§ (1) For the purpose of making the best use of all persons, whether men or women, able to work in any industry, occupation, or service, it shall be lawful for His Majesty to appoint a Minister of National Service under the title of Director-General of National Service, who shall hold office during His Majesty's pleasure.
§ (2) The Director-General of National Service shall, for that purpose, have such powers and duties of any Government Department or authority, whether conferred by Statute or otherwise, as His Majesty may by Order in Council transfer to him or authorise him to exercise or per form concurrently with or in consultation with the Government Department or authority concerned, and also such further powers as may be conferred on him by 866 Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, 1914, and Regulations may be made under that Act accordingly, but no Order in Council or Regulation shall authorise the compulsory employment or transfer of any person in or to any industry, occupation, or service.
Mr. HAZLETONI beg to move in Subsection (1), after the word "Service"["title of Director-General of National Service"], to insert the words "for Great Britain and another such Minister under the title of Director-General of National Service for Ireland."
The Government having refused our demand to exclude Ireland from the scope of this Bill, it now becomes necessary for us to do what we can towards making this Bill on its voluntary basis as suitable as it can be made to Irish conditions. I had intended to move the Clause that stands 867 in my name on the Paper [Exercise of Powers of Minister of Rational Service in Ireland] and also to move the omission of Clause I, but in view of the statement made by the Chief Secretary in the course of the Debate this evening and not wishing in any sense whatever to delay the House upon matters of serious importance, it is of the utmost importance that we should get to close grips at once upon the issue raised by the Chief Secretary with regard to his intentions concerning Ireland. Therefore I propose this Amendment. Earlier in the discussion I had to point out how extraordinary it was that the Chief Secretary apparently had some definite policy in his mind upon this subject which he has not yet fully disclosed to the House or put upon the Order Paper as an Amendment to the Bill. It is high time that we had from the Chief Secretary a full statement of the Government's intentions, and I invite him to explain to the House and to Ireland on this Amendment what it is he proposes in this connection. If you are to work any kind of voluntary National Service in Ireland which will be of any advantage to the country, or meet national needs, you must have a man intimately acquainted with Irish conditions, you must have an Irishman in whom the country would have confidence, and that man must have a definite policy, which will carry with it the sympathy and support of the Irish people. The claim has never been made by anyone from these benches that the utmost within the power of Ireland could not and should not be done so far as any effort is required to meet the present emergency in Ireland, either in regard to food production or any other direction. But Ireland has been gravely alarmed, not without reason, at the attitude that has been taken upon this matter by the Government and the Chief Secretary. It appeared to us—and I think the House will agree with good reason—from the speech of the Chief Secretary on the Committee stage, that Ireland was to be put under the Director-General of National Service for Great Britain, and that her needs and situation were not to be taken into account; that Ireland was to be approached only as a reservoir from which to draw all the labour which it is possible to draw out of the country to put into munitions and other national needs here, instead of approaching this question on a broad and patriotic point of view from the Irish 868 standpoint and utilising the labour and the resources of Ireland within its four shores. In his speech on that occasion the Chief Secretary used these words:
I can tell the hon. Member that of the 160,000 men who were reported to be within the age of military service in Ireland and to be the surplus for labour which could be used, a number amounting to more than 40.000 is said to be already employed in this country.Our position from the start of this controversy has been that there are nothing like 160,000 men of military age of so-called surplus, and that there is a dearth of labour for national necessities in Ireland itself, and that if there is to be any organised effort to meet the emergency which has arisen, Ireland ought to have the first regard of the Government and have the first claim upon the labour of her own sons in employing them upon national needs. No one has claimed from these benches either, although the Chief Secretary to-night and on the Committee stage almost led the House to believe that it was so, that we want to set up a legal disability against Irishmen coming over to find employment at higher wages in England if they can. I do not believe in that policy myself. I believe that it is likely to lead to very serious misunderstandings between Ireland and England if Irishmen are induced to come over here under a voluntary National Service scheme and find employment and take the place of men who have gone to the front in this country. What are you going to do with these men whom you bring over here under the voluntary scheme when, in a few weeks time, you turn the voluntary scheme for Great Britain into a compulsory scheme] Are they to be exempted then? Are we to have to put forward another claim from these benches that these men are not to be brought under your compulsory scheme which we know very well is coming? While we do not want to set up a legal disability, we say the policy of the Irish Executive ought to be a policy of employing these people as far as possible in their own country, where there is plenty of work for them, where, although some small effort has been made, nothing like the effort has been made by the Government towards placing Ireland in a position of equality with Great Britain with regard to munitions. It is for these reasons that I believe we shall have to have appointed for Ireland a separate Minister under any voluntary scheme of National Service. We shall have to raise the question, also, of what the status of this Minister is to be and 869 what his relation is to be to the House of Commons and to the Irish Executive, who is to represent him in this House, and what his plans are. It is really monstrous to ask Irish Members to give a blank cheque to this Government which has deceived them so often, and to force a measure of this kind, not only through Committee, but, if they can, through the Report stage, without explaining to Ireland and to the Irish Members the intentions of the Government. I do hope the Chief Secretary will not force us into the position of having to ask the House of Commons to adjourn the further consideration of this Bill, but that ho will make a full, frank, and clear statement as to what the policy of the Government is going to be. I think from the interruption he made to-night during the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) that he is not only in the position to tell the House his plans, but that he is in the position to tell the House the name of the gentleman whom he has got up his sleeve as the Director-General, or whatever he likes to call him in this capacity, for Ireland. I invite him to give to the House the fullest and the frankest information.
