§
Motion made, and Question proposed
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £5,000, 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, 1938, for a Grant in Aid of the Government Hospitality Fund.
§ 6.26 p.m.
§ The First Commissioner of Works (Sir Philip Sassoon)One of my predecessors who administered the Government Hospitality Fund on its inception in 1908 urged that national hospitality would lose all its utility and half its charm if the details of it were continually being discussed, and so I hope that I shall be able to explain, without going into details, why I have to ask for an extra £5,000. The framing of an Estimate for Government 975 hospitality is always a difficult matter, because when the Estimate is framed very little is known of what national entertaining will have to be done over the period and in the present circumstances the difficulty was enhanced by the fact that the period covered the Coronation. Every care was taken to make allowance for unusual contingencies, but certain factors did contribute to an under-estimation of the expenses.
§ Mr. Wedgwood BennWhat was the exact figure last year?
§ Sir P. SassoonI will get that figure for the right hon. Gentleman. The figure for this year is considerably larger because it was to cover the period of the Coronation and also the Imperial Conference. The Imperial Conference was attended by more delegates on this occasion and they stayed longer than they did in 1930, and owing to the pressure on the hotels in London at the Coronation it was more difficult to find them accommodation. There was £4,000 surplus over from 1936. In regard to unknown functions, the aggregate expenditure for the previous years, which formed the basis of the Estimate under this heading, was considerably less than the sum which was actually required this year. That was principally due to the interest which was centred in this country at the time of the Coronation and the fact that the delegations stayed longer than was expected, being very anxious to discuss certain matters. In addition to that, the state of foreign and trade affairs has been more active than usual, and more Government entertainment has taken place than in previous years. I would ask the Committee to accept this explanation of why I have to ask for an extra £5,000. I am basing my plea on the fact that it was more difficult than usual to make an estimate of the expenditure required for the year.
§ 6.31 p.m.
§ Mr. BennThis sum covers the Coronation year; we understand that. Nevertheless the Hospitality Fund has multiplied by four times since last year and yet we are being asked for a further sum of £5,000.
The ChairmanThe right hon. Gentleman cannot discuss the reasons why the Fund has been multiplied in the way he suggests.
§ Mr. BennI do not wish to traverse any Ruling of the Chair, but, having provided four times as much for hospitality as was provided last year, the Treasury now come forward and ask for an additional £5,000. One understands the special circumstances in which the original sum was asked for; it is well known that it was taken because this was the Coronation year and special charges were to be needed, but it requires some further explanation why, having taken in the original Vote so much more than was needed last year, the Treasury now say that an additional £5,000 is required. I would like to ask the First Commissioner whether any provision is made in the Vote for entertaining King Carol when he comes to this country. If so, that raises rather a different issue.
§ Sir P. Sassoon indicated dissent.
§ Mr. BennIf the right hon. Gentleman says that that is not the case I have no further comment to make. There is no such intention? Very well then, I shall not pursue the matter.
§ 6.33 p.m.
§ Mr. Morgan JonesI understand that King Carol is to be entertained this month, that is to say, before the end of the financial year. In that case, does the right hon. Gentleman anticipate spending public money during this financial year which is not covered in the sum for which he is now asking? Evidently the right hon. Gentleman does not know what the answer is.
§ Sir P. SassoonI am asking for a Supplementary Estimate for the year.
§ Sir P. SassoonYes. I have already spent this money. I am asking for this supplementary sum for an expenditure which has already been incurred.
§ Mr. Morgan JonesThe right hon. Gentleman now tells us that he has spent this £5,000 before this Committee has approved of it. I ask him again whether, during this month of March—the financial 977 year ends at the end of the month—he is proposing to ask for money to expend before the end of the year is upon us?
§ Sir P. SassoonI have no knowledge of the visit which has been mentioned.
§ 6.35 p.m.
§ Mr. BennThe right hon. Baronet cannot get out of it in that way. First of all he tells us that this money has been spent. These Supplementary Estimates usually represent the sum estimated to be needed before 31st March, and therefore the £5,000 would not be expended until the end of the financial year. The Treasury, having made up their prospective accounts to the end of the year and finding themselves short, come and ask for an additional £5,000. We understand that the visit of this monarch is intended before 31st March, and therefore we are asking the right hon. Baronet whether part of this additional sum for which he is asking is caused by the intending visit of King Carol. That is a question which the right hon. Gentleman really must answer. It is no good his saying that he has no knowledge of something which has been in the newspapers. He happens to be the representative in the House of Commons of a Department which is asking us for money.
