§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £51,787, 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 other expenses in the Department of His Majesty's Treasury and Subordinate Departments, including expenses in respect of advances under The Light Railways Act, 1896.
§ 10.0 P.M.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYThere is an item of £5,509 in connection with the history of the European War and for increased rate of war bonus. I understand that the War Office is making a history of the European War. The Admiralty, I know, is. The Air Force, the Ministry of Munitions, the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Reconstruction, in fact, every single Government Department, so far as my information goes, is writing a history of the War. It is a great means of keeping officials in their jobs when they ought to be out working for their livings. It is the great excuse of the Admiralty in every Department— Naval Intelligence Department, Operations Department, Mine-Sweeping and Trawler Defence—every single Department has men, who ought to be demobilised, remaining on in order to write the History of the War. Now we are asked for £5,000 for a separate history of the War. I think this requires very careful scrutiny by this Committee. I am against this money being spent now, because the history of any war cannot be written till at least two generations after wards. If you told the truth you would blast too many reputations; and I commend that, without anything personal in it, to such hon. and right hon. Members of the War Cabinet who may be present now in the 780 House. Any historian will bear me out when I say that you ought not to write a history, or histories, of the War now, and unless my hon. Friend does so, I am prepared to move a reduction of this sum.
§ Commander BELLAIRSI do not think we could discuss a more important Vote than this concerning the salaries and allowances connected with the Committee of Imperial Defence. It appears from the answer given by the Prime Minister in the House to-day that the Committee of Defence, as such, has never met since the War broke out. I ventured to suggest that it had been superseded during the War. The Prime Minister objected to that term and said that it had been merged in—I suppose—a more glorified Committee—that is the War Cabinet—during the War. My own powers of description are unequal to the task, but perhaps it might be equally appropriate to say that when one read of the lady who went for a ride on the back of a tiger, but she was not superseded, but simply "merged" in the tiger! Since the War the Defence Committee, for which we are invited to vote an increased sum, had only met once. We are told by the Prime Minister that Sub-Committees have met. But this is the one Committee which brings about the co-operation of the three fighting services and therein lies its importance, and this is the only way you can bring that about outside the Cabinet. I want to know why this Defence Committee has never met as a Defence Committee during the War, and why it has ceased to function? Who constitutes the Defence Committee? I myself am willing to vote almost any sum for this Defence Committee because it is the one Committee by which we can bring about great economies in the fighting services in using them for what they are best fitted to do.
We have heard from the Secretary of State for War that very often the Air Service can manage a war much more economically than the Army. I do not see how you are going to bring about any co-ordination in these matters unless these fighting services meet together. Why don't they meet?
§ The CHAIRMANI would remind the hon. and gallant Gentleman that this is a Supplementary Estimate upon which we cannot discuss general policy.
§ Commander BELLAIRSI just desire to ask, on this Vote for Defence Committee expenditure, why it has not met? What is the obstacle to its meeting? Is it that the Secretary of State for War has an ambitious scheme by which he is to be at the head of the three fighting Services? Is it the Admiralty? Or has anything come between the Committee and the Cabinet? You have a most efficient Secretary of the Defence Committee in Sir Maurice Hankey. He is a man who can bring about the co-ordination of these three fighting Services. We in this House never get an opportunity of discussing the fighting Service as a whole unless this special Vote is put down for discussion, which I hope it will be at a later date. Why, in the matter of these histories, cannot we have the whole thing co-ordinated so as to get the real lessons out of the War?
§ Mr. MARRIOTTI desire to move to reduce the Vote by £100, to draw attention to Sub-head A. There is an increase in the Treasury establishment of £22,000. I want to draw the attention of the Committee to the relations which are at present subsisting between the Treasury and this House, in regard to the presentation of their accounts. I asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer a week ago whether the Government had had time to consider the Report of the Committee on National Expenditure, recommending a very serious new departure in the procedure of this Committee, and the reply I received from the Chancellor of the Exchequer was:
This proposal has received the most careful consideration of His Majesty's Government, and in their view its adoption would lessen the responsibility of Ministers to Parliament, and tend to weaken the control of the Treasury over expenditure.What was the recommendation which the Committee on National Expenditure actually made? I may remind the Committee that when the Select Committee was set up, it was specifically instructed to make recommendations in regard to the procedure of this House in relation to Supply and Appropriation, so as to secure more effectively the control of Parliament over public expenditure. Why was that done? Because there was an opinion that our procedure in Committee of Supply during the last three days was quite inadequate to attain the object for which the Committee is set up. 782 We concluded in the first place that the time allotted was quite inadequate—
§ The CHAIRMANI am afraid that cannot come in on a Supplementary Estimate, because it is a question of the relation between the Treasury and this House. That must come on the main Vote for the year.
