CIVIL LIST COSTS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19333, 25 May 1937, Page 6

CIVIL LIST COSTS

LABOUR PARTY PROTEST “POMP & CIRCUMSTANCE” CENSURE MOVE REJECTED PROVISIONS APPROVED (Elec. Tel. Copyright—United Press Assn.) (Reed. Mav 25, 1 p.m.) LONDON, (May 2-1. The question as to whether the time has not arrived to modify the ‘‘pomp and circumstance” of the Monarchy was raised by .Major 0. R. Attlee on behalf of the Labour Party when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Neville Chamberlain, moved a series of resolutions in the House of Commons, giving effect to the recommendations of the select committee on tHe Civil List which maintained the total at £410,000.

Mr. Chamberlain explained that no provision was made for the event of the marriage of Princess Elizabeth, because the committee felt; it was impossible at present to know what would be the conditions then prevailing, or what provision, if any, it would be proper to make. (Major Attlee, moving that the provision be limited to a year only, said that the Labour Party’s opposition was not associated with republicanism or the running of the Monarchy ‘‘on the cheap,” but they could not acquiesce in establishing false standards for a long period. ‘‘Excessive Boosting” He protested against what he described as the excessive boosting of Royalty in recent years. The Labour Party members were not prepared to accept the standard laid down by the Civil List. There should be a revision, ia consultation, to see how the Royal Family could host be fitted into democrat- v.

The present conception of suitable provision rested on the idea of a century ago.

‘‘We live in a democratic- age and do not make a Cod of an ordinary man,” continued .Major Attlee. ‘‘’l’hc King rules not only here, but in the Dominions, those great democracies where the, people socially are move democratic than here.”

Alluding to the Coronation. Major Atllee said that there was no question that the people liked a certain amount of pomp and circumstance, but there was a difference between occasional displays of pageantry and the continuous observance of ritual. It was not right- that the- King should he expected always to live on parade, or that he and his family should always be in the public, eye. q’here had been in recent years far too much boosting of Royalty in the press and over the wireless. .ft was unfair to the Monarch and unhealthy to the community. Importance Appreciated He did not underestimate the importance of the .Monarchy, but the greatest of its responsibilities was not comparable with the responsibility of the House of Commons. There might be grave political mischief if the, conditions under which the King lived meant cutting him off from the masses of the people, or surrounding him with influences operating in one direction only.

‘‘We are looking to the future, believing that the country is moving rapidly from a- class state to a classless state,” lie said. ‘‘We do not believe that enveloping .the Royal Family with a continual round of obsequience makes for the strengthening of the .Monarchy.” Mr. Winston Churchill (Con., Eppingj wondered where .Major Atllee had been during the past few weeks in which there hud been a clear manifestation that it was the wish of the overwhelming majority of all parties that the pomp and circumstance associated with the Monarchy should not be cleared away in these modern days. Performing Vital Service Denying that any town in Britain was stirred to its depths by the Coronation, or that any big section of the population wanted ‘‘bunting and bunkum,” Air. J. Alaxton (Ind.-Lub.J Bridgeton) argued that the cost of the luonurehial system was heavier than was neeessarv.

Sir Archibald Sinclair (Lib., Caithness) said that the Monarchy was performing a vital service. lift agreed that greater simplicity might be desirable, but said Hint, the King, and previously King Edward and also King George V, had shown keenness to make access to the court easy for all sections of society. He said he was surprised that Major Atllee blamed the press, which knew the interest which the people took in the Royal Family.

Mr. J. Wedgwood (Lab., Nowcast le-under-Lynne) asked how could the King get, the feelings of the people when he only read the newspapers of lhe government classes.

The Labour Parly amendment was defeated by 204 to 104 votes, after which the resolutions were approved.