PRIZE MONEY (Hansard, 18 November 1948)

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre (New Forest and Christchurch)
On a point of Order. We are now being asked to consider a Motion of which we have no knowledge and which has no reference to anything that has been considered by the House. Do you rule, Mr. Bowles, that we consider this Motion, or shall I be in Order in moving the Adjournment of the Committee?

§ The Deputy-Chairman
The Motion has been on the Order Paper for some time.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
If it is on the Order Paper, then surely it must have reference to something of which this Committee has knowledge? We have no knowledge of anything to which it refers.

§ The Deputy-Chairman
This is a Committee of Ways and Means, and any question of raising money starts here.

§ Commander Noble (Chelsea)
May I submit that this Motion refers to a new Clause which has not been taken in Committee?

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
As this Motion has apparently nothing to do with anything in the Prize Bill, is it in Order, in the course of our discussion, to make 711 reference to a new Clause which happens to appear on the Order Paper but which the House has not had an opportunity as yet to consider?

§ The Deputy-Chairman
What the Committee is now asked to do by the Government is to put certain funds into the Consolidated Fund Bill, but it would be out of Order to refer to any particular Clause of the Bill.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
You will notice, Mr. Bowles, that in this Motion the word "unclaimed" occurs. Is it to be taken that we have knowledge of that of which the new Clause speaks?

§ The Deputy-Chairman
I do not think that is a point of Order but a question which might be addressed to the Government.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
It will be very difficult for us to speak on this Motion without knowing how you are going to rule.

§ The Deputy-Chairman
The hon. and gallant Member had better wait until I do rule. I cannot answer a hypothetical question of that kind.