The ChairmanThe question which the right hon. Gentleman is now asking is whether this sum of money is necessary or not, but that does not give him the right to discuss matters for which the Government are not asking for money.
§ Mr. BennIf I am out of order, I bow, naturally, to the Chair, but it is the function of this Committee to ask Ministers to tell us what expenditure is for and for them to be cross-examined, if the Committee is not satisfied. That is what the Committee is for. I am not satisfied with what the right hon. Gentleman has told us.
The ChairmanThe right hon. Member can only cross-examine the right hon. Gentleman on the subject for which the expenditure of the money is asked.
§ Mr. BennThere is no limit to the amount of cross-examination to which Ministers may be subjected in Committee, provided it is in order. I say that I am dissatisfied with the right hon. Gentleman's answers.
§ Sir P. SassoonPerhaps I can make the matter clearer. This money covers, of course, any expenditure which would be incurred before the end of the financial year, in anticipation of the general need. I was not in a position to say whether any part of the expenditure would be used in the way suggested, because I had no information about it.
§ Mr. BennWhat position are we getting into now? We asked the First Commissioner whether the money was to cover the visit of King Carol, and he told us that it was not. Now he tells us that if there is a visit it will cover it. Therefore this visit comes within the factors which make it necessary for the right hon. Gentleman to come to the Committee and ask for another £5,000. I ask the Committee whether it is desirable that we should spend public money upon dictators who come to this country. I think it is the right occasion on which to say that it is not—although I do not wish to indulge in any remarks about foreign Monarchs who may be the guests of this country. I remember that, before the War, Members of the Liberal party in this House protested very much about a proposed visit of the Tsar of Russia. It is very unsatisfactory that the First Commissioner should tell us that no money is asked for that purpose, and then should tell us that money is required for the purpose.
§ Sir P. SassoonNot specifically.
§ Mr. BennNot specifically? But when the King comes, this is the only fund into which the right hon. Gentleman can dip. Knowing that, the advisers of the right hon. Gentleman have come to the Committee to ask for an additional £5,000 for this and kindred purposes. The Committee has a right to be dissatisfied with the First Commissioner for the type of answer which he has given, particularly when he told us that the money was already spent, whereas, in fact, he is coming down for more money which will not be spent until 31st March. I raise these matters as a protest against entertainments which assist dictatorial personages when oppressing their own democracies. It is time to protest against this type of entertainment which has a definite political character.
§ 6.39 p.m.
§ Mr. Morgan JonesDo I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that, in 979 point of fact, his original answer was inaccurate and that the money has not up to now been spent?
§ Sir P. SassoonI would not like the right hon. Gentleman to be under any misunderstanding. Of course, this Supplementary Estimate carries us over to the end of the financial year. I understood that no particular sum was allocated to any future visit, and that it dealt to a very large extent with expenditure which we had already incurred in the Coronation year.
§ Mr. JonesI am sorry, but we get deeper and deeper into trouble about this thing. Now I understand that we are asked for £5,000 extra to carry us to the end of the year. The Government would not ask for £5,000 unless they knew expressly upon what they wanted to spend the money. Now the right hon. Gentleman tells us that he is so in doubt about what the £5,000 is wanted for that it might include expenditure upon the visit of King Carol to this country. We ought to have more explicit information than that. Either this money covers that visit, or it does not. If it does not, the £5,000 is necessary for some other purpose. If it is necessary for another purpose, there can be nothing left for this State visit which we are expecting during this month, if indeed it is to take place. If it comes in the month of April, that will be in the next financial year, and the right hon. Gentleman is all right. The financial year ends at the end of this month, and the right hon. Gentleman will be in an exceedingly difficult position unless he proposes to come later in this month for another Supplementary Estimate to cover the State visit.
§ 6.42 p.m.
§ Mr. LansburyThis Hospitality Fund is one of the most extraordinary funds that a Minister ever had to administer. The unfortunate First Commissioner of Works who is supposed to administer it has no power over it at all. He is told to put in so much money as an Estimate, but when it comes to saying how it shall be spent he has not the least say at all. When I held that office, the Chief of the Treasury became my secretary because I protested that I would not administer a fund and be responsible for administering it when I had no authority over it whatsoever. The Department of my right 980 hon. Friend the Member for Gorton (Mr. Benn), when he was Secretary of State for India, was entertaining some Princes or other from India when they were over here for conferences. The Department sent in a requisition asking that provision should be made. The First Commissioner had no choice but to make that provision.
