BOARD OF TRADE. (Hansard, 27 February 1936)

§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD OF TRADE (Dr. Burgin)
This Supplementary Estimate will be found on page 7 of Command Paper No. 51, with explanatory details on page 8. The original Estimate for the current financial year for the Board of Trade was £239,912, and the revised Estimate is £244,912 net, the additional amount required by way of supplementary grant 946 being £5,000. The details fall under five headings, namely "Salaries", "Special Services", "Travelling and Incidental Expenses", "Telegrams and Telephones" and "Law Charges". These details amount to £10,000, but there are savings amounting to £5,000, so that there is a net increase of £5,000. Under salaries we find the cost of the restoration of the remaining half of the cut, accounting for £2,650, and the cost of increased staff, £350. The increased staff has been necessitated chiefly in connection with the increased work in negotiating commercial treaties and payment agreements with foreign countries. Special services, £3,500, are chiefly due to the carrying out of a treaty obligation arising under the Anglo-Argentine Agreement of 1933, under which an inquiry into the structure of 947 the meat trade was called for. That inquiry has proved rather more costly than was anticipated, and the £23,500 arises principally from that cause.
The item for travelling and incidental expenses arises out of the matters discussed on the last Supplementary Estimate, the negotiation of payment agreements with a number of foreign countries. Permanent officials have visited such places as Angora and other capitals, and their expenditure on their travels has accounted for this increase. The next item, "Telegrams and Telephones", arises in this way: It is found that although the greatest care is taken to keep within the bound of economy, the habit of telephoning from these foreign capitals where agreements are being negotiated increases, and there is increased expenditure under that heading. As to law charges, £1,500, they are chiefly due to the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission scheme and in part in connection with inquiries into shipping matters.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
When I first examined these Supplementary Estimates, I formed the impression that the items were not of very substantial importance, but I have found ample cause to change my mind. The statement made by the Parliamentary Secretary reveals that these services were incurred in connection with treaties arranged between this country and foreign countries and with travels abroad by our officials, and more particularly expenditure incurred in connection with schemes promoted by the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission. May I direct attention to the paucity of information furnished in the statement now before the Committee No one would have suspected from a reading of these items that Item B 3, relating to law charges, bore any reference whatever to the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission and the promotion of schemes by that body. My first complaint is that within these items much more ample information should have have been provided to enable hon. Members to come to a considered conclusion as to how the money was being spent.

§ Dr. BURGIN
Will the hon. Member be good enough to look over the page?

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I have looked over the page, and if the hon. Member refers to page 7, I have the greatest difficulty in ascertaining under which item on that page there is a reference to the matters contained under the Item B 3 on page 8. There is certainly no reference on page 7 to the subject of the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission. I can only assume, therefore, that the hon. Member, having, like myself, sat continuously throughout the night listening and to some extent participating in the debates, is not in precisely the kind of fettle that is necessary to take t really intelligent interest in our proceedings. I certainly detected, as no doubt; other hon. Members did, earlier in the proceedings, when the hon. Gentleman sat on that bench that he looked very fatigued. He certainly brightened up after a brief absence from the Chamber. What the cause of that brightening up was, I am unable to say, but I cannot help thinking that the hon. Member must feel particularly fatigued as a result of the long wait that has been imposed upon him because of the attitude of his right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary.
However, it is not of much value bandying words across the Floor as to the relative mental merits of hon. Members. What we are concerned with is the information, or absence of information, as regards the Vote now before the Committee. It is the established practice, and the tradition has certainly been confirmed by all sides of the House in our previous proceedings, that we have a right to examine with meticulous care the expenditure of public money. That being admitted, there follows the further consideration that we are entitled to know to whom the money is being paid and among how many it is being distributed. Moreover, we are entitled to ascertain whether the money is being wisely used and whether there is any purpose in the spending of these sums. Referring again to Item B 3, I cannot discuss, I understand, the policy of the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission, but I am entitled to discuss the failures of this body.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I am afraid not on this occasion. The hon. Member has overlooked the fact that there is a separate Vote 949 for the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission, namely, Class 6, Vote 6, Subhead I, and it is a long standing rule of Committee of Supply that where there is a separate Vote, matters concerning that Vote must be raised on it.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
With great respect, in a previous Debate I ventured, upon a statement made by yourself, Captain Bourne, to ask a question of order. You said, and I think it applied to the Minister of Labour, that he was expected to state the reasons why money should be expended, and I submit for your consideration that if the right hon. Gentleman was entitled to give reasons why sums of money should be expended, we should not be deprived of the right of suggesting that the money ought not to have been spent. I understood that you replied in the affirmative.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I do not think the hon. Member quite appreciates my Ruling on this occasion. The reason why we cannot raise the operations of the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission is that there is a separate Vote for that Commission on another Estimate, which is not now before the Committee, and it is a long standing rule of Committee of Supply that where there is a separate Vote, matters concerning it must be discussed on that Vote.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I submit that the hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary himself informed us that these law charges related to expenditure incurred in connection with schemes promoted by a particular Commission under the technical control of his Department. The Mines Department, as we know, is closely associated with the Board of Trade. Surely, if the hon. Gentleman comes here and says, "I am proposing to spend money on legal expenses in connection with the promotion of schemes by a particular Commission," we are entitled to query whether it was wise to spend money on those schemes.

