Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.) Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon Finch, Rt. Hon. George H. Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West) Resolution agreed to. Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury) Houston, Robert Paterson Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R. Muntz, Sir Philip A. O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens 3. That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £1,550, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for the Salaries and Expenses in the Offices of the House of Commons." 4. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £255, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the Chief Randles, Sir John Scurrah Sheffield, Sir BerkeleyGeorge D. Stone, Sir Benjamin TELLERS FOR THE NOES- MR. CLAUDE HAY (Shoreditch, Hox-| for following the London County Council ton) said that there was on this Vote an as a model. He was now attacked by increase of £300 for the wages of gangers the hon. Member for Hoxton for not and labourers in the Royal parks and paying the men enough. He thought pleasure gardens. Was that increase to he could set the mind of the hon. Membe temporary or permanent; and how ber at rest by assuring him that this many persons were affected by it? In was a permanent increase. The total order to obtain that information he moved increase would, moreover, be slightly the reduction of the Vote by £100. greater for the year than appeared on the He had found that the conditions of Paper, because the Supplementary Estilabour and the pay of the gangers and mate was only for nine months. The total labourers in the Royal parks and gardens number of the men was 448, of which were not satisfactory. What was con- number 300 were labourers, and the rest sidered a fair wage a few years ago was were gangers or other men of that class. not sufficient now; and he hoped that He was asked whether it would lead to the First Commissioner of Works would increased wages in other parks. He make it clear that the wages of the men was communicating with the Board of he had referred to would be brought up Agriculture and with the Treasury in to the proper standard, and that any in- order that the increase might take crease which might be given under this place in other parks concurrently with Vote to other employees would be ex- that which he had named. Kew was tended to the gangers and labourers in not now under his jurisdiction, but under the Royal parks and pleasure gardens. the Board of Agriculture. The exact amount of wages paid was for labourers in London 27s. a week, and in the country 23s. a week. He could not bear in his head the exact number of hours worked. SIR F. BANBURY said he wished to second the Motion, but not for the reasons propounded by the hon. Member who moved it. He believed that the wages of the gangers and labourers in the Royal parks and pleasure gardens were as good as they should be; but what he wanted to ask the First Commissioner of Works or the Secretary to the Treasury whether any information could be given to the House as to what further cost to the country would be involved by the rise in the wages in this and other departments. Amendment proposed MR. CLAUDE HAY said that after the explanation which the right hon. Gentleman had given he would ask leave to withdraw his Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Resolution agreed to. Second Resolution read a second time. SIR F. BANBURY questioned the "To leave out £2,300,' and insert £2,200.'" First Commissioner about the ventilation -(Mr. Claude-Hay.) of the House of Commons. He had asked him about the subject in Committee, but he did not think that since that time the ventilation had been improved. He made no complaint about the Lobbies, but in the House itself they still felt exceedingly cold about their feet and legs, and he had on many occasions noticed a disagreeable smell on entering the Chamber. That was because it was heated by hot air, and there was an exhausting kind of smell which resulted from that kind of heating. He asked whether when the weather got warmer the right hon. Gentleman would not make some alteration in the system of ventilation and have the windows open. The right hon. Gentleman on the former occasion explained that under the present system it would be difficult to have the windows open because of the working of the large exhaust fans in the roof. Those fans, however, could be stopped, and many of them thought that the results would be good and pleasant. At all events, even if they were wrong there would be no harm in making the experiment. To do so, indeed, might save money now spent upon working the electric fans. He also inquired why the Patronage Secretary had been given another room downstairs. Why should that right hon. Gentleman require two rooms, one upstairs and one downstairs. Was the latter chosen as a stronghold against suffragettes and Labour Members? MR. LUPTON (Lincolnshire, Sleaford) said he had had great experience of crowded halls, and never in his life had he been in a place where the ventilation was so excellent as in the House of Commons. He did not notice any nasty, stuffy smell, and he had noticed it in other buildings heated by hot air. He sympathised with the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London when he spoke of cold draughts about his feet and legs, but he admitted the difficulty of having a perfectly satisfactory system of ventilation. He had a little solution to offer which would, he thought, meet the