§ Mr. DILLONThis Amendment raises so far as Ireland is concerned an issue of great and far-reaching importance. I cannot understand how any responsible Government can for a single moment expect a system of National Service on a voluntary basis to be a success without the co-operation of the people to whom it is applied. When you were bringing forward this system of voluntary service for Great Britain it was stated over and over again by the Prime Minister, and all who were advocating it, that the whole thing depended upon the enthusiastic and almost unanimous co-operation of the people. I ask the right hon. Gentleman what shred of evidence can he offer us here to-day that he has got the co-operation of the people of Ireland of any sort or kind? He had the votes of the representatives of Ireland here to-night and he described that as a political demonstration. I ask him to go to Dublin or Cork and face the people in any open meeting—if he will not accept us as the authoritative spokesmen of the people of Ireland and put his proposition of National Service to them. If he can get a resolution passed in any of the southern cities or the midland towns or counties in favour of National Service my attitude towards this Bill would be 870 very much altered. Has he got a single public meeting throughout the length and breadth of Ireland in favour of this proposal Has he got a single public body in favour of it? Has he got a resolution of any representative public body from Ireland in support of it? The Government has come down to-night to ask us to accept this Bill without furnishing us with one single shred of evidence that they have got the support of Ireland. Now comes this new proposition. Accepting for the sake of argument that the Bill is going to be forced on to the Irish people—and, make no mistake about it, you are forcing it on the Irish people—is it to be a system under the control of Mr. Chamberlain or is it to be a system really under the control of Irishmen? The right hon. Gentleman interrupted me to say that there was to be an Irish Director, but he was vague and misty as to the position of that Director, in regard to Mr. Chamberlain. According to the text of the Bill, so far as we can understand it, since that very important announcement was made, this Irish Director will be simply an underling, a kind of understudy of Mr. Chamberlain and under his orders, and really occupying very much the same position as one of his local inspectors in Great Britain.
I do not believe that this Bill under these circumstances will succeed in Ireland or will attract any measure of support. The thing, at any rate, ought to be thoroughly and clearly settled to-night, whether this is to be a wholly Irish administration, quite divorced from, and totally independent of the English Director-General. If not, the thing is damned irretrievably, and will not be tolerated for a single moment in Ireland. I want the light hon. Gentleman to tell us frankly we are to have a wholly independent Director-General in Ireland, and, if so, is he prepared—because nothing else will meet our difficulty—to accept the Amendment of my hon. Friend? Nothing else will satisfy us or give any assurance that the Director-General in Ireland is to be a real person and not an understudy and not a subordinate of Mr. Chamberlain. If it be the intention to set up a separate Department I may put the question, Must we not suspend operations and pass another money Resolution? Because I take it that the Government, in dealing with these Irish questions, always deal generously with the matter of salaries. I take it that the Irish 871 Director-General will have a salary, and may have, for aught I know, one of the Ulster Unionist Members as a Parliamentary Secretary. In the last Division the Government majority was almost entirely made up of paid members of the Government. I myself the other day—I think this is becoming a public danger—stood at that door and counted nearly fifty paid members of the Government passing through the Government Lobby. It is the policy of the Government according as they find themselves getting into rough water to increase the cohorts of their stalwarts.
