PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE (Hansard, 18 February 1947)

§ Mr. Osbert Peake (Leeds, North)
Although this Supplementary Estimate is only for the net sum of £10 I think I ought to make one comment upon its form. This Supplementary Estimate, like all the others which we have been considering and are about to consider, consists of three parts. The first is the heading, the second the subheads, and the third the details of the subheads. In Part II of this Supplementary Estimate we have the item, "Incidental Expenses: Original Estimate £400, Revised Estimate £1,520, Additional sum required, £1,120." That is to say, the amount required for incidental expenses is approximately three and a half times the amount of the original Estimate, having increased from £400 to £1,520. Then we look at Part III of the Supplementary Estimate to see the details which account for this increase, and we find set out the following words: "Incidental expenses: Additional provision required, £1,120" Part III, which is supposed to give us the details of the sum required, gives us no information of any sort or kind.
This position frequently arises where the heading is "Incidental and travelling expenses," and we usually deduce in that case that the additional sum required is on account of travelling expenses. Here there is no clue at all to the subject of the additional requirement. When we compare this Estimate with some of the other Estimates before the Committee, we find that it is unique. If we turn, for example, to page 24, we find a similar heading in respect of incidental expenses on account of the Supreme Court of Judicature for Northern 1101 Ireland. There, however, we were given details; they are incidental expenses and additional provisions for expenses of the Lunacy Office. We have an indication of what the additional sum required is for. I think it would be wrong for the Committee to pass this stage of the Supplementary Estimate when it is served up in this wholly unsatisfactory form and when that part of the Estimate which is supposed to give us some details in fact contains no information at all. I, therefore, ask for some explanation of how it comes that the incidental expenses—quite unspecified—of the Privy Council Office are some three and a half times the original Estimate.

§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Glenvil Hall)
The short answer is that the difference between £400 and £1,520has been spent on certain items which were unforeseen when the Estimate was first presented. The travelling and subsistence expenses in connection with the attendance at a sessional committee of an Indian representative came to £608; the books of the Judicial Library Committee were cleaned, and that cost £98; in addition, provision has been made this year for new uniforms for the council chamber keepers, which account for another £50; travelling and incidental expenses of the Lord President and his staff on visits to United States, Canada, Scotland and Ireland accounts for the remainder of the total of £1,120. As the right hon. Gentleman has said, there have been certain savings which we cannot discuss but which bring the net debit down to £10, which I ask the Committee to let us have.

§ Mr. Peake
I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for giving so clearly the particulars for which I asked, but it would save the time of the Committee if Departments would take note of the fact that it is desirable that in Part III of a Supplementary Estimate they should give us some information to provide a clue as to the need for additional expenditure. I hope that whoever framed this particular Supplementary Estimate will take note of my remarks because we shall invariably ask for information if such Estimates are not given in the proper form.

§ Mr. Marlowe
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether part of this sum which is attributable to expenses of the Lord President of the Council will be in- 1102 cluded in the startling disclosures from platforms mentioned by the hon. Lady the Member for the Exchange Division of Liverpool (Mrs. Braddock)?