§ 47. Lieut.-Colonel CROFTasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that a controller under the Disposal Board has negotiated a contract with Messrs. Leylands, in which his family is largely interested, in competition with another firm; whether there is reason to believe that the goods offered differed as to quantity and value, far exceeding the difference in tenders between Messrs. Leylands and their competitor; and whether, since the traditions of the Civil Service have been violated and an unnecessary loss has been caused to the State, he will give an early opportunity for discussing this question and eliciting the facts?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI can add nothing to what has already been said on this subject. I am not prepared to give the facilities asked for.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTWill the right hon. Gentleman give an opportunity to this House at an early date for discussing this question, in view of the extreme uneasiness throughout the business interests of the country?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI think the uneasiness is confined to my hon. and gallant Friend and his party. The proper body for investigation is the Select Committee on National Expenditure.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTWill the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that when the Committee reports, the question will be discussed?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThat depends on the report of the Committee. Certainly, if the House desire to discuss it, I shall be glad to give an opportunity.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTI beg to give notice that I shall call attention to the matter, and ask leave to move the adjournment of the House, in view of the vital urgency of this question to the whole country and to national finance.
§ At the end of Questions—
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTI beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, in order to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public impor- 398 tance, namely, the present practice of the Disposal Board, involving loss to the State, owing to inefficient and irregular methods.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe statement which the hon. and gallant Gentleman has just read out is of a very indefinite character, and not definite. I understood he desired to call attention to the subject matter of his Question No. 47, relating to a particular transaction with Messrs. Leyland. That would be a particular matter, but what, the hon. and gallant Gentleman has read out is much too indefinite, and could not possibly be taken.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTMay I amend it as follows, "in that a contract has been granted to a certain firm, Messrs. Leyland Bros., involving loss to the State?"
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat matter, I understand, is now being investigated by a Select Committee of the House. It could not, therefore, be discussed by the House while it is before the Committee.
§ Sir RICHARD COOPERIf the hon. and gallant Member is able to show that large sums of money are being daily lost to the State, what course is open to him in such a case?
§ Mr. SPEAKERTo bring it before the House on the proper occasion, for instance, in the discussion of the Estimates of the particular Department concerned.
§ Sir R. COOPERIn that case must we knowingly allow daily losses to go on, and is there no means of remedying that?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is begging the whole question.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODAre we to understand from you, Sir, that if a case is being discussed by the Public Accounts Committee or by the Committee on Public Expenditure, this House is precluded from discussing any such question? Is that not a departure from the privileges of this House, and have we not a perfect right to discuss anything irrespective of the Committee?
§ Mr. SPEAKERMatters which have been referred to one of the Committees of this House the House itself will not discuss. Obviously, it would not do so, having referred the matter to a Committee for 399 discussion. The Committee would naturally be aggrieved if, after a matter had been referred to it for discussion, the House itself should undertake the discussion.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODI think you may have been misinformed, Sir. This question has not been specially remitted to the Committee. It merely happens that the Committee on Public Expenditure are enquiring into this case. They may enquire into any number of cases, as they do habitually, but that should not preclude this House from discussing any of these matters. Otherwise we might have our freedom and liberties circumscribed by a Committee taking up a case without meaning to put it through.
§ Mr. SPEAKERYou might have this result, that the House might arrive at one decision and the Committee at another, which would be very undesirable. It has always been the rule that matters referred to a Committee should not be discussed by the House until the House has received the Report from the Committee. In any case, I should be inclined to hold that this matter is not urgent. It has been raised by the hon. and gallant Member on several occasions before the House, and, therefore, it can hardly be considered urgent.
§ Mr. GWYNNEThe Committee on Public Expenditure is divided into three Sub-committees, dealing with almost every subject, and, if that be the rule, we should be precluded from almost any discussion. The Committee on National Expenditure have a right to roam over every subject.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTMight I ask if it is not the duty of an hon. Member of this House who is aware of grave loss incurred by the State, to bring the matter forward on the earliest possible occasion? You, Sir, are aware of the fact that I endeavoured to raise this question on the Easter Adjournment, and was deliberately counted out by hon. Gentlemen. Therefore, what opportunity have we of stopping any grave loss to the country which we consider is going on, and which it is our duty to report to the House?
§ Sir F. BANBURYIs it not the fact that a Committee is not only investigating this particular subject at the moment, but has been doing so for the last two months, and in all probability will report to the House in about a fortnight's time?