convenience of every Member of the House. Under the present system one man was nearly boiled while another man was nearly frozen. He suggested that a little electrical heating apparatus should be supplied for the feet of hon. Members, which could be switched on or off at pleasure. In order to prevent undue heating of the House owing to the forgetfulness of hon. Members to switch the apparatus off, it might be automatically switched off every half hour, and then those Members who wanted warmth could switch it on again. Members would in that way be able to get all the heat they wanted; and another advantage was that the Government would be enabled to find out where the warm Members were. The cost would be trifling, and apart from the wire the apparatus would cost £2. COLONEL LOCKWOOD hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would not Sir F. Banbury. interfere any more with the ventilation of the House. It was impossible to find a place in which the ventilation was better than the House of Commons. In the nature of things there must be draughts, and it was impossible to satisfy everybody, but he thought the warmth of the House was sufficient for any decent warm-blooded man. *MR. HARCOURT said he belonged to the class which suffered from cold, but he was bound to see that a proper flow of air was kept up in order to maintain an even temperature. He was afraid, however, that he did occasionally take a liberty with the health of hon. Members by decreasing the flow of air, and that while he made them comfortable he might be contributing to the causes which brought about ill health. But the matter was a very difficult one to deal with Within five minutes of his receiving a complaint that it was too cold from one side he got a complaint that it was too hot from the other. He was therefore really between Members and the deep sea. It was impossible to please them all, but he was endeavouring to diminish the supply of air on the Opposition benches, and for the comfort of hon. Members who had complained he was having placed there temporary gauze screens, so that the flow of air would be less during the cold weather, while the screens could be removed during hot weather. He heard with great alarm the proposal that they should cut off the action of the fans in the roof and open the windows during the warm weather, because if that were done the result would be that there would be no air in the House. He could not consent to try so unhealthy and unpleasant an experiment while the House was sitting, but if for purposes of experiment the hon. Baronet would, with himself, sit there after the House had risen, he would stand the strain for as many hours as he could or for so long as the hon. Baronet desired to continue the experience. He did not think he could venture upon the experiment of electric heaters, even though it would enable the Government to know where the popular seats were. As to the extra room given to the Patronage Secretary, a few months ago a small scullery was Some found insufficient for the staff of the | Official Publications, issued last year. The sergeant-at-arms and he had given them men were paid from 12s. to 17s. a week, better accommodation. That scullery, according to the work they did. which was not good enough for them, had of them worked about the. House in now been given to his colleague, who was various capacities, and they were exceeda very hard-worked official, and entitled ingly well paid for the work they did. to a little rest and comfort. He did not The work in the autumn sittings was think he had exceeded the general wishes equally distributed, as it was every of the House in giving his colleague a session. small room. Resolution agreed to. Third Resolution read a second time MR. CLAUDE HAY said he would move to reduce the Vote by £100 in order to ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury a question which he had already asked in Committee, but which the hon. Gentleman had not answered. He wished to ask what amount was paid to the messengers who delivered the Votes and Proceedings of the House at Members' residences. He was also anxious to know how the work was dis tributed and the conditions under which the work was done-whether each man covered the same distance and carried the same weight. The hon. Gentleman on the last occasion was unable to give the figures, but thought the messengers were paid £150 a year. He (Mr. Hay) had, however, ascertained that they were paid from 12s. to 17s. a week according to length of service for work which took them from seven in the morning until twelve. He wished to know why the men were not on the establishment. *MR. SPEAKER said that none of these questions arose on this Vote, which was a Vote arising out of the expense of the autumn sittings. MR. CLAUDE HAY said in that case he would not pursue the subject further, but would ask the hon. Gentleman to inform the House what was the exact amount for the distribution of the Votes and Proceedings during the autumn sittings. MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH (Derbyshire, W.) said the hon. Gentleman had made a reference to the Select Committee on Official Publications which sat last year. He would like to ask whether any of the recommendations of that Committee would be put into force. On the Committee stage he also asked a question with regard to the payment of witnesses' expenses. He urged the importance of seeing whether anything could be done so to arrange Committee work that the attendance of witnesses from distant parts was not prolonged more than