15. We are, however, not satisfied with the existing procedure. We therefore recommend that the Estimates Committee should be increased to 30 members next year, which would enable it to subdivide itself into six Sub-Committees of five members (and a quorum of three). who would examine the whole Estimates every year. For this purpose we assume that each Sub-Committee would examine two or three Classes according to size, including the Revenue Departments and Fighting Services. The reports of the Sub-Committees would come up for approval by the Main Committee as at present. As the work would be onerous and detailed, we further suggest that members of this Committee should be excused from service on all Standing Committees and Private Bill Committees.

16. We also recommend that if the Chairman of the Estimates Committee considers all the Reports when presented to the House justify a day for discussion, he should communicate with the Chairman of Ways and Means, who, if he agrees, should arrange with the Government for a day to be allotted towards the end of the Session before August 5th for that purpose. Provision for such procedure already exists under S.O. 15 (4) under which three additional days may be allotted to Supply.

17. It has been suggested on more than one occasion that the technical nature of the work which the Estimates Committee is called upon to do makes it imperative that they should have the assistance of a skilled Parliamentary officer. This suggestion has never been adopted, and whilst we still adhere to it, we realise that questions of Departmental and Treasury responsibility arise which make it unlikely that this suggestion will be carried out.

18. The National Expenditure Committee of 1918 had powers, under its terms of reference, to appoint from outside its own body such additional persons as is thought fit to serve on any Sub-Committee which it might appoint, with a view to the preparation of its recommendations. We recommend that the power should be restored to the Committee.

INTER-DEPARTMENTAL VOTES.

19. We also desire to direct attention to the discrepancies that occur between the Gross Estimate for a Department and the actual cost of such Department to the Nation. It will be noticed that appended to the Gross Estimate of each Department is a table of figures showing the actual cost of the Department, the main causes of difference between the Estimate presented to the House and the actual cost being attributable to items which are accounted for by other Departments of State. The most important of these items are:

(1) Office accommodation: This is at present a Class I Service and is accounted for by H.M. Office of Works.

(2) Rates: This Service is accounted for by the Treasury and now forms the Estimate presented to the House as Class I, 13.

(3) Stationery and Printing: Accounted for by H.M. Stationery Office, Vote Class II, 30.

(4) Post Office Services (except telegrams and telephones): Accounted for by H.M. Postmaster-General, Vote Revenue Departments, No. 3.

20. We would point out that, taking the 1925-26 Estimates, in some cases the difference between the Gross Estimate and the actual Expenditure is very great. In the case of the House of Lords Vote, even if Judicial salaries are excluded, the actual Expenditure is more than double the Estimate presented. In the case of the House of Commons, the excess is approximately £155,000 on a Vote of £377,000, without the

charges resting on the Consolidated Fund. In the case of the Treasury, the excess is over 23 per cent.; Home Office, 18 per cent.; Foreign Office, 39 per cent.; and other Departments show correspondingly heavy excesses between the Estimate presented to Parliament and the actual cost of the Department.

21. Under existing procedure the items which cause this excess can only be discussed upon the Vote to which they are appropriate, and cannot be discussed upon the Vote of the Department itself. Thus the question of buildings required by the Ministry of Labour can only be discussed in Class I, Vote 9 (Labour and Health Buildings, Great Britain), a Vote for which the Office of Works is responsible, and cannot be raised on the Vote for the Ministry of Labour. The effect of this is to render criticism of the course pursued by a Department, as regards its office accommodation, a matter of the utmost difficulty, since discussion on the office accommodation used by a Department is out of order on the Vote for that Department, and must be raised on a Vote for which the Office of Works is responsible. The Office of Works, however, has no responsibility as regards questions of staff at headquarters or outstations. This is a matter for the Department concerned, but is also the determining factor as regards the accommodation needed.

22. Similar considerations hold good with regard to the Rates payable on buildings, the amount of Stationery supplied to Departments, and to a lesser degree to the services rendered by the Post Office.

23. We are of opinion that discussion should be permitted on any item, other than items specifically chargeable by Statute on the Consolidated Fund, that is included in a footnote to the Gross Expenditure of a Department as being part of its total expenditure, even though such items are not included in the Estimate presented to Parliament. We feel, however, that it would be undesirable to alter the existing system of accounting for such items. We recommend, therefore, that the rules of Debate should be altered so as to permit such discussion taking place on the Vote for the Minister's salary. If this recommendation be carried into effect it will not entail any alteration in the Standing Orders of the House.

RATES DEPARTMENT VOTE.

24. We are of opinion that the existing Statement of the Rates Department Vote (Class I, Vote 13) should be completed so as to show the actual amounts paid for each Department. The detail given for each Department should distinguish between rates paid on Headquarter Offices in London and those paid for Offices or Buildings elsewhere.

MOVING THE SPEAKER OUT OF THE CHAIR.

