Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

represent. Some Departments have outgrown the purpose for which they were originally established, whilst others were established hurriedly to meet some pressing need, without due regard to their permanent duties or to the relation which those duties might bear to those of existing Departments. The consequent gaps and overlapping have largely escaped public attention because the Estimates are cast in a form which makes their detection more difficult than it might otherwise be.

6. As public opinion tends to demand a more efficient public Service, so that Service, in its turn, becomes more intricate and specialised, and wider in its ramifications. This condition of affairs not only makes real Parliamentary control more difficult, but also more necessary. We believe the first essential to control is that the Estimates should be so framed as to show the object rather than the subject of expenditure. Otherwise it is almost impossible for Parliament to follow the financial results of its own legislative proposals, or to be in a position to control the Executive in the way in which it carries those proposals into effect.

7. We consider it important that, as far as possible, all Votes representing activities controlled by, or linked to a particular Ministry, should be grouped in the same class, and that there should be some indication in the Estimates as to which Minister is responsible to Parliament for such Services. At present there is no way in which the complete functions and expenditure of any Ministry can be readily ascertained from the Estimates.

8. In the scheme of re-classification, which we have drawn up, and which we attach as an Appendix to this Report, we do not suggest the splitting up of existing Votes, except for certain minor alterations.

RE-CLASSIFICATION OF VOTES.

9. We consider the Civil Service Estimates should in future be divided into the following nine Classes:

I.-Central Government and Finance.

II. Imperial and Foreign.

III.-Law and Justice.

IV. Education.

V.-Health, Labour and Insurance.

VI.-Trade and Industry.

VII. Common Services (Works, Stationery, &c.).

VIII. Non-effective Charges (Pensions).

IX.-Miscellaneous (Expiring Services).

10. We have regrouped existing Votes under what would appear to be their most appropriate Classes, adding some explanation, in any case, where it appears to us necessary, at the end of the Appendix.

NOTES ON CLASSES.

11. We recommend that the Civil Service Estimates should in future be called the Civil Estimates, in order to dispel a common

illusion that the bulk of the money voted in these Estimates goes. in the payment of Civil Servants' Salaries. Quite apart from this fact the title is a misleading one, as a large number of Civil Servants is employed in the Revenue Departments and the Departments of the Fighting Services.

12. In our view it is desirable to put all Civil Service Estimates involving the payment of pensions or non-effective allowances to individuals into a separate Class. In the case of the War Departments and Revenue Departments, there is a separate Vote for non-effective services, and it is useful to have a comparable Class Class for the Civil Service. The Class should include the Votes for Superannuation, Ministry of Pensions, Royal Irish Constabulary Pensions and Merchant Seamen's War Pensions, which could not properly be classified under any of the other Classes. Old Age Pensions and Widows' &c., Pensions are borderline cases, but in view of their close connexion with the Health Insurance Scheme, the Widows' &c., Pensions may more properly be placed in Class V and Old Age Pensions should go with them to that Class.

13. We also think it would be convenient, at the present time, to group all Expiring Services together, as we have done in Class IX. Nearly all these Services belong to the Trade and Industry group, and whilst we do not desire to alter the existing System of Accounting or Ministerial responsibility, we believe that by grouping them together we shall concentrate attention on the fact that they are Services which are expected to disappear from the Estimates at an early date. For this reason. the category should not be extended too widely or given a quasipermanent character. It should not, for example, include the Ministry of Pensions, as although that Service is a definitely expiring one it will continue for a generation or more to come. ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEDURE AND FINANCIAL PROCEDURE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

14. Under existing circumstances the Estimates Committee examines the Estimates of two or three Departments every year. If a Department is examined this year, it may therefore not expect re-examination for about seven years under normal circumstances. This is not conducive to economy, as the fact that the Estimates Committee is likely to examine a Department is in many ways as much a deterrent against excessive expenditure as the actual examination itself.

15. It has also been suggested that no Estimates should be taken in Committee of Supply until the Estimates Committee. has reported on them, or has stated that it does not propose to examine that Department. There are, however, difficulties in the way. It is one of the privileges of the Opposition to select the subject for discussion on the allotted Supply Days, and any serious attempt to curtail or limit this privilege would, in our opinion, be a grave interference with the functions of Parliamentary criticism, on which the existing system of

56840

a 3

[ocr errors]

Government so largely rests. It should also be remembered that the selection of a particular Estimate on a Supply Day often serves as a basis for the discussion of questions of policy, far removed from the details of financial administration.

16. We are, however, not satisfied with the existing procedure. We therefore recommend that the number of members of the Estimates Committee should be increased next year, which would enable it to subdivide itself into sufficient Sub-Committees to 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 Private Bill Committees, and also, if they so desire, on Standing Committees.

17. We also recommend that it should be within the prerogative of the Opposition to select the Estimates Committee's Reports as a subject for discussion on any allotted Supply Day or Days. We are further of opinion that if the Opposition do not propose to exercise this prerogative, they should so inform the Chairman of the Estimates Committee, in writing, not later than the eighteenth allotted Supply Day. If the Chairman of the Committee, in view of this information, considers that the Reports justify a day for discussion, he should communicate with the Chairman of Ways and Means, who, if he agrees, but not otherwise, should be empowered to arrange with the Government for an extra Supply Day to be allotted for this purpose, under the procedure of S.O. 15 (4), under which three additional days may be allotted to Supply.

18. 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.

19. Until 1920 the National Expenditure Committee had powers, under its terms of reference, to appoint from outside its own body such additional persons as it thought fit to serve in an advisory capacity on any Sub-Committee which it might appoint, with a view to the preparation of its recommendations. We recommend that this power should be restored to the Estimates Committee.

INTER-DEPARTMENTAL VOTES.

20. We also desire to direct attention to the differences that occur between the Gross Estimate for a Department, and its total estimated cost to the nation, due to items of expenditure 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 1 Service, and is accounted for by the 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. Stationery Office, Class II, 30.

Accounted for by the

(4) Post Office Services (except telegrams and telephones). Accounted for by the Postmaster-General under Revenue Department, No. 3.

This expenditure is shown in a table of figures underneath the total estimates in each Vote.

21. Under existing procedure these items of expenditure can only be discussed upon the Vote of the Department which accounts for them. 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 in a lesser degree to the services rendered by the Post Office, and certain smaller Departments under the Treasury.

23. We would point out that, taking the 1925-26 Estimates, in some cases the difference between the Gross Estimate and the total estimated expenditure on behalf of a Department is very great. In the case of the House of Lords Vote, even if Judicial salaries are excluded, the total estimated expenditure is nearly double the Estimate presented. In the case of the House of Commons, the difference 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 difference is over 23 per cent. of the Estimate; Home Office, 18 per cent.; Foreign Office, 39 per cent. whilst other Departments show correspondingly wide differences between the Estimate presented to Parliament and the total cost of the Department to the Nation.

24. 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 Estimate of a Department as being part of its total

56840

a 4

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.

25. 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.

26. 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, to the Civil Services, 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.

27. We accordingly suggest that the four days should in future be allotted as follows:

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

28. 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, but Parliament, as the

« ZurückWeiter »