I am not trying to defend one of my numerous successors, but only to explain that the First Commissioner cannot answer the question whether anything will be required for the visit of King Carol. I do not know which Minister could answer, whether the Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister or who, but when the requisition is made the only responsibility of the First Commissioner will be to issue an order to a certain officer to get everybody ready on the job. I do not think that we can do on this Vote what my right hon. Friend, with whom I agree, would like to see done, that is, not to vote any money for the purpose which has been suggested. The person who can answer the question is the Prime Minister. In my judgment the administration of the Hospitality Fund ought to be overhauled. One person ought to be responsible for it who could settle how much should be spent at a particular time, what brands of wine should be served, whether it should be Empire or foreign and whether it should come out of the cellar where it has been a long time, and so on.
§ Mr. LansburyI knew that I was out of order, but I felt as I listened to the rather hefty attack made upon the right hon. Baronet that I would like to point out that I had also been a victim, and a fellow victim with him. My hon. Friends are attacking him vicariously for somebody else, and if they want to stop this expenditure they had better get after the Prime Minister on one of the days when he is here for Question Time.
§ Mr. BennIf it is a question whether any of the money is required for this visit, the proper way, surely, is for the money to be voted now, and for the House of Commons to be informed at the time when the money is voted.
§ Mr. LansburyWe do not know whether any of it is required for that purpose or not. The Minister who can tell us 981 whether King Carol is coming and is going to be entertained is not here. I am only calling attention to the idiotic manner in which this fund is dealt with. In my case, it came to the point that I refused to answer about it, because I had no responsibility, and my right hon. Friend who is now Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Pethick - Lawrence) answered for it. So far as I can see, the Government have gone back to the old vicious method of making a man responsible for something for which he is not responsible.
§ 6.47 p.m.
§ Mr. MaxtonPresumably this visit is in contemplation, and hospitality is going to be extended—
§ Mr. LansburyThe right hon. Gentleman does not know.
§ Mr. MaxtonNo, but I imagine that, had this visit been proposed at the time when my right hon. Friend held the office of First Commissioner, such a proposition would have been brought before the Cabinet.
§ Mr. LansburyI must not divulge Cabinet secrets.
§ Mr. MaxtonI was always suspicious of a Labour Cabinet, but I should imagine that in some form or other the Cabinet, at some point, would be informed whether such a visit is to take place or not. Probably we shall read about it in the papers. I should have thought that the First Commissioner had a duty to inform his fellow Members whether this visit was in contemplation, and whether hospitality money was to be expended on it, and that it would be his duty to intimate to his fellow Cabinet Ministers that the very strongest objection had been expressed in the House of Commons. It is better that the objection should be taken now, so that the First Commissioner may be fully informed of the attitude of the House of Commons to this sort of thing.
I have no objection to hospitality; I have not the faintest objection to people who come to this country being treated in a decent way; and I should imagine, from what I have heard of the right hon. Gentleman's private hospitality, that he would have a very generous outlook on these matters. I have read in the newspapers 982 about the lavish way in which he entertains people who visit him in his own private house, but I should imagine that he, as a private individual, may be a little selective about his guests. All that we are asking here is that he should be selective in this matter. When he is called upon to put the money down, he is at least in a position to say, "Before I put this money down for this particular purpose, I want to bring the matter before my fellow Ministers, and to tell them that in the House of Commons there is a large section who have the profoundest objection to any hospitality being offered to this particular monarch at this particular time, having regard to the circumstances that exist in that particular country."
§ 6.51 p.m.
§ Sir Percy HarrisThe more I hear of this discussion, the more amazed I am at the financial control of the Treasury and the way in which the Government does its business. I could not help thinking, while my right hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) was speaking, what a row there would have been in Poplar at this kind of finance. I was for 28 years on a public body, and we indulged in a certain amount of hospitality, but there had always to be an estimate, and the responsible officer would count the cost. The right hon. Gentleman says he has nothing to do with it, that he is only a channel of communication. But someone must make the contracts, someone must get an estimate for entertaining so many people at dinner, or giving a ball or reception. That must be done by some Department. Which Department is it? Is it the Treasury? I see the Financial Secretary with his head on his hand, looking a bit worried. Does he make the contracts?
The ChairmanI have already said that we certainly cannot discuss the general question of hospitality on this Vote, which is only a very small Supplementary Estimate.