§ The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN
I am afraid that on this occasion that is not the case. The hon. Member must confine his remarks under this Item solely to the law charges.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I am content to confine myself to the law charges and to ask whether the charges incurred in connection with schemes promoted by the 950 Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission are excessive. Are the legal charges consistent with the needs of the Commission? Was it worth spending any money at all on legal charges having regard to the results? With regard to the item for "travelling expenses, I gather from the hon. Gentleman that they were mainly incurred in connection with visits of officials abroad. I am not clear whether we can discuss the purport of those visits. It ought to be permissible, because if we incur expense by sending officials abroad, we are entitled to ask what they were doing when they went abroad. Were they working in connection with the large range of treaties for which the Government are responsible? What was the nature of the treaties which these gentlemen arranged, and is it intended to revise or denounce any of the treaties? It does not appear to me that we can within the rules of Order discuss the effect of these treaties. An item which gave me considerable concern was "Anticipated savings on Clearing Office for Enemy Debts—rents, legal and incidental expenses." I should like to ask why, 17 years after the great War came to and end—

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
The hon. Gentleman must raise that question on the main Estimate.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
On that, I must raise one or two submissions for your consideration. Upon what are the savings likely to accrue? The answer is supplied in the item. Is it not, therefore, a travesty of the proceedings of the Committee that we are not entitled to ask what it is all about?

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
The hon. Gentleman is not quite correct in stating that. If he will look at the main Estimate, he will observe the savings under Sub-head G 2.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I am content to confine myself to the limited field you provide for me. Why is it that so many years after the War, when presumably the arrangements for clearing enemy debts should have come to an end, we have an item relating to rents, legal and incidental expenses? What concerns me more than anything is the possibility that some of this expenditure might relate to the liquidation of reparation shipping.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
We cannot go into that question now. The hon. Gentleman must raise that on the main Board of Trade Estimate. All the hon. Gentleman can be concerned with now is why the Government are making this saving.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
That is exactly what we want to know. I am afraid that I wrapped up my question in involved language, but now that you have assisted me, I will put the question in that categorical form. I am not sure whether I would be in order in offering a few considerations, but I prefer not to do so, having spoken at such length and having asked so many questions. I have no doubt other hon. Members will have further questions to ask. I content myself with what I have said in the hope that the hon. Gentleman will be courteous enough to respond. I hope he will not be under the impression, as other hon. Members on that bench have been, that we are merely asking questions in a flippant fashion and with no sense of gravity, but that he will take the assurance from me that we are asking these questions within our rights as Members of the Committee in the hope that further information can be furnished.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
I have some diffidence in rising to take part in the Debate, because I have enjoyed a good night's sleep, and that fact may make it a little difficult for me to keep within the strict Ruling that has been given in the discussion of these Estimates. I should like to offer my respectful sympathy to yourself, Captain Bourne, and the Chairman and the officials at having been kept up in this brutal manner by the Government. I think that if they had no mercy on the Opposition, they might have had some mercy on you and the Chairman and the officials. I was amused when Ministers indirectly complained that the Opposition were asking for a good deal of information. During the short period I was at the Office of Works it was my unhappy fate to stand at the Box with Supplementary Estimates, and I was expected to defend almost every portion of my administration—whether the Serpentine was dirty, whether it was safe to bathe in it, whether anyone was getting fevers or other serious illness through bathing in it, and the conditions of baths that never came under my control.
952 All these questions came up for discussion, and I congratulate the Ministers of to-day that they are not subjected to the torments through which I had to go on those occasions. I had to know all about the bird sanctuary and whether the cats got in, and whether I took proper precautions to deal with the grey squirrel. There may be some other kind of squirrel, but I am not sure. I had to deal with the Estimates in an extensive manner. I notice that the Parliamentary Secretary cheers that statement. I wish he had learned the lesson and had given us fuller explanations of the Votes that are before us. I notice that salaries are up by £3,000. Nobody grudges the Ministers and the official:. getting the cuts restored. They ought never to have been made, for I have always considered that that supposed necessity was all "guff," and that the crisis was nothing to do with our expenditure, but all had to do with the City of London.

