HC Deb 11 July 1957 vol 573 cc552-8

3.45 p.m.

Mr. Julian Snow (Lichfield and Tam-worth)

I beg to move, in page 2, line 4, at the end, to insert: (4) The maximum amount of the annual salary authorised by subsection (4) of section one of the Ministerial Salaries Act, 1946, to be paid to the Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's Household is hereby increased to two thousand two hundred and fifty pounds. I do not propose to detain the Committee very long. My hon. Friend the Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) and I tabled this Amendment because we thought we should draw attention to the work carried out by the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household. This appointment is always considered most unimportant and I do not think the Committee generally realises the amount of work that has to be done. The compilation every day of a report to Her Majesty, which has to include personal impressions and a lot of thought, is done by the Vice-Chamberlain, who has certain other duties to which I need not refer here.

I understand that the view is held that other duties of the Vice-Chamberlain in connection with the Whips' Office is a matter for different party practice. Nevertheless, the fact remains that because he has to do this work in the afternoon, he therefore is not able to apply himself to other responsibilities which fall to his lot as a Member of Parliament.

There are in this Chamber at the moment, I believe, four hon. Members who have held this position. I should like to think that they agree with me that although the Amendment comes from the Opposition, the present holder of the office is carrying out his job in the best tradition of the Vice-Chamberlain's office and that, apart from personalities, the position as such should receive some recognition from the House.

Mr. Michael Stewart (Fulham)

If I may add a word in support of the Amendment, it is only to say this. In the whole arrangement of salaries, from those paid to the most eminent Members of the House to those paid to the back bencher, there is always a gradation. The steps are so arranged to fit the different degrees of responsibility. There are the salaries of the Prime Minister, of senior Ministers, of junior Ministers, and of various types of intermediate Minister.

The Amendment relates to a Member of the House whose main duties are those of being a Government Whip, but who has, in addition, the other duties referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow). Those other duties carry a certain amount of responsibility and consume a considerable amount of time. There is, therefore, a substantial difference in that respect between him and the other Household officials, and it seems to be in conformity with our general plan of salaries that that difference should be reflected in a moderate difference of salary. This is a matter to which the Government might reasonably give attention while the Bill is under discussion.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. J. Enoch Powell)

I must advise the Committee that for the very reasons of gradation which the hon. Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) has mentioned, it would be quite impracticable to make this alteration within the scope of the Bill. The Amendment proposes to give to the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household a salary of £2,250, but the Bill, taken in conjunction with the Ministerial Salaries Act, 1946, provides for one of the Ministers who are commonly referred to as Whips the salary of £2,200 while applying a salary of £2,000 to the rest.

The effect of this Amendment would, therefore, be to give the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household a larger salary than that which is payable to the person who is, in effect, by practice the deputy Chief Whip. Thus a much more extensive regrading than is involved in the Bill would be necessary if anything of the sort which the hon. Member is arguing were to be done. I would, therefore, suggest to the Committee that this alteration lies outside the scope of what the Bill seeks to do.

Mr. W. A. Wilkins (Bristol, South)

Even if, as the Financial Secretary says, this Amendment is outside the scope of what the Bill seeks to do, the Committee nevertheless should consider some other aspects of the responsibilities which devolve upon the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household. Those who have served in the Whips' Office—Government Whips' or the Opposition Whips' for that matter —know quite well that the responsibilities of the Vice-Chamberlain are probably much in excess of those which devolve upon other Whips.

One of my hon. Friends dissents, I understand, but I hold firmly to the view that the Vice-Chamberlain has many additional responsibilities. As my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow) has pointed out, the Vice-Chamberlain is specially closely tied to service in this Chamber. If we cannot remunerate the Vice-Chamberlain in accordance with the work he is called upon to do we can still make a clear and justifiable case, even though it may not be possible to implement it through the Bill, to improve his lot. I should like to have the attention of the deputy Chief Whip for this, for it may be possible for him to make representations about it.

What I suggest is that the duties which reside in the Vice-Chamberlain should be reconsidered. Surely we have reached a time when they could be. Is it really necessary now to have to send every evening a message to the Palace detailing the work of the House of Commons up to a comparatively early hour? It can be a record of only a very limited amount of work done up to, say, half-past six or seven o'clock. I wonder whether, instead of a daily report, there could not be a weekly statement. It would not be so arduous a job to produce a weekly statement, and it would contain a report of the main work of the House of Commons during that week.

Mr. Emrys Hughes (South Ayrshire)

I associate myself with the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, South (Mr. Wilkins). Is it really necessary that the Vice-Chamberlain should have the enormous responsibility of sending a communication to Her Majesty which Her Majesty probably will not read? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"] I am only saying "probably" I would not be dogmatic about that. If Her Majesty reads this document my sympathy extends to Her Majesty as well as to the Vice-Chamberlain. The responsibilities of the Vice-Chamberlain could easily be lightened by sending a marked copy of HANSARD to Her Majesty instead of the daily message.

Sir Arthur Vere Harvey (Macclesfield)

The hon. Gentleman the Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow) has raised this matter with the very best of intentions, but I think it is unfortunate that the remarks of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Bristol, South (Mr. Wilkins) should have been made. I fully expected the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) to make such remarks as he did.

