§ Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 71A.
§ [Captain FITZROY in the Chair.]
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Arthur Michael Samuel)I beg to move,
That it is expedient to provide for the application to persons in the Diplomatic Service of the Superannuation Acts, 1834 to 1919, and to authorise in the case of such persons the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of allowances and gratuities under those Acts as so applied."—[King's recommendation signified.]1072 The object of this Motion is to enable the Government to bring in a Bill to regulate the pensions of officers of the Diplomatic Service. I have issued a White Paper which explains the objects of the whole scheme and the proposed legislation. At present officers of the Diplomatic Service are in receipt of pensions under the Act of 1869 and difficulties arise from time to time because many diplomatic officers are transferred from foreign stations to Civil Service appointments at home, and vice versa. We seek to put diplomatic pensions on to the same basis as Civil Service pensions, with small modifications which will be seen at the bottom of page 1 of the White Paper. Officers of the Diplomatic Service interchange positions with officers of the Civil Service. When I say the Civil Service I mean the Foreign Office. There are provisions already existing dealing with the difficulties and anomalies which arise under these interchanges of position, but recently those difficulties, which have always been very troublesome, have increased owing to the combination in 1919 of the Diplomatic Service with the Foreign Office. In some cases the Act of 1869 has become almost, if not entirely, unworkable and certain hardships have been caused. For that reason we desire to put the officers of the Diplomatic Service on the same footing, with slight modifications, as officers of the Civil Service. An option will be given to existing officers of the Diplomatic Service to come in under the new Act. We do not yet know how many will come into the new arrangement but, assuming that they all come in, the utmost annual cost to the public purse would be £11,500 at the beginning and at the end a small sum which we think would not exceed £2,000 a year. The cause of the higher cost at the beginning is this. The new scheme provides for reduced pensions on the one hand and retiring and death gratuities on the other hand. Those gratuities do not exist in the present system. They will be payable immediately on retirement or death. Thus the larger annual increased cost will fall due at earlier dates. The pension reductions, however, will be spread over the whole life of the pensioner. That is broadly what the proposals are. If there are any other details on which hon. Members desire information I will do my best to explain them.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYAn Ambassador is a man who is sent to lie abroad for the good of his country, and, when he comes to be retired, it is, of course, very right and proper that he should be properly pensioned. As far as I can gather from the hon. Gentleman's explanation which I am sure he tried to make as full and lucid as he always does, this is to bring officers of the Diplomatic Service in line with the Foreign Office. Does this also apply to the Consular Service? Is the Consular Service part and parcel of the Diplomatic Service? Could we have enlightenment on that point first of all?
§ Mr. SAMUELIt applies also to the Consular Service, because the, Consular Service is already part of the Civil Service.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI am very glad, because I have always thought it very necessary to improve the conditions of the Consular Service, perhaps even more than the Diplomatic Service proper. I think this is a move in the right direction. I see under the Superannuation Act of 1909 awards may be made as follows to members of these Services. After only 10 years' service, a pension may be paid, so that a man who goes into the Service at 21 and retires at 31 can take a pension. That is very extraordinary. [Interruption.] He does not serve abroad at all. My hon. Friend is not right. A clerk in Downing Street after 10 years' service can get a pension. Could we have some explanation as to the shortness of the term, because this applies to the whole of the Foreign Office staff and the whole of the Diplomatic Service. Is it to make provision for people who may have to retire through ill-health? There must be some explanation. I do not think I have heard of that in any other Service of the Crown.
I would also like to take this opportunity of drawing attention to the disparity between the emoluments of this Service, with its very pleasant conditions—we are improving the residences of our representatives abroad; especially in the case of Turkey, for example—and what is paid to people in this country who do the work without which the community could not exist. At the present moment, in the County of Durham, 1074 where I was last week, a miner working six days a week, with the stoppages, cannot take home to his family more than 40s., and there is no pension for him until he reaches the age of 65. In our Diplomatic Service, according to the White Paper, there is a fixed annual allowance not exceeding £1,700 per annum for a first-class pension; £1,300 per annum for a second-class, £900 per annum for a third-class, and £700 per annum for a fourth-class.