§ Mr. H. G. WILLIAMS
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that five hours ago his colleagues were explaining that there was not a crisis?

§ Mr. LANSBURY
The hon. Gentleman has been here all night, and his question is excusable. He did not understand what I said. All I said was that the crisis had nothing to do with us but with the City of London, as everybody now knows and admits. Nobody outside a mental asylum now says it was a, national crisis in the ordinary sense of the word. We congratulate the Government on restoring the cuts. I refer hon. Members to the item on page 8 for "Increased staff and overtime modified by savings due to changes in personnel." That sounds all right, but v hat does it mean What is the increase in the staff? It cannot be much for Have some office boys been appointed? Then, surely, in these days of unemployment a Government Department ought not to ask anybody to work overtime. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] The hon. Member for South Croydon (Mr. H. G. Williams) probably k rows all about it, because he has been working overtime, but he will not get any extra pay for it. I wish the Minister to tell us what is the increased staff for, what is the number, what sort of persons have been appointed, and also how much of the £350 is due 'to overtime?
953 There is also an item for "special services" and excess due to unexpected increase in the amount of travelling and other expenses in connection with special inquiries and committees. I admit that the Minister gave us a little information on that subject, but not much. This is a sum of £3,500, and the Committee are entitled to know what the special services were and what has been the result of them. Have we got any value for this expenditure? Are we able to set against it some national gain, something which has accrued to the country's benefit? Then I find an item headed "Travelling and incidental expenses." When I get a lawyer's bill, which is not often, or a doctor's bill, I sometimes find an item for "incidentals" which seems relatively larger than the main expense. What are the incidentals in this case? Do they relate to hotel, motor car, or entertainment charges?
We ought also to know more about the "trade and payment" negotiations which are referred to under this head. Is that in connection with debts to British nationals in the Argentine and Brazil, about which hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite are continually asking questions? That is part of the international problem. Is there any Estimate in connection with these negotiations as to how these foreign nations are to be able to pay their debts? If this money has been spent on negotiations, we ought to be told what success has attended the efforts of the negotiators. In my judgment this is one of the most important questions, if not an overwhelmingly important question, in connection with international relations. What are we going to do about the debts which nations are unable to pay and as a result of which they are unable to trade in the ordinary way? We learn that in some countries coffee has been burnt in great quantities, while, in others, wheat and meat are not permitted to come on to the market at all, although millions of people need those commodities. The cause of this can be traced back to the system of usury that has grown up in the world. It is of importance to know what success has attended those who have been sent abroad to negotiate on these matters.
As regards the amount for telephones and telegrams, the Minister told us that 954 abroad, people were more accustomed to use the telephone now than formerly. But I think when we have an increased expenditure of £1,000 on this head we ought to have a little more information than that casual reference. It may have become the custom, but it does not follow that we should in all circumstances consider it a good custom or consider that it was necessary. When we remember the sort of economics which are inflicted on the very poor in the name of national wellbeing, we are entitled to ask whether this luxury of telephoning from foreign capitals is necessary or justifiable. On the question of legal charges, we have had nothing but the casual remark that they are concerned with the coal business, though I did not understand the hon. Gentleman to mean that the whole £1,500 is in connection with the Coal Commission. The Minister ought to have told us at the beginning—

