§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1920, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, including the Foreign Claims Office, Foreign Trade Department, War Trade Statistical Department, and News Department.
§ The ADDITIONAL UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lieut.-Colonel Sir Hamar Greenwood)in the regrettable absence of the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I have been asked to submit this Supplementary Estimate. I regret the absence of my hon. Friend. The Committee will be glad to know he is rapidly recovering from his illness. This Supplementary Estimate asks for £10. in effect I am asking the Committee to give me this sum in order that I may use certain increases of revenue from the Passports Department to cover the expenses of that Department, and also to cover certain expenses in connection, with the foreign messengers who travel from London to the different diplomatic posts abroad. Of the £18,000 under the head of salaries, wages and allowances, £13,000 is due to war bonuses that are not special to the Foreign Office, but common to the whole of 789 the Civil Service. These war bonuses are fixed by the Conciliation and Arbitration Board set up by the Government. As to £5,000 of the £18,000, I want that particular sum in order to cover the increased staff in the Passport Department. The demand for passports has exceeded all expectations, and, although it is a most remunerative business, the Department does require additional staff to earn the extra revenue.
Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAYThe hon. and gallant Gentleman has laid particular stress upon the fact that he is asking for only £10, and in explanation of that he drew attention to the fact that the demand for passports had greatly exceeded all expectations, and that, therefore, the revenue from that source would write off a certain amount of expenditure. I wish to draw attention to the increased staff of the Passport Department and to ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman one or two questions. I very much regret to see that it has been necessary for the Foreign Office to increase the staff. I fully recognised the necessity for the passport system during the War. I myself have some considerable knowledge of the system and I have had something to do with it. I fully recognise that it was essential for war purposes, but I cannot see the necessity for it now. It is only right to say that the head of the Passport Department of the Foreign Office has carried out his duties in a very admirable and efficient manner, but now that the War is over the passport is an unnecessary restriction upon the freedom of the travelling public. I addressed some questions to the hon. and gallant Gentleman on this subject, and I was referred by the Treasury Bench from one Minister to another. As a result of the questions which I put, there appeared in the "Times" the following day a letter from the hon. Member for the combined Universities drawing attention to the great inconvenience to which travellers visiting Switzerland had been recently subjected. That is the case everywhere that the passport system is at present in vogue. I wish to urge the Government to lead the way in bringing this system to an end. The answer that I received to my question in reference to France was that the French Government were responsible for the passport system, but I would like to ask whether it is not the case that the 790 French Government expected that the visé system would come to an end some eleven months ago, shortly after peace was signed, and whether it was not due to the Regulations enforced by the British Government that the system was continued? We have been told that the receipts from passports balance the expenditure. That may be so, but the fees are paid by the public; it all comes back upon the consumer. The public is fleeced again, and that is an additional reason why this load should be taken off the taxpayer and why this restriction should be removed from legitimate travelling. I ask myself whether there is any necessity for the passport and visé system at the present time, and I suggest that there is no necessity for it at all. It is quite true that a certain amount of control of foreigners entering this country is necessary under the Aliens Restrictions Act which has been passed by this House. Under that Act foreigners are compelled to register, and surely it is the duty of the Department presided over by the Home Secretary to ensure that the Regulations are carried out. The French Government have recently, I understand, introduced a Bill establishing a permanent system for foreigners in time of peace and which suggests that no passports will be required on the frontier. Any person over fifteen will have to make a declaration of identity and nationality, and if he intends to remain in the country he must obtain the identity card instituted in 1917. What response did the British Government give to that proposal? Do they intend to keep in being the passport offices all over the world, in the United States, South America, France, and elsewhere; or will they follow the example of the French Government and abolish as soon as they possibly can this illegitimate war-time restriction upon the freedom of travel?