§ The Parliamentary and Financial Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. John Dugdale)
I am sorry at this hour to inflict a little more work on Members. The object of this Motion is to see that unclaimed and non-condemnable goods that are remaining in the Supreme Court Prize Deposit Account, or in the Colonial Prize Court, shall be paid into the Exchequer. After the last war the Exchequer had to claim each individual item. Every item that was non-condemnable had to be claimed by them first before they could take it and this process went on for a period of many years and involved a large number of people in a considerable amount of work. We want to shorten that process.
The situation is that there are a number of small parcels and goods in ships which have been captured. Such parcels belong to neutrals or indeed to our own countrymen or in certain cases, maybe, to the ex-enemy. They are small parcels and they are not in any case prizes. They are goods which are placed in the ship for carriage and which are not part of prize. 712 They would therefore never have become either droits of the Admiralty or droits of the Crown and there is no question of their distribution as droits of the Crown in the form of prize money.
It took 12 years after the last war for the Treasury to lay claim to each individual parcel. May I illustrate the difficulty by reference to one court, the London Court. There are some 912 writs referring to some 800 or more individual items, some of which are of only a few shillings. The Treasury would have to go through the process of claiming each one of these separately.
What we want to do is to see that after a certain time has elapsed all these goods shall be paid to the Treasury. The total amount is equivalent to approximately £7,000 and I have the authority of my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to say that the Treasury are willing, if this Motion is accepted, to consider on its merits any claim that may be subsequently put forward by or on behalf of any claimant who can adequately show good reason for the claim not having been presented within the prescribed time. I think in that way we can be quite certain that justice will be done to any claimant even if he has not put in his claim by the prescribed time. I commend this to the House because it will save a considerable amount of work. It will do justice and it will avoid much of the trouble that we had after the last war. I hope the House will accept the Motion.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller (Daventry)
The hon. Gentleman has made it perfectly clear that in moving this Motion he is really undertaking a task normally undertaken by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury and that the sole beneficiary of this Motion, if passed, will be the Treasury. He has told us that the total involved is about £7,000 and of the difficulty after the First World War of collecting these unclaimed amounts and paying them into the Exchequer. I gather that the sole purpose of this Motion is to enable these sums, now in the Supreme Court Prize Deposit Account, to be taken out of that Account and paid into the Treasury.
First of all, we should be interested to know why a Resolution is necessary for that purpose, having in mind the fact that I do not think that we had a similar 713 Resolution for the payment out of the Supreme Court Prize Deposit Account into the Royal Naval Prize Fund or the R.A.F. Prize Fund. Why, if we did not have a Resolution for that, do we require to have a Resolution for this particular purpose to facilitate payment into the Exchequer?
I would ask the Committee to pay attention to the wording of this Motion. It says: That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to make provision as to the payment, and the distribution or application, of any prize money granted by His Majesty out of the proceeds of prize captured in the late war … it is expedient to authorise the payment.… But the hon. Gentleman has not indicated in the least in his speech that it is expedient to authorise the payment into the Exchequer of these unpaid sums in order to facilitate the distribution of prize money. He has made it clear that the contrary is the case; that there is no question of the distribution of this money as droits of the Crown or prize money. Therefore I would suggest to the Committee, and to the hon. Gentleman, that passing this Motion is entirely contradictory because the Motion says, on the one hand, it is for the purpose of distributing that prize money, and on the other, that to distribute it we pay it into the Exchequer and none of it goes to the Prize Fund.
I should have thought that this was the most fantastic Motion ever put before a Committee of Ways and Means even at this late hour, and I would ask the hon. Gentleman to take it away and think again. If there is only £7,000 involved, why not pay it into the Royal Naval Prize Fund or the R.A.F. Prize Fund. Why put it into the Exchequer, and what is the Exchequer going to do with it? Is it to be placed to meet the loss on some nationalised industry? If so, it will not go far for that purpose. As the total Prize Fund is a small amount this time, why not add this amount to it and make it a little larger? If that is done, I hope it will be found possible by the Government to meet the proper and just claims of naval ratings who served in merchant ships during the war, who are now excluded from benefit; and also commodores of convoys. It might provide some prize money for them without reducing the amount payable to other 714 naval ratings and officers under the scheme proposed.
There surely cannot be any grounds whatsoever for taking money now in the Prize Account. Although the hon. Gentleman says it is not droits of the Crown or the Admiralty, the money is in the Prize Account, and there can be no justification for taking it out and paying it straight over to the Exchequer. I must ask the hon. Gentleman to think again, and I hope he will take the Motion away tonight. I do not think there is any particular need to pass it tonight, and I hope he will be able to tell us later that he has been able to prevail on the Treasury to add to the existing fund available for distribution as prize money this small sum of £7,000.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
I must admit that probably like many members in this Committee I was very surprised when the Leader of the House said that this Motion would be taken tonight. We on this side of the House are at a disadvantage because a Motion in wide terms like this means that we have to rely on what the Government say about it. In the past we have found them a most creditable source of information, and I would thank them tonight for what they have said.
What the Government are asking the Committee to do is to say that all unclaimed sums shall pass into the Exchequer, but they have left out of the Motion how they are going to define the word "unclaimed." As we know the word, it has a definite meaning, but it may be that the House is going to be faced with a different interpretation before this Bill is passed. We are going to be faced with the position that any sum which may accrue to the Supreme Court at the end of six months from a time the Admiralty determine, will go to the Exchequer, instead of being asked to pass to the Exchequer whatever minor sums—and the Parliamentary Secretary mentioned £7,000—which it would be impossible to distribute.
Apart from that, we may well be faced with the fact that a major claim might be outstanding at the time when, under the provisions to be made, prize money would cease to be payable. We are 715 asked to do something for which there is no authority. The Parliamentary Secretary has said that he would like to pay this minor surplus into the Exchequer, but he has produced no argument to show that it is a minor surplus, or that he can control by this Motion how much the Exchequer will receive.
I suggest that, when we are dealing with a Prize Fund which has proved a disappointment to Members in all parts of the Committee, the last thing the Parliamentary Secretary ought to do is to add to their disappointment by trying to cut still further whatever sums may accrue to that account. I hope that before we endorse this Motion we shall get the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to tell us exactly what he means by "unclaimed"; to elucidate what he means, when we are talking in terms of something further to come before the House, by "not within claims"; and above all, what he means by the further idea he has put forward that at the end of six months no further sums shall go into the Naval Prize Fund.
I shall be forced to vote against the Motion unless we can get a clear statement from the Financial Secretary that his only object is to ensure that non-condemnable, as apart from non-condemned, goods shall be transferred in this way to the Treasury. So long as this Motion permits money which should go to the Prize Fund being diverted to the Exchequer, I for one feel bound to vote against it.