§ Dr. BURGIN
Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman did not hear me, or perhaps it is my own fault that I did not make it clear, but I said that in addition to the coal reorganisation scheme, the legal charges also related to work connected with the mercantile marine.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
If the hon. Gentleman says he said so, I accept his statement. Perhaps I had not been thoroughly awakened when he was speaking and was not as alert as I ought to have been. But we ought to be told what the money was expended on, why it was expended, and with what results I wish also to ask about the item on page 7 concerning the Clearing Office for Enemy Debts. That has been a long-drawn-out business. How much longer is it to appear on our Estimates? [HON. MEMBERS: "Until it is finished."] Then it is somebody's business to finish it. I thought that this business of collection and distribution would have been brought to an end long ago. We should also know whether any of the incidental and legal expenses come under this heading of "Savings".
Speaking generally on the Estimate, I would say that the Government seem to have got into the habit of flinging those Estimates at us with very little printed information, and the Minister who submits them does not give us much additional information. I suggest, respectfully, that if they want to get their 955 Estimates through, they ought to print more information on the Paper. Finally, may I say that I think it a scandal that while I have been sleeping, you, Sir Dennis, have been slaving here '? As you were not in the Chair when I first rose, I wish now, personally, to offer you my sincere sympathy and to express my indignation that those who manage the "usual channels" should have slipped up as they have done on this occasion. It is disgraceful that a brutal majority should treat the House and especially you and the officials in this manner.

§ Mr. A. HENDERSON
I should like to express my sympathy with my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary over the fact that he has had to spend 11 hours waiting for his Votes to come on, but the responsibility for that must not be placed on the shoulders of my hon. Friends on this side of the House, and he will have to look to his own colleagues and place the responsibility there. Some of us on this side are anxious for a little more information than we find in the Estimates. The right hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) has covered most of the territory, but perhaps I can fill in one or two gaps. First, there is the question of overtime. Members on this side have strong feelings about overtime, especially as we are just finishing a period of some 10 hours' overtime, and we should like to know how much overtime has been worked by officials in the Department, and how many hours each day and each week. We are anxious to safeguard the interests of the workers in the Department, and to enable us to do that it is essential that we should be informed about the hours of overtime.
Passing to item A2, we should like a little more information about these "special inquiries and Committees" In the Parliament of 1929 hon. Members who then sat on this side of the House constantly criticised the Labour Government for appointing too many Committees. I should like to know what these special inquiries were about, and how long they took. According to item A3 additional expenditure which was "unexpected" has been incurred. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will tell us in what sense it was unexpected. What was the nature of the surprise. I understand he has given some information about the 956 missions to foreign capitals, but I do not think it was sufficient. We should like to know to which foreign capitals missions were sent, how many were sent, how long they were away, and what was the result. Then we come to "payments negotiations." They seem a different species of negotiations from trade: negotiations, and we should like some information about them.
I am glad to see that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury has at last arrived. I am not sure whether he looks as refreshed as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, but he is making a brave effort. According to item A4, the expenditure on telegrams and telephones has increased. There seems to have been a great many surprises in the Board of Trade, and we should like to know why this expenditure proved greater than had been anticipated. Seeing that the Board of Trade have been making fuller use of the telephone, I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should convey hi; views as to the utility of the telephone to some of the other Government Departments and to the Prime Minister himself, because then we may avoid some of the difficulties experienced in the past.
Finally, there is the item of "Law Charges."; The Parliamentary Secretary belongs to the legal profession, as I do myself; we both have strong interests in this matter. Like my right hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Bromley, I should like a little more information about the expenditure on law charges. I understand that part of it was occasioned by the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission, and I should like to know how much, whether counsel were employed and, if so, what they received in emoluments.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I hope the Committee will feel that in following the usual practice of opening this Supplementary Estimate rather shortly and then submitting myself to questions. I was consulting their convenience. I not want the Committee to think there was any discourtesy on my part. I felt it was better to go over the field fairly generally and then invite questions, and my invitation has certainly been accepted whole-heartedly. I am always an admirer of the consistency of hon. Members opposite, 957 and I admire particularly their consistency in asking for the fullest and minutest particulars on every point and then complaining of overtime. A whole special staff has to be kept in order to deal with the possibility of questions from hon. and right hon. Members.

