HC Deb 12 November 1928 vol 222 cc482-3
56. Sir F. HALL

asked the Prime Minister whether, in connection with the declared policy of the Government to effect large economies in Civil Service expenditure, it is proposed to reorganise the existing departments with a view to obtaining a more systematic distribution of work: and, if so, whether there will be a preliminary inquiry into the matter by a Royal Commission or other body?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin)

No, Sir. His Majesty's Government does not at present contemplate any such re-allocation of the functions of public departments as my hon. and gallant Friend would appear to have in mind.

Sir F. HALL

If there is this hopeful anticipation of saving £10,000,000 a year on the Civil Service, how is this economy going to be effected if we carry on exactly the same policy as we are doing at the present time?

The PRIME MINISTER

I suggest that that question should be put to the Treasury.

Mr. BECKETT

Are we to take it that it is now definitely decided that the Ministries which the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced would be wound up are not to be wound up?

The PRIME MINISTER

The hon. Gentleman has not been very much in the House during recent months, and he may not have heard the very full answer which I gave on this subject, a copy of which I shall be very pleased to send to him.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

Do I understand that the Prime Minister has resigned his position as First Lord of the Treasury, because he referred my hon. Friend to the Treasury?

The PRIME MINISTER

I should have thought that my hon. and gallant Friend, with his knowledge of this House, would have known that the use of the word "Treasury" is limited to the departmental Treasury.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

Does that mean that the Prime Minister has no further responsibility for the Treasury?

The PRIME MINISTER

Not at all.

Sir F. HALL

May I ask my right hon. Friend if it does not mean exactly what he said?