§ LORD ADDISON had the following Notice on the Paper: To call the attention of His Majesty's Government to the expense incurred by Peers, many of whom are engaged upon work of rational importance near their homes in the country, in travelling to London for the purpose of carrying out their Parliamentary duties there and to ask whether they will take this into consideration. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the little question which stands on the Paper in my name is of a very different character from the other matters which have been occupying our time to-clay, but I suggest that it is nevertheless of very substantial importance. I think it has been agreed on all hands that the debates in your Lordships' House during the war have served a very valuable national purpose, and the discussions which we have had to-day have been no less important and significant. That being so, we recognize that those members who are able to contribute to our debates render a notable public service; and it is right, I think, that we should take account of the difficulties under which many of them inevitably work at the present time.
§ It is a long time since a salary was first voted to members of the House of Commons. I quite recognize that, in view of the very large number of difficult and complicated matters which would arise, questions of that sort are not appropriate for discussion here; but I do know, as a matter of fact, that a considerable number of members of your Lordships' House who occasionally have made noteworthy contributions to our debates, and who are themselves engaged in important national work in the districts in which they live, would wish to attend this House more often were it not for the expense of doing so. That is a fact which is not, I think, to be wondered at in these days. Notwithstanding the very large numbers of members of the Peerage who are usually absent from our debates, there is a substantial number of noble Lords of high distinction who take part in our deliberations so far as they can. It is because it was brought to my notice that a considerable number of members of your Lordships' House, and especially those who live at a distance find it impossible, in these days, to incur the expense involved by frequent attendance, or by attendance as much as they would 623 like or as the public interest would make desirable, that I raise this matter.
§ The day has passed when this House consisted only of well-to-do people. What with taxation and so on even the pockets of the wealthiest have had substantial inroads made into them. Apart from that, a considerable number of members of this House are of moderate means, and in these days it would be true to say in some cases of small means. In view of the fact that the system has worked at the other end of the passage very successfully for many years, I think it is right that at all events the cost which a member of the Legislature necessarily incurs in discharging his duties should be taken account of by His Majesty's Government. That has been the case in regard to the other place for many years past. I raise this matter simply because I feel that it is not right that a number of members of this House should be deterred by considerations of expense from attending as they would wish to do in these days.
§ My own view of what ought to be done goes a good deal further than the words on the Paper, but I should like to acknowledge that this subject has been a matter of informal and friendly discussion for quite a long time past, and that I have received most friendly guidance and help from the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, and from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I sincerely hope that your Lordships will feel able to give this matter a friendly reception to-day. We cannot, of course, commit breaches of Privilege; we cannot decide anything which will mean an increase in public expenditure. All that we can properly do, I think, is to ask His Majesty's Government to consider the matter fairly in the light of all the circumstances. If they consider it favourably, no doubt they will make suitable proposals in the right place at the proper time.
§ VISCOUNT SAMUELMy Lords, I desire to associate myself briefly with whathas been said by the noble Lord, the Leader of the Opposition. The suggestion embodied in his question is very narrow in its scope, and for my own part I am glad that the noble Lord has not carried the matter further, although he says that his own view would have induced him to do so. This relates entirely to transport expenses, and does not in any way raise the question of Parliamentary salaries for 624 members of this House; it is not even the thin end of the wedge in that direction. I am sure that any suggestion of that kind would have been very widely disapproved in your Lordships' House, and would probably meet with even greater disapproval elsewhere.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHMy Lords, I do not think it would be right that this subject should be referred to only by the Leaders of the two Parties opposite. I feel it is appropriate that someone on the Back Benches should also give support to the proposal which has been made by the noble Lord opposite. I think the importance of the proposal is not really reflected in the number of noble Lords in the House to-day. It is a very important proposal, and one which deserves support from every one of us who tries to attend the debates in your Lordships' House. It is one which appeals to me as a Scottish Peer, not only for the reason which may occur to some of your Lordships that thrift is a national Scottish characteristic, but because the journey from Scotland is a good deal more expensive than the journey which many of your Lordships have to make in order to attend the sittings of your Lordships' House. For my part I welcome the proposal, and I hope that His Majesty's Government will give it favourable consideration.
§ THE EARL OF CLANWILLIAMMy Lords, as my noble friend Lord Balfour of Burleigh has spoken for his friends north of the Tweed, may I say one word for my friends who come from a still further distance—namely, from Ireland, the South of Ireland especially? Before the last war this House used to be very often occupied in discussing Irish questions, and we used in those days to have a very large attendance of Irish Peers, which very often added to the interest of the proceedings. Since then the falling off in the attendance of my friends from both the North and the South of Ireland has been very noticeable, and I think I can say without fear of contradiction that during this war only two Peers from the North of Ireland have paid any attention to their duties in your Lordships' House. Those who come from the South of Ireland are in an even worse position, because we all know the difficulties which they have, and which prevent them from attending to their duties here as much as they would like to do. In their case 625 the expense is greater even than it is for the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Burleigh, and his friends, because the distance is much greater, and it is deplorable that this has prevented many friends of mine from attending the debates here. Therefore I gladly support the proposal of the noble Lord, Lord Addison.
LORD GRANTLEYMy Lords, I have every sympathy with the question of the noble Lord, Lord Addison, but could any arrangement be made for a Committee of the House to study this matter? I only ask the question as a humble student of the history of this House and a great admirer of the immense prestige which it has. Many years ago its prestige was less than it is to-day. To-day it is a very live factor in the country, and people of all classes admire the debates that take place in your Lordships' House. I wonder whether we should not have a close study of the question, because perhaps some of the prestige of the House might disappear if it were felt in any way that money, either for travelling expenses or anything else, were received by the members of your Lordships' House.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNEMy Lords, the point which has been raised by the noble Lord, Lord Addison, in his question is clearly one which has become of in creasing importance to members of your Lordships' House. In the old days before the war we were all of us a good deal better off, and, in addition, the majority of Peers had houses in London where they lived during the Session, so that the problem of travel largely did not arise. Now the situation is very different. Whatever our position was before the war, the heavy hand of taxation has fallen upon all. Most people have had to give up their London houses and nearly all the members of your Lordships' House are doing work of national importance in their own country districts, very often at a great distance from London, and, to make things worse, the cost of travelling has, I think, considerably increased. This, as I know from my own experience, seriously interferes with the ability of noble Lords to fulfil their duties in this House. I have had many examples, in the two years since I have been Leader, of Peers who had important contributions to make on subjects upon which they were experts, but who simply could not afford to come up for the debates. 626 That, surely, is a profoundly unsatisfactory state of affairs. Noble Lords have their duties to do as legislators and it clearly cannot be right that they should not be in a position to perform them.
There could of course be no question of salaries for Peers: that would be quite contrary to the traditions of your Lordships' House. But payment of their bare out-of-pocket expenditure on railway travel, just to enable them to perform their Parliamentary duties, comes in rather a different category, and I believe it deserves proper consideration. With regard to the point which the noble Lord, Lord Grantley, has just raised about the setting up of a Committee I ought perhaps to say that when the matter was first raised by the Leader of the Opposition we did set up a small unofficial Committee, including the Leaders of various Parties and other experienced members of your Lordships' House, and it was in the light of their discussions that the noble Lord has now pit down his question. Therefore I hardly think that it would be necessary to set up another Committee for this purpose. I would suggest that I should bring this matter to the notice of my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I shall be very glad to do that and I hope that it may receive a sympathetic response if and when it comes to be considered in another place.
§ LORD ADDISONMy Lords, I should like to thank the noble Viscount and the other noble Lords who have spoken for their contributions to this discussion.