GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1935, AND GOVERNMENT OF BURMA ACT, 1935. (Hansard, 24 October 1939)

§ The Under-Secretary of State for India and Burma (Sir Hugh O'Neill)
I beg to move, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty in pursuance of the provisions of Section 309 of the Government of India Act, 1935, praying that the Government of India (High Court Judges) (Amendment) Order, 1939, be made in the form of the draft laid before Parliament. This is the first of five Orders which form the subject of Addresses to His Majesty. They all provide for Amendments in matters of detail to the existing Orders which have already been passed by the House. If you have no objection, Mr. Speaker, and if the House agrees, I propose to deal with them all in one short statement.
The first, which I am now moving, relates to the High Court Judges (Amendment) Order. When the principal Order was framed for the purposes of prescribing the salaries to be drawn by certain judges of High Courts in India, provision was inadvertently omitted for the overseas pay to which those judges had hitherto been entitled. The object of this Amending Order is to make good this omission, in the case of judges appointed since the Act came into force whose emoluments are governed by the Order. The amount involved is £13 6s. 8d. a month.
The second Order is the Family Pension Funds (Amendment) Order. Its purpose is to provide for the situation brought about by the recall to active service of certain Commissioners for the Indian Family Pension Funds. Two of the Commissioners of one fund have been recalled to duty in India, and the Secretary of State has, therefore, terminated their appointments. As it is desired to reappoint them when they are again in a position to carry out the duties of Commissioners, the Amendment offers facilities for the filling of their posts on a temporary basis.
The third Order deals with Governors' allowances and privileges. The following are the objects of this Order: (1) To enable the Secretary of State to deal equitably with such cases as that of Sir John Herbert, Governor-Elect of Bengal, 1250 who, because his predecessor, Sir John Woodhead, will not have held office for one complete year, is not, under the Order as it stands, at present entitled to any grant for the renewal of furnishings in Government houses; (2) To make an adjustment in the method of dealing with the deferred pay due to members of a Governor's bodyguard; (3) To rectify small omissions or oversights relating to leave allowance of a Governor's surgeon, the rate of conversion in sterling of a Governor's leave salary and the cost of stationery and printing in Madras; (4) To increase the contract grant to the Governor of Bengal by 10,000 rupees, which is about £750 per annum; (5) To increase by 2,400 rupees per annum the grant to the Governor of the Punjab for the maintenance of motor cars. This increase is counterbalanced by a reduction of the tour grant by the same amount.
The fourth Order is the Adaptation of Acts of Parliament (Amendment No. 2) Order. Its purpose is to extend by a further six months the period, expiring on 30th November next, during which Burma goods enjoy exemption from the application of the Import Duties Act, 1932, pending the conclusion of a trade agreement between the United Kingdom and Burma. The date on which the exemption was to cease has been postponed by successive Amending Orders, so as to give time for the conclusion of a trade agreement. The outbreak of war has naturally delayed the trade agreement, and consequently an extension of time is necessary.
The last of these Motions concerns the Existing Railway Funds Order, which deals with the allocation of certain railway funds as between India and Burma, arising out of the separation of the two countries. The final figure has now been ascertained and takes the place of the provisional figure in the existing Order.

§ Mr. Wedgwood Benn
The right hon. Gentleman named one amount of money involved, and I would like to know whether any substantial cost is involved in the re-adjustment of the privilege allowances such as bodyguard appointments. With regard to the question of the entertainment allowances, I would like to know whether it is a re-adjustment or whether it involves any substantial 1251 increase in the charges on the Revenue. The other remark I have to make is with reference to the Burma agreement. This involves Burma making an agreement under the Ottawa Agreements scheme for preferential trade with this country. I would like to know whether the right hon. Gentleman contemplates that Burma legislature will be given to a free agreement on this matter with this country, or whether he contemplates that the Government of Burma will have to do something so objectionable as in the case of the Government of India Act, namely by certification, to carry through the Tariff Act.

Mr. Graham White
On the fourth Order, could the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether he has considered the most convenient way of dealing with this matter? This is one of a series of amending Orders, and, as far as it can now be foreseen, it is possible that it may be followed by others. It occurs to me to ask whether the date might be related to the actual conclusion of the agreement between Burma and England, and whether that might be a more convenient process, instead of the Minister coming to the House every six months.

§ Sir H. O'Neill
With regard to the point raised by the hon. Member for East Birkenhead (Mr. White), I do not think at this stage it would be practicable to put in a definite date, because we do not know what that date will be. After all, the outbreak of war has made it impossible for the Burma-United Kingdom Trade Agreement to be concluded, and I must say that in the present circumstances it is wise to postpone it for six months, although, of course, it is possible that it may require further extension. That, perhaps, will be the time to see whether the hon. Member's suggestion with regard to fixing a time or a date will be practicable. With regard to the first point raised by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, in which he asked about the Order dealing with Government allowances and privileges and what amount of money that involved, I think it would be roughly correct to say that they are all adjustments with one exception, that exception being the increase in the contract grant 1252 to the Governor of Bengal by 10,000 rupees—that is £750—per annum. Apart from that, there are adjustments such as the adjustment in the method of dealing with the Governor's bodyguard and matters of that sort. The amount involved would be very little.

§ Mr. Benn
Seven hundred and fifty pounds a year?

§ Sir H. O'Neill
Yes, it would be very little over that sum. The right hon. Gentleman also asked, when the Burma-United Kingdom Trade Agreement came to be settled, whether the Burma legislature would have a free right to deal with it or whether it would be dealt with by certification as under the Government of India Act. That is rather a hypothetical question and is one, perhaps, which it is wise not to answer definitely until we know exactly what the terms of the proposed trade agreement are.

§ Major Milner
I am not altogether clear about the allowances to Governors for renewals and furnishings. Are those all in the nature of increases and are they in respect of moneys expended or to be expended? If they are all increases, it is rather remarkable that all of them should be over-spent.

§ Sir H. O'Neill
They are not increases, but merely different ways of putting various sums of money at a maximum. The proposal in future is to grant a lump sum covering the whole period, which can be reduced, if necessary, by order of the Secretary of State.

§ Mr. Benn
It is unfortunate that we still have to come to this House of Commons in order to settle these Indian questions, and it does not seem to be a very fortunate moment to ask for an additional sumptuary allowance of this kind at this juncture.