Mr. LENG-STURROCKIn regard to this item about the history of the European War, I think the Committee ought to have more information. The hon. and gallant Member for Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) said that it would be many years before we could get a complete and accurate and impartial history of the War, and he suggested that it could not be done to-day because it would blast so many reputations. It is plain that we cannot expect any definite result from an official history for many a long day to come, and it is out of the province of the Committee to ask for details as to how this money is being expended, and exactly what the estimated cost of the official history is going to be. If it is the case, as alleged, that there is more than one official history of the War being prepared, then I say still more emphatically we ought to be told from the point of view of the Treasury exactly the whole of the expenditure involved in this matter. There are countless histories of the War published unofficially, some very good, and others bad. It is not for the Government to encourage the continuance of expenditure which was initiated at a time when it was thought very desirable to prepare the official history. That need not be done at the present time in view of the ultimate publication which may take place years hence. All that need be done now in the way of expenditure is to maintain a very small staff collating all the facts of the War, and laying the bedrock for a work which will be accomplished out of a Vote to come before the Committee some years after this.
§ Mr. HURDWill the hon. Gentleman also tell us what is this increase of Treasury establishment—£22,000?
§ Viscount CURZONI want to have a little more information as to what is being done in connection with the history of the European War. In this connection I disagree with the hon. Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) in what ho said. I hope that this Vote for 783 the staff indicates increased activity in this direction. I have always heard that one war begins where the last war left off. I very much hope that the lessons of this war will not be lost to this country. I trust that this item indicates increased activity so far as the Admiralty and the War Office are concerned. It is important that the lessons of the war should not be lost. Some are in writing, some in the form of that new invention, the film, and I want the right hon. Gentleman to tell us exactly what is being done. I trust we shall also be informed that we may look forward to having a history of the War at a not very distant date.
§ Mr. BALDWINI will first answer as briefly as I may the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Hurd). I would remind this House that every Committee on Expenditure has remarked that, while the strength of all Departments of the State has grown, that of the Treasury has remained stationary. It has been observed more than once by those best qualified to judge, that admirable as the staff is it is not numerous enough to cope with the vast amount of work that faces it to-day. That statement was made by Mr. Herbert Samuel in the last Parliament, and it has been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and by Members of the present Parliament who are most noted for their interest in economy. We have taken up this question of Treasury supervision with great energy and zeal during the twelve months now passing. In introducing the Estimate last year, I foreshadowed that whatever might happen in other Departments I hoped to be in a position to introduce an increased Treasury Vote at an early opportunity. No one is more conscious than I that we have been understaffed for our work. We want to be in a position to maintain our record, and if we are to do that we must have more strength. The permanent staff on the 1st April, 1919, was 114. It is now 154. Before we have finished our re-organisation we may nearly come up to 200. We have divided the office on a method that we believe will enable it to cope in the best way with the work, specialising the financial work and work that deals with establishments and work that deals with all the other Departments, and this extra £35,000 is going to sharpen our swords and make us a far more efficient 784 Department in our work, in our criticism, and, I hope, in the effect we may have on the other Departments than we have ever been before.
A great deal of interest has Peen very naturally shown in this comparatively small item of salaries, wages and allowances for those who are engaged in compiling histories of the War, and I think this is a very favourable opportunity to give the fullest in formation in my power as to what is being done in this matter. It is the first chance I have had. It was decided that on the whole it would meet the public need if what may be called interim histories of the various activities of the War could be published at as early a date as possible, that is to say, if it was compiled by men who are thoroughly competent to prepare histories which would appeal to the general reader more than to the men who specialise, because the preparation of what may be called the professional histories must be a work of time. It may be years before sufficient information is collected to enable these professional histories to be prepared, and my own view is that when these more popular histories come to be sold the demand for them will be enormous, and it will be no surprise to me to find that, so far from losing money on their production, they might even be a revenue producing undertaking. These histories are all being prepared on the same lines and will be produced by the leading publishers, and the copyright will be vested in the King's Printers. The present position is as follows. There is a naval history in preparation. The author of it is Sir Julian Corbett. The first volume is finished and will be published in the spring of this year, and the second is well in hand. The complete history will probably run into four volumes. The author of the military history is Professor G. S. Gordon. The first volume is nearly ready, but it is too early yet to say in how many volumes the work will be completed. A trade history is being prepared by Mr. Ernest Foyle. The first volume is finished and gone to press. The second is well advanced and three will complete the series. Mr. Archibald Hurd is writing a history of the merchant navy. The first volume is finished and gone to press. Good progress is being made with the second, and that series will be completed in three volumes. 785 Professor Sir Walter Raleigh is writing a history of the Air Force in the War. He is writing the preliminary chapters, and hopes to have the first volume ready before the end of this year, and as at present advised I am told two volumes will suffice, for that history. There is a great mass of material; a much greater mass than could have been anticipated when these histories were first projected, owing to the length of War. In the current year about £11,000 will be spent on the production of these histories, the particulars of which I have read to the Committee. I have given the Committee the fullest information on this subject within my power. I do not know why this particular group of histories comes in my Vote; except that everything comes into my Vote that no one is anxious to father, I present the Vote with great confidence. Although it may not meet with approval in some quarters, I believe it is an expenditure that will command itself on general grounds to the majority of the Committee