§ Mr. E. J. WILLIAMS
Could not a larger staff be kept, to save overtime?

§ Dr. BURGIN
The hon. Member is evidently not very familiar with either the work which the Board of Trade have to do or with the nature of the staff required. I think the Committee will feel that in an economic age, for the Board of Trade to come before them with a Supplementary Estimate for merely £5,000 ought to occasion no surprise at all. The surprise should be that the sum is so small. It must have been obvious at Question time, from the enormous increase of work that has fallen on the Department, that there would be increased expenditure, and as I go through the items raised and endeavour to answer conscientiously, fully, and completely the questions which have been put to me we shall find that the increased expenses arise out of the type of subject-matter so frequently discussed at Question time. Take, for instance, the visits to foreign capitals in connection with trade agreements and debt recovery agreements. How can anybody, in making an Estimate for 12 months ahead, know what financial crises will occur in any particular countries, know with exactitude where there is going to be trouble and where it may be necessary to send a mission It has been necessary, in the interests of British traders, to send abroad British missions to endeavour to recover trade debts to British exporters for goods which they have sent abroad and for which they have been unable to secure payment. That refers to Turkey, Spain, Rumania, and other countries with which agreements have recently been concluded in the interests of British trade.
The hon. Member for Seaham (Mr. Shinwell), who put his points with great detail but with great precision, asked me substantially three questions—about law charges, travelling expenses, and about savings under the Clearing Office. The law charges are an additional provision required for increased expenditure incurred by the Solicitor to the Board 958 of Trade. What has the Solicitor to the Board of Trade been concerned with that has been of an abnormal character? Two things—the presentation of coal reorganisation schemes, in particular the West Yorkshire scheme, and the presentation of that scheme to the Railway and Canal Commission

§ Mr. SHINWELL
Is it not the case that since the middle of July the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission has suspended its investigations—I do not say suspended all its activities, but suspended its investigations into the possibility of amalgamations—and, therefore, how was it possible to incur greater expenditure?

§ Dr. BURGIN
I have not said anything about incurring more expenditure during that period alone, but that the Estimate in respect of the submission of coal mines reorganisation schemes to the Railway and Canal Commission has been exceeded, largely by reason of the West Yorkshire scheme and its submission to the Railway and Canal Commission. Many hon. Members will recall what happened to that scheme and the expensive character of the proceedings before the Commission. There were also heavy charges incurred by the Solicitor to the Board of Trade in connection with inquiries into a large number of shipping casualties of an unusual and exceptional character, with which hon. Members will be familiar. As to travelling and incidental expenses, I do not know into what details the hon. Member for Seaham desires me to go.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I do not ask the hon. Gentleman to go into minute details about every journey undertaken by members of his staff, but that he should let us have some conception of the general character of their activities.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I am much obliged; that will facilitate my task. I am anxious to give the hon. Gentleman the information in whatever detail he likes, but I want to consult the convenience of the Committee as to its form. Wherever the position becomes intolerable for British exporting interests, and it becomes impossible to continue trade with a particular country because the British exporter cannot receive payment, it has become the practice to send a mission, in conjunction with the Treasury, to the 959 capital concerned, in order to endeavour to negotiate an arrangement under which some recovery of debts already accrued and due may be made possible, and provision may be made for continuing a current exchange of goods. Recently an unusually large number of such missions has been found to be necessary. I cite Turkey—the visit to Angora; Spain—the visit to Madrid; and a visit to Budapest, by way of examples. These were all visits to the capitals of countries with which trading conditions have become difficult because of exchange restrictions or other credit barriers, and the amount required under this heading is for the purpose of meeting additional expenditure on such missions in connection with these trade and payment negotiations. The agreements have resulted in advantage to our traders, and the expenditure on procuring them is entirely justified and, in the opinion of my Department, very much to the advantage of British trade.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
On a point of Order. May I ask you, Sir Dennis, whether it will be in order for me to ask the Minister to explain a little more fully what is the advantage that has accrued from each of these agreements?