Captain COOTEI agree heartily with what the last speaker has said, and it appears to me that this restriction on travel has been continued far too long. If a man wants to go to Russia why should you put any obstacles in his way? The particular question I rose to mention is this. It was announced some time ago that the Ministry of Information had come to an end, but, according to my information, that Ministry was transferred largely to the Foreign Office and became the News Department. How much, 791 if any, of this Vote, is accounted for by the expenditure involved upon this News Department, and what exactly does this Department do. I do not see much signs of its activities—
§ The CHAIRMANThe hon. and gallant Member has been mislead by the fact that the heading is that of the main Vote for the year. There is no item for the News Department here.
§ Mr. MOSLEYI rise to endorse the remarks of my hon. and gallant Friend (Lieut.-Colonel A. Murray) concerning the vexatious restrictions on travelling by the present passport system. Before the Committee passes a Vote of this nature we ought to receive some information concerning the necessity for maintaining these restrictions to-day. My hon. and gallant Friend who moved the Vote no doubt had Ministerial facility for his visit to Deauville last summer, and enjoyed all the amenities which appertained to his exalted station, but as a humble member of the travelling public journeying to the same destination, I was put to a very considerable inconvenience. I can only imagine that on a longer journey than that undertaken by my hon. and gallant Friend and myself considerable inconvenience is experienced. I have heard from numerous sources, and from my own constituency in particular, which embraces a large number of individuals who travel on the Continent, that they are subjected to the utmost inconvenience, which appears, in these times, to be entirely unnecessary. I ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman to justify the necessity of maintaining this system before the Committee passes this Vote.
§ Sir H. GREENWOODI appreciate the nature of the criticism of my three hon. and gallant Friends, and I shall in a moment or two justify the retention of the passport system. The passport system under the British Foreign Office is in existence not because of His Majesty's Government or the Foreign Office, but for two main reasons. First of all, because all other foreign countries insist upon passports, and no Britisher can travel abroad without a passport, unless he is willing to run the risk of arrest as he goes from frontier to frontier in foreign countries. May I say also that the finest testimonial and the best guarantee as to 792 character that any human being can carry there is a British passport. A British passport will pass a Britisher in spite of his habits. It is therefore essential, as long as Britishers travel, that they should be armed by His Majesty's Government with this token of their nationality and sample, I hope, of their respectability.
There is one other important reason why passports are essential. This House has passed an Aliens Act. Under that Act persons coming into this country must show that they are desirable persons. Therefore when a Britisher travels abroad or, being abroad, seeks to return, he must have a passport, either issued from the British Foreign Office or a Consular Officer abroad in order that he may be admitted with the very minimum of trouble. These are the two important reasons why we have passports; not because we want them, but because the rest of the world, and, curiously enough, expecially the United States, insists upon them. I hope, therefore, with this explanation, that my three hon. and gallant Friends, whose splendid work abroad during the War has, I am afraid, made them forget the needs of these passports, will accept this Vote without further demur and that the Committee will come to that intelligent unanimity that I hope it will always show.
§ Mr. SPENCERI have only one remark to make, and I do not exactly know whether I shall be in order. It has to do with the issuing of the passports, and, if I may say so, with the invidious distinction that is drawn, and has been drawn by the Foreign Office in their issue. A very distinguished member of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain was chosen as the representative to a Geneva Conference. He made application for a passport, along with other people, but, for some reason or other, he and another gentleman were refused their passports for a considerable time. When his passport came through, instead of its being for a fortnight, as he desired, the Foreign Office would only give him leave to be away from the country for a week. I do not know if the right hon. Gentleman is in a position to give us the reason why—
§ The CHAIRMANThat really cannot arise on a Supplementary Vote. It might come on the Main Vote for the year on the Secretary of State's salary.
Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYI merely wish to say, with all respect to the hon. and gallant Gentleman, that his reply is most unsatisfactory. He has not justified his case at all. I asked him quite briefly about the passport system, but I also included in my remarks the visé system. He has told us it is necessary to keep the passport system, but he has said nothing about the visé and if we could abolish the visé it would certainly be a great convenience to the travelling public I told him what the French Government were doing, and he only replied that they demand a passport. I asked what response the British Government intended to make to the Bill which was being introduced in the French Parliament, but he made no answer to that. I hope the Government will lead the way in this matter, by approaching the French Government and other Governments, and I suggest that in one of the spare moments devolving on the Peace Conference they should discuss this matter and see whether some arrangement cannot be arrived at.