§ Mr. ACLANDI should like to refer to the first subject dealt with by the Financial Secretary, namely the increase in Treasury staff. I hope that will commend itself to the Committee. I had the honour for a few months to occupy the position which my hon. Friend now adorns, and I was constantly amazed at the amount of valuable work done by Treasury officials, considering the extraordinary smallness of their numbers. The numbers which the hon. Member has given include, I think, nearly everybody. The number of effective men who really draft the important letters of the Department are extraordinarily small when one realises the amount of work they turn out. All through the War, and indeed before the War, they have been working under the most extreme pressure, and the position of the Treasury has suffered in consequence. I hope that in making these additions to the staff a certain principle has been borne in mind, and will be in any further expansions which are to take place, a principle which I believe will be exceedingly valuable in that part of the public service, and that is, that, as a general rule, the higher division clerks who are brought into the Treasury should, before they are appointed to the Treasury, have had some 786 real practical experience in some other Administrative Department. A great deal of the bad repute into which the Treasury has occasionally fallen is due to the fact that men who pass high in the Civil Service Examinations come straight into the Treasury and their work suffers simply because they lack experience of other Public Departments. If the Treasury can introduce this system, which ought to be more possible now that their staff is rather larger, I Relieve the public service would be the gainer. I have in my mind many instances where criticisms of Treasury action have really not been justified. It is always supposed to be negative criticism, but there are Treasury criticisms which are really helpful to the Departments. I believe that will be assisted by making the work a little lighter, by avoiding the constant overstrain upon the staff, and by introducing the system of giving the clerks rather more outside experience before they go to do their work in the Treasury.
§ Mr. MARRIOTTI should like to ask whether the Vote includes the charges for the booklets on individual countries which were prepared at the Foreign Office for the purposes of the Peace Conference. If so, is there any intention on the part of the Government at any time in the immediate future to put these booklets on the market? I was a member of the Committee responsible for urging an increase of the Treasury staff to which this Vote is giving expression, and I must congratulate my hon. Friend on proposing this Vote, and on the fact that there was one Government Department which was admirably efficient although it was hopelessly understaffed.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYI beg to move to reduce the Vote by £1,000.
I move this Reduction to draw attention to the very surprising explanation about the histories. Plenty of histories of the War have been written already by private people, and why the Government should go into this business I cannot for the life of me understand. The Noble Lord (Viscount Curzon), the hon. Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellairs) and myself want staff appreciations of the War. I understand that a cheap edition is going to be put on the bookstalls, written by the Government. 787 This will be nothing else but propaganda. I am sorry that a writer of such eminence as Sir Julian Corbett is being prostituted—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]—to write cheap popular editions. Hon. Members, I think, will agree that Sir Julian Corbett is a writer of the greatest eminence, and to use him to write cheap popular histories of the War is an insult. This is a most dangerous precedent. Suppose we were to have a popular history of the Peace Conference?
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI am not such a fool. "Would that mine enemy would write a book!" Such a history would be nothing else than Government propaganda to boost Members of the Government, which all those histories are going to be.
Mr. LENG-STURROCKThe hon. Gentleman has been good enough to give us an explanation of the histories which are in contemplation, but apparently there is no limit to the expenditure which may be incurred upon them. One history has been written of which, ho says, one or two volumes are ready, and we do not know how many more may follow. I have no hostility to the Treasury in this matter, but I suggest it to them that it is opening a door through which any amount of money may fall. I think that a scheme should be brought up showing the exact scope of the undertaking and an estimate of the expenditure which will be incurred. My hon. Friend alluded to the possibility of a sales revenue. That is the most problematical thing in the world. If we made out an estimate showing the probable expenditure which we can fairly gauge and what is likely to accrue in revenue to the Treasury, there is no publishing house to-day which would dream for a moment of allowing thousands of pounds to be spent every year out of profits from histories when sales revenue accounts are proving to be, from the financial point of view, failures in every sense of the word.
§ Viscount CURZONMy name has been mentioned by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull. I would like, therefore, to make my action quite clear. I want to see something absolutely reliable 788 written in connection with the War, something which will be of the utmost educational value to the youth of the country and to the many people who want to know all about what has happened. There are many unauthorised histories being published and a great many yarns are being passed round in the Press as to certain incidents of the War. I hope this history will settle all those things. One wants the history to be readable and available for general consumption. At the same time, I hope that it will not prevent the Naval and Military and Air Force authorities from producing, for staff purposes, a real history on more expensive lines. I hope the Committee will not support the Motion for the reduction of the Vote, because I think the expenditure is likely to be very valuable from an educational point of view.
§ Amendment negatived.