HC Deb 03 December 1919 vol 122 cc517-21

(1)The governor of a governor's province may, by notification, appoint ministers, not being members of his executive council or other officials, to administer transferred subjects, and any ministers so appointed shall hold office during his pleasure.

There may be paid to any minister so appointed in any province the same salary as is payable to a member of the executive council in that province, unless a smaller salary is provided by vote of the legislative council of the province.

(2) No minister shall hold office for a longer period than six months, unless he is or becomes an elected member of the local legislature.

(3) in relation to transferred subjects, the governor shall be guided by the advice of his ministers, unless he sees sufficient cause to dissent from their opinion, in which case he may require action to be taken otherwise than in accordance with that advice: Provided that Rules may be made under the principal Act for the temporary administration of a transferred subject where, in cases of emergency, owing to a vacancy, there is no minister in charge of the subject, by such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed by the Rules.

(4) The governor of a governor's province may at his discretion appoint from among the nonofficial members of the local legislature council secretaries, who shall hold office during his pleasure, and discharge such duties in assisting members of the executive council and ministers as he may assign to them.

There shall be paid to council secretaries so appointed such salary as may be provided by vote of the legislative council.

A council secretary shall cease to hold office if he ceases for more than six months to be a member of the legislative council.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN

Before I give a ruling upon it, I should like the hon. Member for Oxford University (Mr. Oman) to explain his Amendment in Subsection (1)—to leave out the word "during" ["during his pleasure"] and to insert instead thereof the word "under."

Mr. OMAN

I regard that as consequential.

Colonel YATE

I beg to move, in Subsection (1), to leave out the word "a" ["a member of the Executive Council"], and to insert instead thereof the words "an official."

The Clause runs: There may be paid to any Minister so appointed in any province the same salary as is payable to a member of the executive council. I wish to insert the words "an official" before the word "member." I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman will think it right to put in these words, but it makes it clearer.

Mr. MONTAGU

I shall be glad if my hon. and gallant Friend will give me a little more light as to the meaning of this Amendment. When I saw it upon the Paper, I thought that it was consequential on his Amendment which was defeated early in our deliberations, making the Executive Council consist partly of official members and partly of elected members. If the Executive Council were of that kind, it would be no use to have this part of the Clause as it reads, but now that Amendment has been defeated and the Executive Council is according to the existing Statute the members are paid the same salary. Therefore, if you were to say "the same salaries as are paid to the official members of the Executive Council," it would be meaningless, because all members of the Executive Council have the same salary under the existing Statute.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. OMAN

I beg to move; in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words "unless a smaller salary is provided by vote of the Legislative Council of the Province," and to insert instead thereof the words but if he be domiciled in India his salary shall, bear the same proportion to that of Members of Council domiciled in England as does that of a Member of the Council of India, domiciled in Great Britain to that of a Member domiciled in India. It will be remembered that this is an Amendment which was suggested by the very greatest authority. Just as members of the Council of India receive less if they are domiciled here, than members domiciled in India, so the proportion should be kept in regard to the pay of Ministers and other executive officers of these new governmental bodies in India.

Mr. MONTAGU

I hope the hon. Member will not press this Amendment. It makes very many assumptions. It assumes that if an overseas allowance is to be paid to an Indian serving in England, the same proportion of allowance is necessary for an Englishman serving in India. In the second place, the carrying of the Amendment would deprive the Legislative Council of all control over the salary of its Ministers. That may be a good thing or a bad thing, but it cuts at the root of the whole question of responsible government. If the Council cannot fix the salary of a Minister responsible to it, we have made a very great change in the relations between the Ministers and the Council. The Joint Committee has made the suggestion that if the Council like to fix a smaller sum for the Minister than is made to the executive councillor, it does not necessarily involve a lower status. Why not leave it there, and why not let them fix and alter the salaries of their own Ministers?