§ Mr. Joynson - Hicks (Chichester)
Frankly, I am in a complete fog about this Motion and I rise to put certain points to the Government and ask for elucidation. I might say in passing that it is a matter for great regret that on consideration of a Motion such as this the Committee is apparently not to have any guidance from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. As I understand the matter which is now before the Committee, this is not to be a Financial Resolution to the Bill. Accordingly cannot see any conceivable reason why it should be necessary for this Motion to be moved now. It appears to be something which is completely divorced from the Prize Bill, and merely relates to matters connected therewith. In fact, as 716 I interpret the Motion, three of the four lines are taken up by a description of the Prize Bill. For three lines the words, "any Prize Bill" could have been inserted, and the Motion would have read: That, for the purpose of any Prize Bill in the present Session it is expedient to authorise the payment into the Exchequer of unclaimed sums in the custody of prize courts. I wish to ask the Financial Secretary whether that is a correct interpretation of the phraseology of the Motion. My second question is how did this money get into the Prize Deposit Account, if it consists of the value of articles found on board ships captured which, as I understood the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty to say, were not condemnable as prizes at all? One would have assumed that action would long since have been taken to return them to their proper owners who, I gathered from the hon. Gentleman, are probably Allies or neutral countries to whom ultimately the prize objects or their value should be returned. I think the Committee is entitled to clarification on that point.
What will happen to these moneys when they get into the Exchequer? If they are not prize moneys, and if they are moneys which represent objects which should be returnable to other countries, why should they be paid to the Exchequer, and what is the Exchequer going to do with them? These are matters which should be before the Committee. I think we ought to have a representative from the Treasury to explain the intention of the Treasury if and when the Committee thinks fit to pass a Motion in these terms.

§ Lieut.-Commander Gurney Braithwaite (Holderness)
It must be clear to the Committee that there is a good deal more in this Motion that the Parliamentary Secretary led us to believe when he placed it before us. I would ask one question and make one suggestion to the hon. Gentleman which I think would lead to a satisfactory and amicable settlement of this matter. When the Bill was taken on Second Reading the Minister stressed to us that the amount for distribution at the conclusion of the war was very much less than at the end of the 1914–18 war, particularly as the Royal Air Force are now participating. The Minister has said tonight that an amount 717 of some £7,000 is all that is involved in this Motion. But £7,000 is a sum not to be sneezed at. It is the annual increment of seven hon. Members of this House—perhaps including some of those hon. Members who indulged in mocking laughter a few moments ago when my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Mr. Joynson-Hicks) was on his feet. The Minister has told us that he has an assurance from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury that this money in the Exchequer can be got out if satisfactory claims are forthcoming. But what will happen to such of that £7,000 as is no claimed?
It may well be that there will be individual claims which come within the ambit of the assurance the hon. Gentleman gave us a few minutes ago. Surely the thing to do with that money is to make it available for distribution among approved naval charities, such as the Royal Naval Benevolent Trust and many others which we can call to mind. That is going to be done in the case of the R.A.F.—the Financial Secretary confirmed that. Is this not a very reasonable and proper suggestion? Surely the Treasury is not just going to sit on this £7,000 or such balance as remains if these claims are not forthcoming. It is disappointing that there is not a Treasury representative here who can answer these points for us. I hope the hon. Gentleman, in replying to the Debate, will be kind enough to indicate his attitude towards that suggestion.