25. We also wish to call attention to the existing procedure of the House under which the Speaker is moved out of the Chair three times on the Votes for the Fighting Services, and only once on the Civil Estimates. With the continuance of this ancient custom that redress of grievances should precede the Voting of Supply, we do not desire to interfere. Originally it was the custom to move the Speaker out of the Chair on all occasions before considering Supply, but as this led in many cases to the Votes never being discussed at all, the present practice was adopted in 1882; one additional day being subsequently added for the Air Estimates. At that time the Fighting Services were relatively much larger Spending Departments than they now are. As these occasions are to-day used to discuss questions of wide financial policy rather than grievances, we think the House of Commons should seriously consider the existing allocation of discussion to particular Votes.

26. We accordingly suggest that the four days should in future be alloted as follows:

27. Whilst we realise that the House of Commons is as justly jealous of any interference with its procedure as is the Executive of any interference with its responsibilities, we appreciate that it is the business of the House not to get things done anyhow, but to do thoroughly and well what it does do. A more efficient public Service may expose the State to the dangers of bureaucracy unless Parliamentary control keeps pace with the extending powers of the Executive. It is with these ends in view we put forward the above recommendations which, for purposes of convenience, we summarise as under.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS.

(1) The Civil Service Estimates should be reclassified in nine Categories on broad objective lines.

(2) Votes should be regrouped in Classes so as to show, as far as possible, the complete functions and Expenditure of each Department. (3) The Civil Service Estimate should in future be called the Civil Estimates.

(4) The Estimates Committee should be increased in size, so that all the Estimates may be examined every year.

(5) Members of the Estimates Committee should be excused from Service on all Standing Committees and Private Bill Committees.

(6) The Chairman of Ways and Means should be empowered to arrange a day for discussion of the Estimates Committee's Reports.

(7) The Estimates Committee should have power to appoint persons, from outside its own body, to serve on any of its Sub-Committees.

(8) When the Estimates for any Department are under consideration, discussion should be permitted on any item (other than those chargeable on the Consolidated Fund) that is included in a footnote as being part of the total expenditure of that Department, although such items are not included in the Department's Estimate.

(9) The Rates Vote, Class I, 13, should be made more complete.

(10) The existing procedure under which the Speaker is moved out of the Chair three times on Votes for the Fighting Services, and once on the Civil Estimates should be re-considered.

Question, That the Draft Report be read a second time paragraph by paragraph, put and agreed to.

Paragraph (1).

Amendments made in line 1 by leaving out the word "naturally " (Brigadier-General Charteris), and in line 5 by leaving out the word "invites," and inserting the word facilitates" (Sir John Marriott) instead thereof.

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraph (2).

Amendments made in line 3 by leaving out all the words from the word 66 we" to the word "investigation in line 4, and inserting the words "In the present investigations attention was concentrated (The

Chairman) instead thereof; in line 5 by leaving out the word "most (Sir Fredric Wise), and in lines 5 and 6 by leaving out the words "do not therefore make any," and inserting the word no" (Sir John Marriott) instead thereof.

Another Amendment made.

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraph (3).

Amendments made in line 1 by leaving out the words "We have given" (The Chairman) and in line 1, after the word " Consideration," by inserting the words " has been given (The Chairman).

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.

Paragraph (4).

Amendment proposed in line 1 to leave out all the words from the beginning to the word "Departments " in line 2 (Sir Fredric Wise). Question put, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the paragraph.

Amendment proposed in line 6 to leave out the word " object " in order to insert the word " purpose (Brigadier General Charteris) instead thereof.

Question put, That the word " object" stand part of the paragraph.

Paragraph (13).

Amendments made in line

by leaving out the word procedure (Sir John Marriott) and in line 8 by leaving out all the words from the word "The " to the end of the paragraph (Sir Fredric Wise).

Another Amendment made.

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.

Paragraph (14).

An Amendment made.

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraph (15).

Amendments made in line 2 by inserting after the word "the" the words "number of members of the " (The Chairman); in line 3 by leaving out the words "to 30 members (The Chairman); in line 4 by leaving out the word "Six" and inserting the word "Sufficient" (Sir Frederick Hall) instead thereof; in lines 4 and 5 by leaving out the words of five members (and a quorum of three) who would" and inserting the word "to" (The Chairman) instead thereof; and in line 13 by leaving out the words "Standing Committees and " (Mr. Dalton) and at the end of the paragraph by adding the words "and if they so desire on Standing Committees (Mr. Dalton).

Resolved, That the Chairman and Mr. Dalton be authorised to redraft the paragraph.

Paragraph 17 agreed to.

Paragraph 18.

Amendment made in line 3 by inserting the words "in an advisory capacity" (the Chairman).

Other Amendments made.

Paragraph, as amended, agreed to.

Paragraphs 19 to 22.

Resolved, That the Chairman be authorised to redraft these paragraphs. Paragraph 23 amended and agreed to.