§ THE EARL OF KINNOULL rose to ask the Lord Chancellor whether a Committee of this House was consulted as to the corps of custodians; whether the chief officer has taken up his duties; and to move for Papers. The noble Earl said: My Lords, at this late hour I am certainly not going to delay the House more than two or three moments, although I think this Question must be of interest to those of your Lordships who regularly attend this House. As I understand the facts there is going to be a reduction of a certain number of police in these precincts—I think the number is one inspector, two sergeants, and thirty-eight constables—while both Houses of Parliament are sitting, and they are to be replaced by a corps of custodians. This, I understand, is to be done in the interest and sacred name of economy. I think it has been stated in another place that the economy effected would be £13,000 per annum. I am going to try to show that there is no economy either to the taxpayer or the ratepayer.
§ I take the smallest point of all first. That is the cost of the new uniforms. At the present moment the police who police this House have uniforms, and whether they stay here or whether they go outside they will still have to have uniforms. For this corps of custodians new uniforms 1301 will have to be supplied. The second point which I want to make is that I understand that the gentleman to be put in charge of this new corps of custodians is an ex-superintendent of police, who became an ex-superintendent only two or three days ago, and that now that he has retired from the police force he is entitled to a pension of just over £9 per week, and while in charge of this corps of custodians he will be receiving on the top of that an additional salary of £300 a year. There are also two ex-inspectors who are in receipt of pensions of £5 a week and they, I understand, under this suggestion, are to have a salary of £200 a year. I do not know how many ex-constables will be employed; perhaps my noble and learned friend an the Woolsack will tell me; but each of those ex-constables who are to be employed has a pension of £3 a week and a salary here of £156 a year. I think it will be found that in most cases their pension plus their salary will come to rather more than what their salary was when they were officers of the police force. I want to ask my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack this question: Has the Minister of Labour been consulted in this matter, and are there no ex-Service men, not in receipt of pensions, who could be perfectly well appointed to do the job which is required?
§ I am willing to admit that there is a large number of police on this building, such as the policeman at the Library here and the police upstairs on the corridors, who have very little to do except to stand there, but there is this point: they are always there in case there should be a riot downstairs; and there is a very big effect in the police uniform. It can be seen perfectly well in the streets. You get a group of people; perhaps there are two men fighting, or something of that description happens, and immediately a crowd gathers. One policeman arrives and says: "Move on there, move on!" and they all move on, and he can arrest the two people without any trouble at all. I think very much that in this House the effect of the police uniform on the general public who come here is the same, and that if we have a corps of custodians who are bedecked in some uniform like a messenger it is going to create a lot of chaos. First of all, every policeman in this building has been here 1302 for very nearly twelve years; he has experience and knows every person who frequents the building. He also has had to deal with many difficult situations in his time; whereas these new people, whoever they may be, will know very little about matters, and all sorts of mistakes may occur. For those reasons, my Lords, I beg to move.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SANKEY)My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, for drawing attention to this subject. He has administered a great number of interrogatories to me in addition to those which he put down on the Paper, and, although it is not within the jurisdiction or province of the Lord Chancellor, I have asked for the information and I will tell him the result of my inquiries and give him the answers to all the questions that I can possibly answer. When Parliament is in session the protection of this building is a matter for the Lord Great Chamberlain and the Speaker of the House of Commons. When Parliament is not sitting the whole responsibility of looking after the building is in the hands of the Lord Great Chamberlain. At no time, therefore, is it a matter which really concerns a Committee of the House; it is the concern of the Lord Great Chamberlain.
Now, my Lords, a new corps of custodians is being established which will be under the authority of the Lord Great Chamberlain and will incorporate the present night watch maintained by the Department of the First Commissioner of Works. I understand from my right hon. friend the First Commissioner of Works that the corps will consist of one superintendent, three inspectors, one assistant-inspector and not more than forty custodians, who will replace the present night watch and forty-one police officers, at an approximate saving—I cannot give the exact amount, but the noble Lord was right—of £13,000 a year. Sixty-one police officers will remain employed at the Houses of Parliament of whom forty-eight will be on duty, together with six custodians, while Parliament is sitting, as compared with fifty-nine at the present time. The new arrangement, which has been agreed with officers of both Houses of Parliament and with the Commissioner of Police, are to come into force on 1303 January 1 next. I think it is true to say that the custodians will not all be pensioned ex-policemen, but at the moment of a change-over of this kind it is very desirable that a certain number of individuals who have been familiar with the work of the House should continue their duties. I think in any new appointments preference will be given to ex-Service men.
Those being the general observations which I desire to make, I will try to answer the questions categorically. To begin with no Committee of this House was consulted for the reasons which I have given: it is a matter for the Lord Great Chamberlain. This question was raised about twelve months ago, and the heads of various departments in this House were asked if they had any objections to the scheme being carried out provided always that the efficiency of the protection of the Palace of Westminster was maintained. It was pointed out then that the whole scheme would come under the jurisdiction of the Lord Great Chamberlain, and no one had any objection. The scheme does not come into operation, as I have already said, until January 1 next, and in answer to the noble Earl I can tell him that no one has, as yet, been officially appointed, but it is hoped that all the appointments will have been made by the middle of December. I finish as I began, by again thanking the noble Earl for raising this Question, which is an important one, and I hope that I have been able to give him all the necessary information on the subject which he is right to bring to the attention of the House.
THE EARL OF KINNOULLMy Lords, I thank the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack for giving me a very full reply to my Question, and I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.