§ Sir P. HarrisWith great respect, even in these days, when we think in millions, £5,000 is a considerable sum when it comes to a matter of entertaining in these hard times.
The ChairmanThe hon. Baronet will forgive me, but it is a question for me to decide as to whether the proportion of the increase to the original amount is large or not.
§ Sir P. HarrisIt is true that it is only a matter of 12½ per cent., which does not matter in these times, but, before we allow these additional sums to be passed, we ought to have some explanation of why it is necessary to come to the House for an additional sum. We have had no explanation. The right hon. Gentleman talked vaguely about the Coronation, but the Coronation is a long time past, and I should have thought that its bills have long since been paid. I do not wish to distinguish between this monarch and some other monarch. If a monarch is to come here, he certainly should not have to go to a tea-shop for entertainment, but should be entitled to the usual scale of expenditure. But I think we ought to know why this extra sum is required, and why it is necessary to have this Supplementary Estimate.
There was a time in the House of Com-months when Supplementary Estimates were very strongly objected to. There used to be a right hon. Gentleman sitting up on the benches opposite who scrutinised, and asked the House to scrutinise, every extra penny that was required. I know that the Patronage Secretary is very concerned at the disorganisation of his time-table by the large number of Supplementary Estimates. I do not think it is enough for the right hon. Gentleman to say that we must not ask for details because it spoils hospitality to ask why a pound is wanted here or a pound is wanted there. I am all for the State being responsible, but, where the State is responsible, we should not suggest throwing money about without proper scrutiny and without being told some details of why the money is required. At a time like this, when there is great financial stringency, I consider that the House of Commons, as the guardian of the public purse, should be most meticulous in its examination of every luxury expenditure. After all, this is a luxury expenditure, which the House is only justified in passing if it knows why it is required.
§ 6.57 p.m.
§ Mr. LansburyI think, Sir Dennis, that in all the circumstances we might, if you will allow me to move it, report Progress in order that we may have a Minister here who can tell us whether the Government expect to entertain this Monarch. I speak with a fellow-feeling for the 984 present First Commissioner. I went through it over this wretched business. There is nobody here, as far as I can see, who can answer, because I am certain that the arrangement made to get over the difficulty concerning myself does not now operate. I am sure that the present Financial Secretary is not now the Secretary to the Hospitality Fund. That was an appointment made to keep me on the strait and narrow path. But my point is that we want to know whether, in regard to this £5,000 which the Department estimate may be wanted up to the end of this month, they had in mind, when they made the estimate, the coming of King Carol. That is really the point, and I think we ought to report Progress.
The ChairmanPerhaps I ought to tell the right hon. Gentleman that that is hardly the best method of achieving what he wants, because a Motion to report Progress, if carried now, would mean my vacating the Committee Chair altogether, and I do not think that that is what the right hon. Gentleman would desire. Moreover, if the Motion were moved, I should have to put it at once without discussion, in the present circumstances.
§ Mr. LansburyCould I move the adjournment of this Debate? I want to act in some way that will allow the rest of the business to be expedited. We have no wish to stop the Government getting non-contentious business; all that I want to know is what is the best method by which we can hold up this Vote until we can get the explanation we desire. I understand, Sir Dennis, that, if a Motion to report Progress were carried, the whole of the night's proceedings would be at an end so far as these Estimates are concerned. I did not think that that was so, but I do not want to question your Ruling on the matter.
The ChairmanI am a little afraid that the withdrawal of this particular Vote could only be done by the Government. The Government have asked for the Vote, and, unless they withdraw it, the only thing that the right hon. Gentleman can do would be to vote against it.
§ Mr. BennAm I not right in assuming that it is the common practice of the House, in the absence of the Minister who can give definite information, to move to report Progress? I think that that is the 985 practice of the House, and, therefore, I respectfully submit to you, Sir Dennis, that a Motion by my right hon. Friend to report Progress until the Minister who can answer the question is present is in accordance with the usual practice of the House.
The ChairmanI am afraid it is not my business to say what Member of the Government is or is not responsible. A representative of the Government on the Front Bench moved the Vote. If the right hon. Gentleman persists in moving to report Progress, I must consider
§ whether I should accept the Motion, but, as I have already said, if I accept it, I shall feel bound to put the question at once without discussion.
§ Mr. LansburyI beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 104; Noes, 208.