§ The CHAIRMAN
From each particular agreement?

§ Mr. LANSBURY
Yes.

§ The CHAIRMAN
That will be in order.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I think the right hon. Gentleman was not in the Committee when we were discussing the previous Supplementary Estimate, which related to the Treasury and on which expenditure in connection with these agreements was part of the matter under discussion. My hon. and learned Friend the Financial Secretary gave a number of details of agreements, particularly with Spain, Turkey and Rumania, showing the advantages that had accrued. I have, of course, no difficulty whatever in again giving to the Committee, for the benefit of the right hon. Gentleman, the same information. The agreements, of course, are never twice alike; there are different problems with each country. Take, for instance, one of the very recent agreements, that with Spain, which has been 960 in force since January of this year. There was a very large amount due by Spanish traders to British traders; there was inability to recover the money; and there was an agreement whereby purchases of Spanish imports are paid for in sterling to a special account, so that our own exporters may receive payment in that way. That is only an example and I leave it there as an example, but, no matter which country the right hon. Gentleman takes, I shall be able to show an equivalent advantage to British trading interests.
The hon. Member for Seaham asked one other question. B e asked about the Enemy Debts Clearing Office, and he was followed by the hon. Member for Kingswinford (Mr. A. Henderson) and by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury). Let there be no mystery about this Clearing Office. It is presided over by a very valuable servant of the Board of Trade, whom I should dearly like to have detached from these duties for the sake of the more general assistance that he could give to the Board. Hon. Members will realise that, under the Treaties of Peace, there has been an immense amount of work to be done in connection with enemy debts. Naturally it is a diminishing task. This saving of £1,800, is, as to £400, in connection with the giving up of the big offices in Cornwall House, which were the headquarters of the Enemy Debts Office. Those offices are being gradually given up because the work is gradually diminishing. By far the larger part of the saving is due to the fact that the work of the office has so far decreased that the expenditure on legal charges in connection with its administration has fallen by £1,400. The right hon. Gentleman asked when this work will come to an end. There is a certain amount of litigation still outstanding, and, until it is cleared up, there cannot be absolute finality, but the work of the office is decreasing annually, and every desire is shared by the Department to bring that section of its operations to a speedy conclusion.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
I was anxious to ascertain when the Enemy Debts Clearing Office would be fully liquidated. I take it that that is the intention of the Department?

§ Dr. BURGIN
Certainly.

§ Mr. SHINWELL
So far, so good, but I would also like to know whether there is in this connection any appropriation-in-aid. I assume that certain tasks are undertaken on behalf of contracting parties, and I should like to know whether those parties, or any of them, make a contribution to the expense.

§ Dr. BURGIN
It is impossible to name a date when the operations of the Office are likely to close completely. The problem of the Stateless persons, whose nationality itself is a matter of dispute, has given rise to a large number of cases, some of which are not yet concluded, and there are still considerable assets under the control of this Department, as custodian, which remain to be liquidated and distributed, but in respect of which there are still questions of principle to be decided. The right hon. Member for Bow and Bromley went religiously through every heading of the Estimate. He is clearly within his rights in so doing, and no one enjoys responding to these questions more than I do. With regard to increased staff and overtime, about which the right hon. Gentleman asked, these expert negotiations with foreign countries cannot be carried on without an increased staff. The sum of £350 in the Estimate is a balancing item as between an increase in expenditure and some savings. The figure of £350 is not particularly allocated to a certain number at so much each; it is a net figure arrived at after giving credit, and it represents —