I do not abject to these people having emoluments. If you have an underpaid servant there is a temptation to corruption, and if it be true that even to-day it is impossible for our Ministers to occupy certain posts without large private means, there ought to be special allowances provided for them and they should not have to dip their hands into their private purses. I do not think it right at the present time that any public officer or any public servant should have to depend on private means in order to keep up to the standard expected of him and to carry out his duties. If we are underpaying our representatives abroad to that extent, then the State should step in and help, otherwise you limit the representation of His Majesty in certain capitals abroad to men of wealth, which is wrong. You limit your choice of selection, and it is mischievous and undemocratic in that no poor man will be able to rise to certain positions in the Diplomatic Service. But I cannot help contrasting the pay and conditions of service with the lot of the Durham miner who, working underground in heat, in damp and in danger, cannot to-clay earn more than 40s. a week, I cannot overlook the case of the South Wales miners who, in many of the fields, while working full time, if they are men with children—
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI am afraid the hon. and gallant Member is going beyond the Resolution we are now discussing. In fact, he is straying a good deal beyond it.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThis is the second occasion to-night that I have, unfortunately, come in conflict with your ruling, and I shall not, of course, pursue the matter further in that direction. I was only using as an illustration the fact that these men do 1075 not get a pension after 10 years' service, and I have said enough to call for a reply as to why a pension can be given after only 10 years in not a very dangerous and, perhaps, not too arduous, profession. If it is wrong to draw attention to the pay of men at the other end of the scale I will not, of course, do so. We are, after all, increasing the pensions by £11,500 for the first two years, and I should have liked to have drawn attention to other pensioners who cannot get the pensions to which they thought they were entitled. I am sorry I have transgressed twice this evening. I think I have said enough to call for a word of explanation, and I shall await the reply with interest.
§ Mr. SIDNEY WEBBI do not want to pursue the criticism of my hon. and gallant Friend because I apprehend that it will not be possible to enlarge this Motion in order to give pensions to all the people who, perhaps, deserve them. I only rise to say that this limited proposal, as far as we can understand it, is one to which we have no objection, and which is, obviously, for the convenience of the Service and in order to facilitate the interchange of officers from Downing Street to the other places further afield in which they have to serve instead of having two watertight compartments—one set of people in Downing Street who have never been abroad and another set of people abroad who have never been in Downing Street. I, myself, some time in the last century, suffered under such an arrangement in a neighbouring Office. I think the administration will be greatly improved if it be possible to interchange one set of officers with the other. As I understand it, this practically assimilates the pensions of the Diplomatic Service with the pension system of the Foreign Office and the home Civil Service generally. I are sure my hon. and gallant Friend need not be alarmed in imagining that this Motion will give every diplomat the option of getting a pension after 10 years if he chooses to ask for it. That is not the arrangement. I think there is nothing to which we can object in this proposal, and if the hon. Gentleman will give a reply probably he will get his Motion.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODI want to raise my voice in protest on behalf of the class 1076 that I represent here—the working class. Time and again—and this is one of the instances of class legislation—they tell us that there is no such thing as a class struggle existing in society and that we should not preach the class war. We Socialists do not preach the class war, but the Tory Government, in bringing forward this proposal for the payment of superannuation in the Diplomatic Service are embarking upon class legislation. We are proposing to give to certain individuals in the Diplomatic Service £1,700 a year pension. That does not seem very much to a rich man, but it is a tremendous amount to the worker, and it is the worker who will have to pay it—not the rich man. It is all rolled out of the flesh and blood of the working class. Who are these people? Whence are they recruited, these individuals who make up the diplomats who have time and again landed this country into war? Is it a case of outstanding ability? Are they poor men Certainly not. If it were a case of examination, my class would always come out on the top. We have no fear of examinations, we are always for making the examination as stiff as you like. My class will come to the top eventually. Before you can get into the Diplomatic Service, you must have an income of £400 a year.
§ Mr. SAMUELI am sure the hon. Member would not like to pursue an argument based upon a fallacy. It is not correct to say that an entrant to the Diplomatic Service must have an income of £400 a year. That has long been done away with.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODThe fact remains that until the working classes, the Labour party, became a power in the land, and until we were able to draw the attention of the country to what was going on, the rotten system was at work. That is not denied. Therefore, it ill becomes this Government to bring forward this Bill, when on every occasion they are trotting out the cry of economy: "We must have economy. We must economise on the education of the children." The Prime Minister said that it was essential for everyone to economise. Here is an opportunity to economise, if the ruling classes are in earnest. The country is becoming poorer and poorer every day, and cannot afford to pay to the men who produce the wealth of this country a 1077 decent living wage. How then do you expect that we who represent these men in this House are going to sit calmly here and allow the ruling classes to vote pensions to their own class?
