*LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYMy Lords, I rise to ask Her Majesty's Government, to explain why it is necessary that the General Post Office should be, in respect of the erection of Post Office buildings, under the control of the Board of Works as well as of the Treasury; and whether the Postmaster-General might not be allowed some discretion as to a portion of the Post Office revenue for Post Office improvements. It is hardly necessary, I think, that I should assure the Members of Her Majesty's Government on the Front Bench that the noble Duke, the Postmaster-General, has no part in the question which I am now asking. I am informed that when a new Post Office is needed at places of the size and importance of Holyhead, the rule is to consult the Board of Works as to the best course to be pursued, and on the receipt of their report the case is laid before the Postmaster-General for his directions, and then submitted to the Treasury for authority for the cost involved. I have heard it denied at the Board of Works that it caused delay, but I think it can be proved to the contrary. There was great delay last year in selecting a site for a Post Office at Holyhead, and in February of this year, after the negotiations had been in hand for 11 months, the matter was allowed to drop. I do not complain of the action of the Post Office or the Postmaster-General, because the delay throughout was caused by the Board of Works. I want to ask why the Postmaster-General should not be trusted in these matters as much a3 the First Commissioner of Works. Generally, the Postmaster-General is a Cabinet Minister, but the First Com- 587 missioner of Works is not always so. The noble Duke, the Postmaster-General, has large experience in the management of business matters, and there are other reasons why he ought to be allowed some discretion. It has been proposed to allot the Admiralty a certain sum for three or five years for shipbuilding so that it should not be necessary to discuss these matters each Session. Surely similar power might be given to the Postmaster-General without compelling him in every case to consult the Treasury.
*THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (The Duke of NORFOLK)My Lords, I am rather embarrassed at the extent of the Question asked by the noble Lord, and I am quite unable to solve the problem as to why the Postmaster-General is not trusted as much as other people. The noble Lord is under a misapprehension in saying that the Board of Works have control over the Post Office. They have no such control. The Hoard of Works is the architect and builder to the Government, and deals with the Post Office buildings in the same way as with other Government buildings. The selection of a site for a new Post Office, and the character of the building to be put up, are subject, of course, to the usual regulations of the Treasury in the same way as other Government buildings. The delay which the noble Lord has referred to may be due to the Board of Works, but I am afraid delay occurs in the execution of most building operations. This is the only answer I can give to my noble Friend.
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OP STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)My Lords, It does not seem to me to require any special distrust of my noble Friend the noble Duke that he is submitted to the same rules that apply to all other Departments of the Government. It is a very horrible burden that we should have to go to the Treasury for sanction, but so it is, and the House of Commons insists in maintaining that régime. They have exaggerated views of the merits of the Treasury. The particular régime which the noble Lord desires to introduce has already been tried, and has been given up. It used 588 to be the rule that the Post Office always paid its own expenses out of the gross receipts; that is to say, it was allowed to build anything it wanted, and in the use of that power it built St. Martin's-le-Grand. This was such a shock to the financiers of that day that nothing of the kind has been allowed since.