Colonel YATE

I do not think we should leave it in this nebulous state. Indian members of the Council coming to England are to have a certain salary, and I think it is equally necessary to say in this Bill that English members in India should have a certain salary. An Indian coming here is to have 50 per cent. more pay than an Englishman residing here, and therefore we should put it in the Bill that an Englishman serving in India as a member of the Council should have 50 per cent. more pay than the Indian serving in the same country. What is sauce for the goose must be sauce for the gander, and you cannot have two different rules for Indians and Europeans in this matter.

Captain ORMSBY-GORE

I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman does not quite realise what the position is. The object we all had on the Joint Committee was to ensure that the Minister in a Provincial Government should have the same status as the official side of the Government, that is to say, the executive councillor, and as it first came before our attention, we proposed that the salary of the execu- tive councillor and the Minister should be the same. The salary of the executive councillor is fixed in the Schedule of this Bill, and it was then pointed out that the ordinary way of securing responsibility of Ministers to a Legislative Assembly was to have their salaries voted. We did not wish to enable the local Legislatures to fix the salaries of the ministers over and above those of the executive councillors, but we wished, in accordance with all Parliamentary precedents, to allow the local Legislative Councils to move to reduce the salary of a minister responsible to the Assembly, and in order to do that the Bill was framed in this form. It then occurred to us that in the interests of economy some of the Legislative Councils, while guaranteeing that the status should remain the same, would be able to find ministers who would perform the duties for a less sum than those inserted in the Schedule. It should be noted that the salaries of the executive councillors are not the same in all Provinces, and so it is quite reasonable to imagine that the salaries of ministers would not necessarily be the same in all Provinces or even bear the same proportion as the salaries of the executive councillors. So I think to attempt to run the analogy which we suggested before the Joint Committee between the Council of India here and the circumstances of the ministers in their local Governments in India is attempting to carry an analogy further than the Joint Committee ever meant it to be carried, and it is to my mind unreasonable.

Colonel YATE

But the hon. and gallant Gentleman seems to forget that the Joint Committee may not be infallible. I think the analogy is one and the same. If the Indian members serving here are to have a higher rate of pay than the English members here, then the English members serving in India should have a higher rate of pay than the Indian members there.

Mr. MONTAGU

I quite agree with my hon. and gallant Friend that if a member of the Civil Service is serving in India he should get an overseas allowance, and the hon. Member will find that the Council of India has proceeded on that idea in fixing the new salaries. Where I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman is wrong is to find an analogy between a Civil servant serving across the seas away from his home and a minister who is to be responsible to the Legislative Council. There there is no analogy. There the salary must be fixed by the Legislative Council, or the whole theory of responsible government disappears. His analogy is quite right, only he applies it to the wrong set of people. What he should apply it to is the public servant not responsible to any Parliament serving away from his home, and there he will find the India Office and the Government of India are in complete agreement.

Amendment negatived.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

I beg to move, in Sub-section (4), to leave out the word "non-official," and to insert instead thereof the word "elected." It will be observed that under the Clause The governor of a governor's province may, by notification, appoint ministers, not being members of his executive council or other officials, to administer transferred subjects, and any ministers so appointed shall hold office during his pleasure. Therefore, the Governor's power is very strong here, and I submit that it would be better if the appointment of these Secretaries, who, I presume, will hold corresponding positions to Parliamentary Secretaries in our House, should be found among the elected members, because this would be an invaluable means of training elected members of Provincial Legislatures in holding office.

Mr. MONTAGU

The hon. Member is quite right in his estimate of the value of this Clause. It is intended to give an opportunity of familiarising young members of the Legislative Council with the difficulty of the work, but I do not think it would be wise to restrict the appointments to elected members. It cannot apply to officials, but in these early days there will be a certain number of members, non-official, who have been nominated, and they are equally entitled to a share of these posts. I think the preference will probably be given to elected members, but I do not want to shut out a nominated Indian prince, for example.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

In view of this explanation, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.