9.0 p.m.
It is a fraud. It is nothing but a fraud. Nothing but a Government of robbers would dare to do anything of the kind. I am glad to see that the Secretary of State for Scotland, who is the Scottish diplomat in London, has arrived. We are trammelled in Scotland. It is impossible for us to carry out our desires, and the right hon. Gentleman cannot grant us our wishes, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is represented by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, who is in charge of this Bill, blocks the way. The Government have not the least compunction in coming forward and saying, "Here is a chance to help a body of men. Even if we take £10 a week off their pension they will never miss their breakfast." We represent men who are working hard and doing work in the absence of which there would be no such thing as the British Empire. The British Empire does not rest upon the diplomats any more than it rests upon the Government of the day. It rests upon the working classes, who have been treated by this Government in the most callous, brutal and unfair manner.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODI am trying to show the difference of treatment that is meted out to the working people of this country and to those who do not work at all. To those—
Who toil not, neither do they spin.Even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.That is what is going on here. We are not in the Ruhr or in Canada or in Russia but in our own native land, and under the cognisance of this Government we have 28,000 boys, between the ages of 14 and 16, working in the mines.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member really must try not to bring these things into this discussion. They are not in Order on this discussion.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODI am sorry to be falling foul of your Ruling, but when I see a White Paper issued like this, it 1078 brings me to my feet at once, because of what is implied here and what I see of the conditions of the people among whom I live and move and have my being—the people who are sent before the rota committees. These diplomats can retire, but there is not any given age for their retirement. They are not forced to retire, as are some of my class. With the worker to-day, it is becoming more and more a fact that when he reaches 60 years of age he begins to fear that it is time for him to pass away. We are living in an age as far as my class are concerned when they are wishing for the grave.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI have called the hon. Member to order several times. I hope he will obey my ruling.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODI do not wish to be rude to the Chair. On page 4 of this White Paper, there is a word which I do not understand. It is not Scots. Whether it is a crossword puzzle or not, I cannot say. It may be ancient French or Latin. It is probably Anglo-Saxon The word is "opt." This is how it is spelled: o.p.t. That is not English, neither is it Scots nor Welsh, and these are the only three languages permitted in this House. It may be Gaelic. Here is this word spelled o.p.t., and I want to know why the time of this House is taken up by words of this description. I have on occasions visited the House of Lords and seen them performing, and certain individuals rehearsing certain old Norman words—
The DEPUTY CHAIRMANThe hon. Member continues to disobey my ruling. I must ask him to confine his attention to the Motion before the Committee. If he continues to disobey my ruling, I must ask him to resume his seat.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODI am asking for an explanation from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. I hope he will, to the best of his ability, explain what is meant by the word "opt."
§ Mr. SAMUELI do not think the hon. Member seriously wishes me to explain the word "opt."
§ Mr. KIRKWOODYes, certainly.
§ Mr. SAMUELIt is very often used in the case of a committee, you co-opt on to a committee. You choose, or select, and in the connection in which it is used here, wishes, or chooses, or agrees.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODWhy do you put it in?
§ Mr. SAMUELWe like to use a short rather than a long word. Let me now deal with the questions which have been raised—
§ Mr. TINKERBefore the Financial Secretary replies, there are one or two comments I want to make on the White Paper. It says that the Act provides for awards of fixed annual allowances not exceeding £1,700 for a first-class pension, £1,300 for a second, £900 for a third, and £700 for a fourth, and on page 4 it says:
An ambassador or Minister may be pensioned before attaining the age of 60 if he has been recalled in the interest of diplomatic relations and cannot be employed elsewhere. This is a restricted form of a power given by the Act of 1869.I should like to know whether the pensions scheme of the Civil Service is a contributory scheme, and whether it is not the case that under the Act dealing with the workers' pensions scheme it, is a contributory one and does not operate before a man attains the age of 65. If his employer discharges him before he attains that age, there is no question of him getting a pension until he reaches 65. I want to put this point, on the one hand, if you have a servant who is called away or discharged before his time he is to have a pension; the industrial servant, if he is discharged before his time, is he not entitled to the same recognition from the State or the employer for work of equal value? People engaged in industry are as essential to the State as civil servants, and if that, is so, are they not entitled to the same kind of treatment? I had no knowledge or idea of the extent of these pensions until I saw this White Paper, and, therefore, I think we have a right to bring to the notice of the Committee the comparison between one class of person and another. I do not object to all people having some kind of pension, but I want some regard to be paid to those who are engaged in industry, so that when they have finished their work they can look forward to some recognition for what they have done.