was necessary. Very often large panels were referred to the same Committee and many witnesses were detained for a long time before the Bill or case in which they were interested came on. Seeing that they were confronted with a large Supplementary Estimate on the point he thought the subject was one which ought to occupy the attention of the Government. He could not help thinking that in some cases the witnesses were called upon earlier than was necessary. Resolution agreed to. Fourth Resolution read a second time. SIR F. BANBURY, in moving a reduction of £200, said that when the Vote came before the Committee the Chief Secretary was asked to explain this item, and the House would agree that the explanations of the right hon. Gentleman were not very satisfactory. The autumn sittings lasted two months, and seeing that a firstclass return ticket to Ireland was about £4 14s., it seemed remarkable that the Chief Secretary and his UnderMR. RUNCIMAN said he was not very Secretary should have spent £200 in well informed on the last occasion, but two months in travelling. The item the hon. Gentleman would find detailed demanded some serious consideration. information as to the employment of The right hon. Gentleman received a the men in question on page 46 of the salary of £4,500. Why was he not Report of the Select Committee on content with that? He gathered on the last occasion that the right hon. it had been the practice to allow some Gentleman had none of the money grant in respect of that expenditure. included in the Vote under discussion. If So far as he was himself concerned, having that were so, why was it put upon the Estimates in that form? He did not know that Ministers had their expenses from their residence to the House. He would have thought they ought to pay that expense themselves. Then with regard to the payment made to the St. Patrick's Inebriate Asylum. It might be an excellent institution, but that was no reason why the House should provide £55 towards its maintenance. He understood that the Chief Secretary was bound by Act of Parliament to give that sum, and the right hon. Gentleman had explained that other homes received sums in the same way. It was, he thought, impossible to defend a policy by which the taxpayers became charitable subscribers to such institutions. He hoped there would be some satisfactory explanation forthcoming Amendment proposed- "To leave out £255,' and insert '£55.' (Sir F. Banbury.) Question proposed, "That £255,' stand part of the said Resolution." had no experience, he was bound to say that the result of the investigations made by the Chief Secretary was very puzzling for those who succeeded to the office, because he noticed that in regard to every kind of expenditure in the way of piers, harbours and other works, many promises were made which it was often very difficult to fulfil. But they were the only travelling expenses for which the Chief Secretary was entitled to make a claim. The travelling expenses were incurred by the Under-Secretary and his private secretary in travelling between London and Dublin, and owing to the autumn sittings, and the activity of proceedings in the Irish Office during that time, the Estimate had been exceeded, and a Supplementary Estimate had become necessary. The Under-Secretary was also entitled to a guinea a day subsistence money when in London, besides his travelling expenses. With regard to the inebriate homes, he was sorry he had not made himself plain to the hon. Baronet on that point. He had given him the reference to the Act, which was 61 & 62 Vict., c. 60, and under that enactment the obligation was imposed upon the Treasury not only in Ireland, but in England and Scotland, to make grants for the maintenance of inebriates who were sent to homes of that description. To speak of it as a voluntary and charitable donation on the part of the Irish Government to the St. Patrick's Home at Waterford only showed the misconception in the hon. Baronet's mind as to the motives which animated the Irish Office. At the time the Estimates were made the Waterford inebriates' home was not in existence, and the demand was subsequent to their preparation. They had no option in the matter; it was an obligation imposed by Parliament, and the only way of dealing with it was to put it in the Chief Secretary's for his journeys through Vote. In the forthcoming year's EstiIreland when investigating the social mates it would find a sub-head of its own, condition of the country, and seeking where it would engage the attention of to make himself acquainted with such hon. Members again. questions as would engage the attention of the House, namely, the fishing and other industries in Ireland. He believed Sir F. Banbury. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BIRRELL, (Bristol, N.) said he was quite willing to give an explanation, and, as practice made perfect, perhaps he would be able to explain the matter more lucidly than he did on a former occasion. He had pointed out that the note at the foot of the Estimate contained a misprint, and that the expenses referred to were not those of the Chief Secretary at all, but of the UnderSecretary. The Chief Secretary did not get those travelling expenses; and he agreed with the hon. Baronet that it would be a most improper thing if he did do so. The Chief Secretary made the journeys between London and Dublin, agreeable or disagreeable, entirely at his own charge. The travelling expenses connected with the Chief Secretary's name were AN HON. MEMBER: How many inebriate homes are there in Ireland ? |