§ Mr. ACLANDI wish to support what my hon. and gallant Friend has said, and I think it would be very useful if the hon. Baronet takes away from this Debate a general impression that the sooner this complicated and most tiresome system of passports and visés all over the place can be modified and made less vexatious the better for everybody concerned. I can see there is some substance in what he said, that because other countries do it we have got to do it, but other people use that argument as well as he. I remember protesting, so far as my limited knowledge of foreign languages would permit, against the fact that I had to leave the place, in Switzerland, I was at and go to Lausanne two days before I should have done in order to get my passport viséd by a French official whose office was only open on certain days, and therefore my very brief holiday was cut short. I said, "This is a nuisance." He said, "Yes, but I should have to go through this sort of thing if I came to your country, and therefore we think it legitimate to make a certain income by forcing you to come to our office and get these visés and making you pay ten francs, or whatever it is, for getting our stamp." I think, if we could take the lead in a little relaxation in these matters, it would be taken up, because the Swiss officials and the French officials in Switzerland do not 794 want to harry the English visitor more than they can help; but, of course, it does pay, no doubt. In fact, the hon. Baronet prided himself on having got £18,000 more out of the passport system than the staff had cost, but I do not want him to pride himself any more on that. I think we would willingly surrender this revenue if we could, and I am sure we should all welcome getting back to a little more freedom.
Mr. LENG-STURROCKI should like, Mr. Whitley, with your permission, to refer to the question of the News Department of the Foreign Office. Your ruling was that there was no item down on this Paper in connection with the News Department, but Item A [Salaries, Wages, and Allowances] so far as they appear to have any relation to the Supplementary Estimate, may well be applied to the News Department of the Foreign Office.
§ The CHAIRMANIf the hon. Member will kindly read the Vote he will see that that would not be in order.
Colonel LAMBERT WARDI wish to offer one or two suggestions as to how expense might be saved. After having bought your passport and obtained a visé, shown it to get a railway ticket, and again on board the steamer, it is surely unnecessary to keep a large staff at the port of embarkation to have it carefully examined. That may perhaps be necessary, but having arrived at your journey's end and made up your mind to return home, surely it cannot be necessary to have your passport re-viséd by the British Passport Office at the place where you happen to be in a foreign country before starting on your journey home. That must cause a large increase of expenditure. I know a place at which I called where the passport office was a very large and expensive building. I am sure they had not sufficient work to do.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHLike everybody who has spoken to-night, I only rise for the purpose of occupying the attention of the House for one moment. There are some items here I do not understand. I see the receipts from fees for passports are larger than anticipated by £23,990. Last year we had to get passports to go to Ireland, and I would like the hon. Member to tell me how much of this increase came from the collection of fees for pass 795 ports to Ireland. I must say the present Home Secretary did not waste his time in Ireland, because when any Minister is in trouble about any Irish question, however simple, he turns to the Home Secretary and gets inspiration from him. I think my hon. Friend ought to be able to answer this himself.
§ Sir H. GREENWOODI can. This Vote has nothing to do with the old passport system of going to Ireland.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHThen I want to know where did the money go to. A more ridiculous passport system than that was never invented, because it was introduced for the purpose of—
§ The CHAIRMANIt is not on this Vote at all.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHMy hon. Friend has told us that, but he told us on the prompting of the Home Secretary, and we have no information on that.
§ The CHAIRMANI have, though.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHI see an addition for messengers' travelling expenses. Was any of that paid for the expense of messengers running over to Ireland?
§ It being Eleven of the Clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his report to the House.
§ Resolutions to be reported on Monday next.
§ Committee report Progress: to sit again upon Monday next.