987| Division No. 112.] | AYES. | [6.59 p.m. |
| Adams, D. (Consett) | Holdsworth, H. | Pritt, D. N. |
| Adams, O. M. (Poplar, S.) | Hollins, A. | Richards, R. (Wrexham) |
| Ammon, C. G, | Johnston, Rt. Hon. T. | Ridley, G. |
| Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. | Jones, A. C. (Shipley) | Riley, B. |
| Banfield, J. W. | Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth) | Ritson, J. |
| Barnes, A. J. | Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) | Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens) |
| Barr, J. | Kelly, W. T. | Sanders, W. S. |
| Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W. | Kirby, B. V. | Seely, Sir H. M. |
| Benson, G. | Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G. | Sexton, T. M. |
| Brown, C. (Mansfield) | Leach, W. | Shinwell, E. |
| Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (S. Ayrshire) | Lee, F. | Silkin, L. |
| Buchanan, G. | Leonard, W. | Simpson, F. B. |
| Burke, W. A. | Leslie, J. R. | Smith, E. (Stoke) |
| Cape, T. | Logan, D. G. | Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly) |
| Charleton, H. C. | Lunn, W. | Stephen, C. |
| Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford | Macdonald, G. (Ince) | Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng) |
| Daggar, G. | McEntee, V. La T. | Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.) |
| Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) | McGhee, H. G. | Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth) |
| Davies, S. O. (Merthyr) | MacLaren, A. | Thorne, W. |
| Dunn, E. (Rather Valley) | Maclean, N. | Thurtle, E. |
| Ede, J. C. | MacMillan, M. (Western Isles) | Tinker, J. J. |
| Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty) | Mainwaring, W. H. | Tomlinson, G. |
| Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H. | Maxton, J. | Viant, S. P. |
| Fool, D. M. | Messer, F. | Walkden, A. G. |
| Gardner, B. W. | Montague, F. | Walker, J. |
| Garro Jones, G. M. | Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) | Watkins, F. C. |
| Graham, D. M. (Hamilton) | Muff, G. | Watson, W. McL. |
| Green, W. H. (Deptford) | Nathan, Colonel H. L. | Westwood, J. |
| Griffith, F. Kingsley (M'ddl'sbro, W.) | Oliver, G. H. | Wilkinson, Ellen |
| Groves, T. E. | Owen, Major G. | Williams, T. (Don Valley) |
| Hall, G. H. (Aberdare) | Paling, W. | Windsor, W. (Hull, C.) |
| Hail, J. H. (Whitechapel) | Parker, J. | Young, Sir R. (Newton) |
| Harris, Sir P. A. | Parkinson, J. A. | |
| Henderson, A. (Kingswinford) | Pearson, A. | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— |
| Henderson, T. (Tradeston) | Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W. | Mr. Whiteley and Mr. Mathers. |
| Hills, A. (Pontefract) | Price, M. P. | |
| NOES. | ||
| Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J. | Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury) | Crowder, J. F. E. |
| Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.) | Browne, A. C. (Belfast, W.) | Culverwell, C. T. |
| Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G. | Campbell, Sir E. T. | Davies, Major Sir G. F. (Yeovil) |
| Albery, Sir Irving | Carver, Major W. H. | Denman, Hon. R. D. |
| Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh) | Cary, R. A. | Denville, Alfred |
| Anstruther-Gray, W. J. | Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. N. (Edgb't'n) | Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side) |
| Aske, Sir R. W. | Channon, H. | Dugdale, Captain T. L. |
| Assheton, R. | Chapman, A. (Rutherglen) | Duggan, H. J. |
| Baillie, Sir A. W. M. | Clarke, F. E. (Dartford) | Duncan, J. A. L. |
| Balfour, G. (Hampstead) | Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead) | Dunglass, Lord |
| Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet) | Clarry, Sir Reginald | Eastwood, J. F. |
| Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M. | Colfox, Major W. P. | Eckersley, P. T. |
| Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. | Colville, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. D. J. | Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E. |
| Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h) | Conant, Captain R. J. E. | Ellis, Sir G. |
| Birchall, Sir J. D. | Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.) | Elmley, Viscount |
| Blair, Sir R. | Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.) | Emery, J. F. |
| Boulton, W. W. | Cooper, Rt. Hn. A. Duff (W'st'r S. G'gs) | Emmott, C. E. G. C. |
| Bracken, B. | Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.) | Emrys-Evans, P. V. |
| Brass, Sir W. | Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L. | Entwistle, Sir C. F. |
| Briscoe, Capt. R. G. | Cox, H. B. Trevor | Errington, E. |
| Brocklebank, Sir Edmund | Crooke, Sir J. S. | Findlay, Sir E. |
| Brown, Col, D. C. (Hexham) | Cross, R. H. | Fleming, E. L. |
| Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith) | Crossley, A. C. | Fremantle, Sir F. E. |
| Furness, S. N. | Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight) | Sandeman, Sir N. S. |