§ Mr. LANSBURY
May I ask what the exact sum is, before taking the credit into account

§ Dr. BURGIN
We are dealing with a Supplementary Estimate in which there is an item of £350 for increased staff and overtime, as modified by savings due to changes in personnel. We are dealing, therefore, with a subtraction of a lesser figure from a greater, and all I am saying is that the right hon. Gentleman would be wrong if he thought that the £350 represented the payments made to a given number of additional staff. It is nothing of the kind; it is a lump figure obtained by taking the whole of the payments to the staff and deducting therefrom savings that we have made as a result of changes in personnel, the net figure being £350.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
I know; but what I really want to know is, what is the original total figure, and how much has been deducted for savings, reducing it to £l350? I cannot find that out.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I am not sure that I can either. The increase of staff has been necessitated, as I endeavoured to convey in my opening observations, in connection with the increased work of the Commercial Relations and Treaties Department in the negotiation of the commercial treaties and trade agreements to which I have referred. One of the difficulties in negotiating more than a certain number of trade agreements at a time is that there are comparatively few highly qualified people who can be put in charge of such negotiations. The difficulty arises from the necessity of employing a highly trained and highly knowledgeable staff, whose services are required for each of these trade agreements and whom it is very difficult to duplicate. That is the reason why there must be an element of overtime. I share with hon. Members opposite the belief that it is wrong, when the labour market is overcharged with labour, unnecessarily to resort to overtime. It is not the practice in the Board of Trade to use overtime where it can be avoided, but there are difficulties with highly trained staffs of that kind, with great pressure of work, and as the difference between the Supplementary and original Estimate is only £350—

§ Mr. LANSBURY
The hon. Gentleman does not quite meet my point. There is so much saving. Part of that has been spent on overtime and increased staff. I want to know what that figure is so as to add it to the £350 and know what has been spent.

§ Dr. BURGIN
The right hon. Gentleman shall have the information if it is procurable. I will endeavour to obtain it for him before I sit down. You cannot send more missions to foreign capitals without greater necessity for communication with your home base. It is impossible for anyone who has had anything to do with these missions suddenly to find himself confronted with such queries as the right hon. Gentleman is putting to me without being obliged to telephone to his Department. As long as there is an increasing demand for specialised trade missions to foreign 963 capitals, it must be expected that the telephone and telegraph account must show signs of expansion. I mentioned that it was a habit to telephone. The speed with which you are put through to the Board of Trade when you are negotiating with a foreign Government, and by the courtesy of that government have priority over its telephone lines, is a very great attraction to harassed officials who desire information. I am not in the least surprised that the accounts should be increased by £1,000.

§ Mr. EDE
If that is so, and there are these special arrangements, why was not the late Foreign Secretary informed before he went abroad to see M. Laval?

§ Dr. BURGIN
I am told that the list of figures that the right hon. Gentleman asks me for is in a number of different sections of the Board of Trade, and the total is difficult to put together. I can only ask his indulgence to be allowed to supply the information to him in writing, which I shall have much pleasure in doing. There is a saving here, with the addition of personnel, and the difference between the two is a relatively small amount.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
Is it not possible to put the figures, not in a letter to me, but in the OFFICIAL REPORT? I want to know what is the extra amount that has been spent. We have £350, but there is a sum to be added to that out of savings, and that is the only figure that I want—the total figure that is made up by savings. My experience, in the relatively small office that I held, of the information that I was called upon to give about very tiny details makes me feel that this figure, which is rather important, should be available, because we may want to discuss it.

§ Dr. BURGIN
I am most anxious to give the right hon. Gentleman and the Committee the information. The increases in four different sections of the staff amount to a total of £6,500. The savings in three different sections of the staff amount to £6,150. Deducting the savings from the increases, I find a net increase of £350, the figure that appears in the Estimate.

§ Mr. LANSBURY
I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman, and I should like 964 to suggest that that kind of information should be available on the Vote. It has taken a long time and a lot of talking to get this simple information.