This work which the Vice-Chamberlain does is traditional, and it has gone on for a great many years. It is quite wrong for anybody in the Committee—and I include myself—to suggest that the practice should be altered. It is not for us to say that it should be. I am sorry that my hon. Friend the Vice-Chamberlain is himself unable to speak on the matter, because I know quite well what he would say on the whole subject if he did speak upon it. I think we should be well advised to leave the matter as it is.

Mr. Wilkins

I did not raise this matter in any frivolous spirit. I emphasised what I myself noted when I saw hon. Friends of mine at work, and that is the arduous character of the work involved in the office of the Vice-Chamberlain. My suggestion was a very serious one. If we cannot adequately remunerate the Vice-Chamberlain through this Bill for the work he is called upon to do, I think that we ought to try to relieve him of some of his responsibilities.

Mr. Harold Wilson (Huyton)

I had not intended to intervene in this discussion, and I should not have done so had it not been for the remarks of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Macclesfield (Sir A. V. Harvey). What he is asking the Committee to do is to come to a decision on the basis of what he, apparently, knows the Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's Household would say if he were to speak, when, so far, he has not spoken. If the Committee is asked to come to a decision on that basis, then, in all fairness to the Committee, the Vice-Chamberlain ought to tell us what it is that his hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield thinks he would tell us, or, failing that, the hon. Gentleman the Member for Macclesfield, since he knows what is in the mind of that silent functionary, himself should inform the Committee what that is.

Mr. Godfrey Nicholson (Farnham)

I am sorry that we are having this debate. The Amendment is about the remuneration of the Vice-Chamberlain, not his duties, and I do not understand how the duties have come into the discussion. I should think that the answer to the complaint, if complaint there really is, that these duties are so arduous—and I am sure they are arduous—is that a sensible Whips' Office would so arrange the duties of the Whips, including those of the Vice-Chamberlain, that the Vice-Chamberlain would be relieved of some of his duties other than that duty which has been specifically mentioned—some whipping duties, perhaps.

I have never been a Whip, I am thankful to say. I do not think I have the temperament to be a Whip. I would never dare to speak disrespectfully of any Whip. I think that a Whip must be of a rather curious temperament. Still, a Whip's life must be a very arduous one. I am sure it is a very arduous one, and I do not believe that the labours of the Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's Household need be any more arduous than those of other Whips. I was joking when I said I never dare to speak disrespectfully of the Whips. I often do, but I do not believe that the Vice-Chamberlain need be overworked if the duties of the Whips are properly arranged.

Mr. George Jeger (Goole)

Like my hon. Friends, I also wonder why it is necessary that a manuscript recording the proceedings of the House of Commons up to a certain time of day should have to be sent to the Palace when a copy of the accurate record which is kept could he made available instead. I am told by those who have held this office that the message which is sent to the Palace is not merely an objective account of what has happened in the House, but contains a number of personal comments upon what has happened, and the names of personalities to whom things have happened or remarks have been addressed, and from whom they have emanated. If we are asked to vote a higher remuneration to the Vice-Chamberlain, I see no reason why the Members concerned should not know exactly what is contained in these messages when they are compiled and sent.

The Deputy-Chairman

It is out of order to discuss the contents of the messages.

Mr. Jeger

I was trying to suggest that if we are to be asked to increase the salary or emoluments of the Vice-Chamberlain the extra work for which it is suggested that he should be remunerated should be made available to us here in Parliament. I am sure we should all be very interested to know exactly what the contents are of these messages, and to see whether they are really worth the extra remuneration that it is suggested should be paid.

Mr. Snow

I hope it will not be believed that those messages to Her Majesty are not read. Those of us who have held the position of Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's Household have the best of all possible reasons for knowing that, in fact, they are read.

This tradition of sending these messages is of very ancient historical origins. The job was at one time a personal responsibility of the Prime Minister, and it was given to the Vice-Chamberlain because of the pressure of work on the Prime Minister. My hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) introduced his characteristic humour into the debate, but I would point out to him that the Vice-Chamberlain has the personal responsibility of giving to Her Majesty his impressions of what goes on in this Chamber.

Mr, Emrys Hughes

Does my hon. Friend really think that next week's debate on Scottish trade and industry will be duly chronicled and faithfully read by Her Majesty?

4.0 p.m.

Mr. Snow

I sincerely hope not. I understood that the function of the Vice-Chamberlain, and I hope that I shall be supported by those who have held the position, was to give certain impressions to Her Majesty which might enable Her to paint a mental picture of what went on. The job might we well or badly done, but until it is abolished the Vice-Chamberlain ought to be paid the rate for the job. I ask the Committee to consider this matter a little seriously.

I rather deplored the line of argument put forward by the Financial Secretary, who appeared to rule the Amendment out of order because it would make the Vice-Chamberlain £50 better off than the deputy Chief Whip. Assuming that that is a valid argument, surely the Financial Secretary could have suggested that he would consider the matter and formulate a Government Amendment to regularise that position. I do not think that the Financial Secretary's argument was a very pleasant one, and I hope that the Government will think again.

Amendment negatived.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 2 and 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedules 1 and 2 agreed to.

Bill reported, without Amendment read the Third time and passed.