| Fyfe, D. P. M. | McKie, J. H. | Sanderson, Sir F. B. |
| Gilmour, Lt.-Col, Rt. Hon. Sir J. | Macmillan, H. (Stockton-on-Tees) | Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir P. |
| Gluckstein, L. H. | Magnay, T. | Shakespeare, G. H |
| Glyn, Major Sir R. G. C. | Makins, Brig.-Gen. E. | Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar) |
| Gower, Sir R. V. | Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R. | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A. |
| Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral) | Marsden, Commander A. | Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D. |
| Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester) | Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M. | Smith, L. W. (Hallam) |
| Gridley, Sir A. B. | Maxwell, Hon. S. A. | Somervell, Sir D. B. (Crewe) |
| Gritten, W. G. Howard | Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J. | Somerville, A. A. (Windsor) |
| Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake) | Mellor, Sir, J. S. P. (Tamworth) | Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J. |
| Guest, Hon. I. (Brecon and Radnor) | Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest) | Spears, Brigadier-General E. L. |
| Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W. | Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswisk) | Storey, S. |
| Hacking, Rt. Hon. D. H. | Moore, Lieut.-Col. Sir T. C. R. | Strauss, E. A. (Southwark, N.) |
| Hambro, A. V. | Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.) | Strauss, H. G. (Norwich) |
| Hannah, I. C. | Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester) | Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h) |
| Harbord, A. | Munro, P. | Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn) |
| Haslam, Sir J, (Bolton) | Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H. | Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F. |
| Hely-Hutchinson, M. R. | Nicolson, Hon. H. G. | Tasker. Sir R I. |
| Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P. | O'Connor, Sir Terence J. | Tate, Mavis C. |
| Hepworth, J. | Orr-Ewing, I. L. | Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne) |
| Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth) | Perkins, W. R. D. | Thomas, J. P. L. |
| Higgs, W. F. | Peters, Dr. S. J. | Thomson, Sir J. D. W. |
| Hoare, Rt. Hon. Sir S. | Pickthorn, K. W. M. | Tree, A. R. L. F. |
| Holmes, J. S. | Ponsonby, Col. C. E. | Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C. |
| Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J. | Porritt, R. W. | Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L. |
| Horsbrugh, Florence | Procter, Major H. A. | Turton, R. H. |
| Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.) | Radford, E. A. | Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan |
| Hulbert, N. J. | Ramsbotham, H. | Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull) |
| Hunter, T. | Rankin, Sir R. | Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend) |
| Hutchinson, G. C. | Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin) | Warrender, Sir V. |
| Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir T. W. H. | Rawson, Sir Cooper | Waterhouse, Captain C. |
| Jones, L. (Swansea W.) | Reed, A. C. (Exeter) | Watt, Major G. S. Harvie |
| Kerr, H. W. (Oldham) | Reid, Sir D. D. (Down) | Wedderburn, H. J. S. |
| Law, Sir A. J. (High Peak) | Reid, W. Allan (Derby) | Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.) |
| Law, R. K. (Hull, S. W.) | Rickards, G. W. (Skipton) | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Leech, Sir J. W. | Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool) | Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin) |
| Lees. Jones, J. | Ropner, Colonel L. | Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl |
| Leighton, Major B. E. P. | Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry) | Withers, Sir J. J. |
| Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L. | Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge) | Womersley, Sir W. J. |
| Liddall, W. S. | Rowlands, G. | Wood, Hon. C. I. C. |
| Lipson, D. L. | Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R. | Wragg, H. |
| Lloyd, G. W. | Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A. | Young, A. S. L. (Partick) |
| Locker-Lampson, Comdr. O. S. | Russell, Sir Alexander | |
| MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G. | Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| M'Connell, Sir J. | Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen) | Major Sir James Edmondson and |
| McCorquodate, M. S. | Salmon, Sir I. | Mr. Grimston. |
| MacDonald, Rt. Hon. M. (Ross) | Samuel, M. R. A. |
Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again," put, and agreed to.
§
Resolved,
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £5,000, 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, 1938, for a Grant in Aid of the Government Hospitality Fund.