STANDING COMMITTEE C [13TH MAY]. (Hansard, 30 June 1919)

§ Captain WEDGWOOD BENN
I think I am right in saying that on this Vote a question arose as to the irregularity of the expenditure of money in connection with the Lord Chancellor's residence. As I understand it, contrary to the practice of Parliament and of public offices, certain new work was commenced before this House had assented to the estimates. When the estimates came before the Committee they discovered that new work, not ordinary work which could properly be described as current work, had been begun. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us, first of all, how the expenditure has been met up to date, and what steps his Department or the Financial Secretary intend to take to regularise the proceedings. Money having been spent without the authority of Parliament, what steps 729 are going to be taken to get some indemnification or the authority of Parliament for the expenditure?

§ The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Sir A. Mond)
I cannot accept the hon. and gallant Gentleman's statement. This work of redecoration can scarcely be described as new work.

§ Captain BENN
I referred to structural alterations.

§ Sir A. MOND
Structural alterations are not necessarily new work. As the Vote has been reduced, and the money must be found, a Supplementary Estimate will be produced at the proper time.

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I would like to ask if this Vote includes expenditure on museums, and what is the state of the museums taken over and occupied by a portion of His Majesty's Air Force during the War. I should like to know if the damage has been made good—some of the damage to certain works of antiquity cannot be made good—and what stage we have reached in the way of replacement of these buildings to a state suitable for the enjoyment of the public.

§ Captain W. BENN
Perhaps this will be a convenient time for the right hon. Gentleman to tell us how many museums, which were closed during the War on account of the shortage of staff, or of a desire to house the contents in a safer way, in view of possible air-raids, still remain closed, and what steps the Department propose to take to reopen them for the use of the public.

§ Sir A. MOND
The only museums which can be fairly described as closed are the Tate Gallery, the Wallace Collection, and the National Portrait Gallery. The other galleries are very largely open. The programme which is now being carried out or about to be carried out of re-housing Government officials at Alexandra Palace will allow me to clear the National Gallery, the Wallace Collection, and I think the National Portrait Gallery. I hope to be enabled also to clear the Tate Gallery. I am further taking steps to remove the small staff still in the British Museum. The bulk of the museum is now entirely free. I do not understand the reference of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) to the damage to certain works of art. I have had no report whatever from any director of any museum occupied by Government officials of any damage of any kind to any work of art.

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I refer to certain works of antiquity, and my authority—I shall be glad if it is not a good one—is derived from certain statements in "The Times." I ask for assurance that it is not so?

§ Sir A. MOND
All I can say is that I have had no information from the President of the British Museum on the subject. Therefore, I can scarcely credit that the statements in "The Times" can be accurate. My attention has not been drawn to the matter before, and I will certainly have inquiries made. With regard to the Vote itself, there are sums allowed for the purpose of cleaning these museums and reestablishing them when they are vacated by the clerical Departments. It will be a satisfaction to ma as well as to everyone to get our museums back into the state in which they were before the War.

Dr. MURRAY
I am not quite sure whether it comes within the purview of this Vote, but I should like to ask what progress has been made with the National War Museum? How is it proposed to deal with it?

§ Sir A. MOND
I presume my hon. Friend is referring to the Imperial War Museum. There is a separate Vote for that.

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I believe this Vote includes expenditure on cemeteries. I would like to ask if the cemetery and monuments for our gallant men who fell in the recent War come under this Vote? It will give great satisfaction if the right hon. Gentleman will give us some information on this point. I understand that this Vote deals in particular with cemeteries like that at Lisbon, where many of our soldiers and sailors are buried. At present our cemeteries abroad are administered and looked after, in a very excellent manner, I believe, by the War Office. At one time they were not able to give any latitude to the parents and friends of the dead in regard to inscriptions on the tombs, but, as a result of representations which were made, they allow the parent now to choose a few simple words. There has been a lot of feeling on the question of monuments among parents, relations, and wives of soldiers.

§ Sir A. MOND
On a point of Order. None of the questions raised by the hon. and gallant Member come under this Vote. The matter is dealt with by the Imperial War Graves Commission, which does not appear on the Vote of the Office of Works.

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman. Another point I wish to raise is on the question of diplomatic buildings abroad. We had an extremely illuminating Debate in the House a few weeks ago, in which a number of hon. Members spoke of the future of the Diplomatic and Consular Service, and one hon. Member remarked that in nearly all cases our diplomatic buildings abroad were not such as to be creditable to a great Empire like this. I notice here are certain sums of money for various parts of the world, for places like Canton and Hankow, and so on, and the Grants are fairly generous. But I do not see any mention of the port of Lisbon. That is a place of some importance, as it is the meeting place of people from South America, and many of them visit the English Consulate. We have a very able Consul there, but he has to provide the 732 Consular building out of his scanty allowance. It is of necessity a very modest one, and not at all suitable for the place. Apparently these buildings come under the Office of Works instead of the Foreign Office. I should like to have some assurance as to the policy to be pursued in future with regard to these places, where the buildings have to be provided by the Consul out of a very inadequate and out-of-date allowance, which might have been sufficient sixty or seventy years ago, but which, in present circumstances, with the increased cost of living, is totally insufficient. I see here an item of £65 for the upkeep of the office of the Vice-Consul at Petrograd. Now, that city has been in the hands of its present Government for eighteen months, and I would like to know what policy is being pursued with regard to our Consulate there. I presume any expenditure is being held over until such time as it can be earned out with safety?

§ Sir A. MOND
The question of buildings for Consular offices in certain places is, of course, a matter for the Foreign Office. My Department merely carries out such schemes as the Foreign Office gives its assent to. I cannot, therefore, make any statement with regard to policy on that matter at all. As to the item of £65 for the Vice-Consulate at Petrograd, I cannot really say whether we still have a Vice-Consul there. I suppose if we have not the money will come back to the Treasury in due course.