same way, if the answer to a question was unsatisfactory, it would be open to any Member to move the Adjournment or to liaise the point on the Adjournment. The Forestry Vote would be in the same position as any other Government Vote, and if any number of Members wished to have it discussed in this House they would only have to make the usual arrangement with the Whips and it could be taken on an allotted day.
§ Mr. G. MURRAYI think the discussion has been a very useful one indeed, because it has thrown light upon what the condition of this unpaid member of the Forestry Commission will be, and also it has brought out that we still have the opportunity, through the Financial Secretary or through that Member, to ask questions or to criticise or whatever it might be. My hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh is naturally very cautious. He is always very cautious, and he has had a great deal more experience in this House than I have. I have always found in the snort time I have been here that he never feels quite able to accept the proposals coming from the Front Bench without fear that there might be something behind them, but I think on this occasion he may accept what has been said without fear of anything detrimental occurring under the Bill. So far as that is concerned, I propose, in view of the explanation and the undertaking, if one might so put it, to withdraw my Amendment and then to move an Amendment in the form proposed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Amendment made: At the end insert
§ "(6) One of the unpaid Commissioners shall be a Member of the Commons House of Parliament."— [Mr. G. Murray.]
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 1, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
812Lieut-Commander KEN WORTHYI rise only to ask the Minister in charge of the Bill whether we shall be given the names of these Commissioners before the Third Reading? I understand it is usual in these cases to give the names, and, as things are, I think it is very important that the Committee now. or the House on Third Heading, should be given the names of as many Commissioners as is possible, as was done in the case of the Ways and Communications Bill.
Sir A. BOSCAWENI am not in a position to give the names, and I cannot give any definite pledge that they will be given before the Third Heading. I have had a good deal of experience of Bills of this sort, and I know it is not the general practice to give the names, although it is sometimes done.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause 2 (Proceedings,. Staff, and Seal of Commissioners) ordered to stand part of the Bill.