§ Mr. Dugdale
If I may say so, I think the Opposition are making rather heavy weather about this. The first question I have been asked, by the hon. and learned Member for Daventry (Mr. Manningham-Buller) is: "Why should not the £7,000 or a sum approximating to that be paid into the Prize Fund?" The answer is that it is not prize, and that seems to me to be a very good answer. You can pay anything you like into the Prize Fund; you can pay the income of every hon. Member of this House into the Prize Fund, if you like, but it is not prize. In passing, the right hon. Gentleman made a somewhat facetious remark that it should be used to help to pay for the nationalised industries. So far as the coal industry is concerned, it is not going to be in need of such payment.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
I wish the hon. Gentleman would be good enough to answer the serious questions I put to him. I asked him, first of all, what was the need for this Motion at all, and secondly, whether it was possible, even though this money may not be prize, to provide that this sum goes into the Prize Fund. Cannot the hon. Gentleman answer that one?

§ Mr. Dugdale
I have been on my feet only half a minute and I had just begun to answer the hon. and learned Gentleman and the other hon. Gentlemen. With regard to the first of the questions of the hon. and learned Member for Daventry, as to why it is necessary to have this Motion, the reason is—because the money could not be paid into the Exchequer otherwise, which seems to me conclusive. I will deal with his second question when I come to deal with similar questions by other hon. Members. The hon. and gallant Member for New Forest and Christchurch (Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre) asked what "unclaimed" meant. It means in fact that there is approximately £7,000 of uncondemnable moneys, which will not be condemnable as prize.

§ Mr. Joynson-Hicks
On a point of Order. In view of what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty has just said, the Motion can have no relation whatever to the Prize Bill. I submit that the Motion is entirely out of Order,

§ Mr. Dugdale
The hon. Member for Chichester (Mr. Joynson-Hicks), who has been raising some points, rather interfered with his own case, I thought, by saying he was in a fog. I think it is correct to say, so far as I can make out, that the hon. Gentleman still remains in a fog. The hon. Gentleman wants to know how the money got into the Prize Deposit Account. The explanation is very simple. All seized goods have to be put into the custody of the Admiralty and if they are sold, the proceeds must go into the Prize Deposit Account, whether the goods may be subsequently condemned or not. That is how the money got into the Prize Deposit Account. The next question he asked was; What will happen to the money when it goes into the Exchequer? I do not think that even my right hon. Friend 719 the Financial Secretary to the Treasury can be expected to say what is going to happen to every item which goes into the Treasury from moment to moment.
I certainly cannot answer for this item any more than I can for other items. It will be spent, I imagine, in the excellent way the Government spend other moneys. The hon. and gallant Member for Holderness (Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite) said there was a good deal more in this Motion than one might suppose. I do not know what grounds he had for saying that. I would say that there is no more in this Motion than it says. I think it is important, in view of the tremendous claim being made that hon. Members opposite are standing for justice for those who are likely to be in receipt of prize, that I should make it quite clear that where none of the money claimed, and were all of it eventually to be given by the Treasury to men entitled to prize, the total amount for each man would be 2¾d.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
I think, if I may say so with respect, that the Parliamentary Secretary has been less than honest with the Committee. He has given me an assurance—I was not allowed to challenge the point as the hon. Gentleman would not give way—that the only moneys to come under this Motion were those arising from goods which were non-condemnable. But if he will look at what his Government have done, he will see that exactly the reverse is what he is proposing to this Committee. That is, that within very certain and stipulated limits, any moneys which may accrue not from goods which are non-condemnable, but from any action which may not have been settled, shall accrue to the Exchequer. It seems to me a very wide difference between what he tried to assure me across the floor of the Committee tonight and what he himself is proposing by legislation. I hope this Committee will not allow that difference to pass before we have had a very clear explanation from the Government.
Let us come to another point. He says that these moneys are small. But how can the hon. Gentleman know that? He has put the figure at £7,000. I ask him how he has arrived at that figure. Is that merely because these goods will be non-condemnable or it is goods which may be condemnable or not? If it is the 720 goods which are only non-condemnable, how does the hon. Gentleman square it with what he is later on to propose, which is that it is only goods which are not condemned? I suggest to the Committee that if we accept what the Financial Secretary has said we are doing something which is neither justified by this Motion nor by what we know the Government are going to pursue later.
Hon. Members in all parts of the Committee in previous Debates have made it clear that they want to get the maximum amount of money into the Naval Prize Fund. That is still our object. It will be open to this Committee at a later stage to debate why particular sums have been contributed to the Naval Fund and the Royal Air Force Fund. But if we pass this Motion tonight we are simply saying that the Exchequer shall have the benefit of a large amount of money which would otherwise accrue to these funds. For these reasons I hope the Committee will not pass this Motion.