§ Mr. HARDIEI read this in the White Paper:
That Act provides for awards of fixed annual allowances not exceeding £1,700 per annum for a first-class pension, £1,300 per 1080 annum for a second, £900 per annum for a third, and £700 per annum for a fourth.It is very remarkable that in this House, when salaries are well above the existence line, there is never any difficulity in getting a proposal like this through. In dealing with a superannuation scheme of this kind it would have been well if the Financial Secretary had given us some explanation of the matter instead of reading certain paragraphs. There is a great deal behind this Bill. In this matter speed is not essential. The people who have these salaries are not waiting for something to be done for them, as in the case of the industrial classes. Hon. Members opposite are silent when it is a proposal of this kind, when it is the case of pensions for their own class, but they are not so silent when it is a case of pensions for the working classes. The Government would do well to explain what is behind this proposal, and why there is so much trouble taken to oppose anything of the kind in the ease of work-men. Why is it so easy to get a proposal like this through Parliament? Is is because the salaries are so big that these people do not want pensions? Is is the case of the "fat sow must always be greased"? The hon. Member might give us some information on this proposal. It. would he interesting because it might he applied in many other directions.Perhaps hon. Members opposite do not want other classes in the community to know how these good things are obtained, perhaps they want to keep it a close combination amongst members of their own class. The House is practically empty at the moment but when it is a case of pensions for the working classes then the benches opposite are fell with hon. Members ready to vote against them, and when they are given they are only a mere pittance. When the question of pensions came up on the Electricity Bill, the same thing happened. The men who had received steady salaries all the years were considered, but the men who were off and on were looked upon with something approaching to disgust. It is a disgrace because such men were generally more useful than the fellows with the big salaries. I ask the Financial Secretary to give us a guarantee that working class pensions in future will be given the same attention as pensions for other classes of people.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI wish to make a suggestion to the Financial Secretary as to what he might do in regard to one point, when the Bill is being drafted. Page 4 of the White Paper contains a reference to the payment of temporary pensions in cases where there has been a rupture of diplomatic relations. I suggest that this should be amended so as to provide that no pensions should be paid to diplomats in cases where diplomatic relations have been ruptured. If that were done possibly there would never be another war and I suggest that the hon. Gentleman should go on the Chinese principle of paying the doctor for keeping you well and depriving him of his pay if you fall sick. I think the hon. Gentleman is a great supporter of all efforts to bring about peace, and I make that suggestion to him as a contribution towards the peace of the world.
§ Mr. MacLARENThe White Paper states that the class of pension is to depend upon complicated provisions as to rank, service, length of residence abroad and classification of the mission concerned. I wish to know who is to decide as to the class of pension. Is that to be in the hands of the Department or in the hands of the Financial Secretary himself; and will the hon. Gentleman give us some idea of what these complications are and how they are to be cleared up?
§ Mr. SAMUELIn regard to the last observation of the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull, I am very much obliged to him for the suggestion which he has made, and I will give it proper consideration. With regard to the question put by the last speaker, II think he will find that it is answered by the paragraph at the bottom of page 1 of the White Paper, which states:
In the case of persons serving abroad pension is to be calculated on the salary, etc., of officers of corresponding rank serving in the Foreign Office.The hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull also asked a question about the Consular Service, and in order to make the matter quite clear may I say that Consular officers are in the Civil Service already, and this is a proposal to bring the Diplomatic Service on to the same basis as the Civil Service, so that the Bill does not affect the Consular status. I do not think there is any other question to which I need address myself ex- 1082 cept to say that these pensions are not contributory. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Seaham (Mr. Webb) has, think, made my replying speech for me on other points. He has said, in effect, that the terms of this Resolution are fair and that they commend themselves to the party opposite. I cannot say anything more explanatory than that; any criticisms that have been levelled at the Resolution have been met by the observations of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Resolution to be reported To-morrow.