HC Deb 24 May 1921 vol 142 cc32-4
51. G. LOCKER-LAMPSON

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that Ministers are obliged to seek re-election when they accept higher salaries, he will consider the advisability of consulting the electorate before other Members' salaries are increased?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

The allegation contained in the first part of the question is unfounded. The second part, therefore, does not arise.

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that, when wages are going down in a great many parts of the country, it is the very worst time to propose that the salaries of Members of this House should be increased?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

That is a matter for discussion, but it does not arise out of the question.

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when we shall have an opportunity of discussing it?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

At the earliest moment at which we can take the Supplementary Estimate.

64 Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Government will reconsider their decision to introduce a Supplementary Estimate for the exemption of Member's salaries from Income Tax?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

In accordance with the promise which I made in answer to similar questions on the 12th May, the House will have an opportunity of considering this matter before any action is taken.

Lord R. CECIL

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication when this Supplementary Estimate will be taken?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

No, not at the moment. I am anxious to have a discussion as early as possible, but if the matter is to be left to the House for their decision, I think it is in the interest of the House and of everyone concerned that there should be some public statement of the grounds on which the Government made the proposal, whatever the view of the House may be after hearing the proposal. I am anxious that that explanation should be made at the earliest possible moment, because there seems to be a great deal of misapprehension about it, but I cannot at present name a day.

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON

Will it not want a new Clause in the Finance Bill?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

No.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE

When the discussion takes place, shall we be allowed to discuss third-class and first-class fares?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

I conceive that any question relevant to the proposal can be discussed on the Estimate.

Mr. STANTON

Will hon. Members who are already very well-to-do be compelled to accept extra remuneration?

Major Sir B. FALLE

Can we raise the whole question of Members' salaries on this Vote?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

What exactly is in order on any particular Vote is a matter for the Chairman of Committees, and not for me to decide, but I conceive that a Supplementary Estimate proposed to give effect to the suggestions I made the other day will enable hon. Members to raise any question relevant to those proposals, and to move a reduction in respect of the total sum proposed to be provided, in order to mark their disapproval of either of the proposals made by the Government.

Mr. STANTON

Could we have a list of all those who are subsidised by big companies?

Back to