§ Commander Noble
There is only one point I wish to raise. I would ask for a categorical answer. If we pass this Motion tonight passing this money into the Exchequer, does that prevent a new Clause being moved during the Committee stage of the Bill asking that this money should go into the Royal Naval Prize Fund and the Royal Air Force Prize Fund?

§ Mr. Dugdale
I think that that is a point of Order and must, therefore, be decided by the Chair.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
If this is a point of Order, may I ask for your Ruling, Mr. Bowles?

§ The Deputy-Chairman
We are in a Committee of Ways and Means and I cannot give a Ruling binding on the Chairman of the Committee on the Bill. But I think the hon. and learned Gentleman can guess what the answer will be.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
If this matter is raised on Ways and Means, its object is to pass money into the Exchequer, and nowhere else.

§ Commander Galbraith (Glasgow, Pollok)
I must ask where we stand on this matter; I do not think that this is the kind of thing we should pass from before we are absolutely clear about it. 721 The moneys in question are moneys which could not go into the Prize Fund. They are in the Deposit Account, but have never formed part of the Prize Fund. Is that the only money concerned? If we pass this Motion tonight, is there any chance of any other funds accruing from prize which, apart from this Motion would go into the Prize Fund? If there are any other moneys accruing at all, and the Financial Secretary can give us an assurance that all the money which can go into the Prize Fund has gone there, then that makes all the difference to my attitude. Are we just passing over money in the deposit account which cannot form prize, and does not form prize and, accordingly, we are not in any way dispossessing the Prize Fund? That is one point; secondly, can he assure us that nothing which would go to the Prize Fund is going to be gathered hereafter?

§ Mr. Dugdale
I should like to assure the hon. and gallant Member that this only concerns money which cannot go into the Prize Fund.

§ Mr. Joynson-Hicks
May I ask if the amount dealt with by this Motion is an ascertained figure, or can the Motion be used for future moneys?

§ Mr. Dugdale
It is only in respect of moneys there now, and is not in respect of future moneys.

§ Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre
May I ask if a manuscript Amendment could be accepted dealing with money which cannot be paid into the Supreme Deposit Prize Account?

§ Mr. Dugdale
No, the matter is perfectly clear and I cannot accept a manuscript Amendment.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
The drafting of this Motion does not quite conform to what the hon. Gentleman has just said. He said quite categorically that it refers to unclaimed sums now in the custody of the Prize Court. Ought that not to be stated in the Motion which, as I read it, would attract any sums which came into Prize Courts in this country or the Colonies in the next few days, or, for that matter, the next few months? He says it applies only to money already there—about £7,000—and what we want to know is what happens to any further income of the Supreme Court Prize Deposit Ac- 722 count. I ask this because it conveys with clarity the meaning he put forward. Will he not accept a manuscript Amendment to insert the word "now" after "unclaimed sums"? It would then read: Unclaimed sums now in the custody of Prize Courts.

§ The Deputy-Chairman
That is a matter for the Chair whether it be accepted or not, and I will not accept it.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
I am sorry, Sir, that you will not accept such an Amendment: that necessarily falls immediately within your province and I accept your Ruling. I am forced back to this—that the hon. Gentleman has given an assurance that this Motion only applies to sums now in the Prize Court. I hope he will reflect on the terms of the Motion and bring it into line with what he himself has said about it.