I assume that if we are going to have an Irish Department we must have an Irish Secretary, because the Chief Secretary himself, like the famous character in the Japanese play, represents about a dozen different Departments, and answers for them all with great labour, I must confess, and it would be rather too much to ask him to take on another Irish Department. The right hon. Gentleman told us that questions for this Department would be answered in the House either by the Chief Secretary or by somebody else. Who is the somebody else? Are we to have another Under-Secretary? Are we to have transferred to what remains of the city of Dublin, after the beneficent operations of the British Government which resulted in a large part of it being burned down, the new system of commandeering hotels? We are very scarce of hotels in Dublin, and we had a great influx of American visitors last year to see the ruins, which are the only attraction that we have now in Dublin. Are we to have this gentleman, and will he take the Shelfbourne Hotel, which is one of the few decent hotels we have for the accommodation of strangers? I suppose that he will want to put himself on a level with his English coadjutors. We have no ducal palaces or magnificent noblemen's mansions in Dublin.
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLCecil Guinness!
§ Mr. DILLONI do not think that they will get Lord Iveagh's house. But I would like to know will they be entitled to commandeer the Shelbourne Hotel or any of the big hotels in Dublin and follow the example which has been set over here? The right hon. Gentleman should give us a plain, full, and frank statement as to the position of the Irish Department.
§ Mr. DUKEIn the course of the previous Debate, the difference between the conditions in Ireland and in Great Britain was dwelt upon, and it was demonstrated to the House how the elaborate system of England, with its organisation and its ample provisions of machinery under the Bill, was not applicable to Ireland, where the conditions were of a simple character and the main industry was agriculture No machinery such as that contained in the Bill, it was said, was adaptable to the Irish situation: yet now it is recommended that there should be another full-fledged Minister, and I am not sure whether he is to have a secretary or not. An honest endeavour has been made to render the provisions of this Bill useful to Ireland, with the minimum expense and the minimum of interference with Irish affairs. Having that object in view, I certainly should have scouted any suggestion to set up a Minister of National Service in Ireland But I agree that the conditions in Ireland are totally different from what they are here. What is to be chiefly regarded in Ireland is the safeguarding of labour resources, and in their application to local uses before beginning to apply any surplus to British industries.
I have had the advantage of consulting Mr. Neville Chamberlain, to whom I represented the difference in the national conditions of Ireland and the difference-in her outlook, and Mr. Neville Chamberlain agreed that it was fairly obvious that the best method for Ireland was voluntary endeavour, and that so far as possible it should be a voluntary undertaking. With that object in view. Mr. Neville Chamberlain was ready to delegate absolutely his duties to the representative in Ireland, who would no doubt be technically entitled to the technical status of representative Director-General of National Service, and would be for all practical purposes attending to the needs of Ireland, and so far as he was able, to subserve the common needs of the United Kingdom and of the Empire, devoting himself to that object with the minimum of interference in Irish modes of life and Irish industries, with the possibility of the maximum degree of utilisation of whatever voluntary help was forthcoming.
§ Mr. DEVLINThe Local Government Board officials.
§ Mr. D. MASONIs he to be a paid official?
§ Mr. DUKEIf he is ready to render his services voluntarily there will be no proposal to pay him. If that help is not forth-coming it may be necessary that there should be some modest salary over which the House would have control. The intention of Mr. Neville Chamberlain is that so far as possible what is intended to be voluntary effort in Ireland shall be under the control of those who are ready to render help. If you are going to distribute labour and to take advantage of the readiness in every county in Ireland of a considerable body of workers who do desire to promote the common object of the United Kingdom in the successful prosecution of the War, and if you utilise that voluntary labour in various districts then the call for paid services under this scheme will be a small one. But the object is first to find out what voluntary labour is available, and second, how you can best apply it.
§ Mr. DUKETo use what margin there is beyond the immediate demands of Ireland for service in this country. Nobody has suggested that there was not a margin of labour in Ireland available for service in this country. [An HOST. MEMBER: "Not now!"] Hon. Members say that it has come to this country in numbers measured by tens of thousands. If that is so, why should the House of Commons be eager to forgo the possibility of utilising the services of these men in this country?
§ Mr. DILLONThey are doing so now.
§ Mr. DUKEThe services which they have rendered have been valuable services in munition works, harbour works, and various other industrial operations. An hon. Member says they are coming freely and he went on to say that labour in Ireland has been depleted. I meant that labour in Ireland shall not be depleted or diverted from local Irish purposes. I am sure it is the desire of the House, and I believe it is the desire of the great body of persons in Ireland, that such margin as there is should be used to the best advantage in this country for promoting common objects. I hope I have answered the questions that were put to me. If I have not made myself clear to hon. Members I do not doubt that I will hear more of it.
§ Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYWill you guarantee that when these men of military age come over to this country that they will not be conscripted?
§ Mr. DILLONThat has been guaranteed already, months ago.
§ Mr. DUKEYes, months ago it was guaranteed. If the hon. Member had only paid attention to the matter he would have known, as the hon. Member for East Mayo most fairly explained, that some difficulties had arisen and a system has been devised of labour tickets to show the status of the individual, so that he is absolutely secure from any interference for the purposes of conscription.
§ Mr. DILLONAt present Great Britain has got the use of labour from Ireland, freely, as much as she requires, and there is no obstruction. As far as I can gather the object apparently that he has in mind in applying this Bill to Ireland is to prevent Irish labour coming over to this country.
§ Mr. DUKEIf the hon. Member thinks that is so I have totally failed to make myself clear on the subject. I stated two objects, of organisation and co-ordination. The first is to take care that labour is applied in Ireland to the best advantage, and to take care that surplus labour, if there be, as I believe there is, some surplus labour, shall be used in this country to the best advantage. So far as administrative machinery goes, no administrative machinery will be set up except under pressure of necessity, which will involve the elaborate arrangement of a second Director-General in Ireland. I agree it is not necessary.
§ Mr. MOONEYWill the appointment of a Director-General of National Service for Ireland require a new Money Resolution, or is it intended that the person to be appointed shall not be paid? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that even after the Money Resolution has been passed as long as the person appointed does not call himself Director he can take any salary that is fixed, and if he be a Member of this House will not require to seek re-election?
§ Mr. DILLONYou might have half a dozen Members of the House appointed under the Bill.
§ Mr. ANDERSONI have been trying to understand this arrangement with regard to Ireland. What I gather is that there is not going to be an independent Director-General for Ireland at all, but some kind of National Commissioner under the control of the Director-General of National Service in this country. If that is so, then the salary of that gentleman will be merged with the other expenses of this office and there will be no opportunity of raising any distinctive policy of National Service as applied to Ireland. That policy as it will work in Ireland will be controlled from St. Ermin's Hotel, and as those of us know who are following up this matter the blundering already in regard to National Service in this country is sufficiently pronounced. Heaven knows what will happen when it is extended to Ireland! Certainly the chaos will not be less. The difficulties are going to be very great and also very delicate indeed. There will be the difficulty of bringing over the young Irishmen of military age, who are not themselves subject to compulsory service, but who, I have no doubt, will be used, when they get over here, by the Director-General of National Service to release men from the factories, men of military age who are subject to compulsory service. That is going to drive a wedge between Ireland and this country. It is going to create a great deal of bad blood, for when once this principle has been conceded the next demand will logically be to have compulsory military service imposed on Ireland.
What is going to be the position of Irishmen who come over under the voluntary scheme to this country provided compulsory industrial service is imposed on this country? Are Irishmen over here going to work under one scheme of National Service, while Englishmen and Scotsmen side by side are going to be subject to quite a different scheme'? That is a point which must appeal to those who are concerned with this thing. The Chief Secretary for Ireland, in reply to a speech I made earlier in the evening said he could not conceive compulsory civil service being imposed on Ireland so long as Ireland did not have compulsory military service. But what is going to happen? We know that the Government are pledged, in the event of failure to find an undefined number of recruits, to bring in compulsory industrial service so far as Britain is concerned. Is Ireland going to go a small part of the way? Is Ireland going to be 876 brought in? If compulsion comes along and Ireland is left out of these arrangements it seems to me best to leave well alone. This scheme of industrial service follows the scheme of military service. Since that does not apply to Ireland this cannot be properly applied to Ireland either— —
Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKERThe hon. Member is going back upon a position that has been already decided. This is only an. Amendment for a second Director-General for Ireland.
§ Mr. ANDERSONI will not follow that any further. I will, in conclusion, say that in this country at any rate, there has been a desire on the part of the Director-General of National Service to get in. touch with opinions in this direction and that, I understand, for example, that this week there is going to be a great trade union congress held and that members are going to be brought up from all parts of the country, at considerable public expense, in order that views may be expressed in regard to this matter by the reports of organised labour. Certainly, I do not object to that in the slightest degree. I think that matters which are vital to labour ought to be discussed by the representatives of organised labour, and I am surprised that the House of Commons is apparently not going to have the same privilege in regard to many points which have been given to the House under this scheme. I would ask what opportunity has been given so far for the representatives of Ireland to express their views in regard to this matter? Has there been any conferences with the Irish representatives? [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Have they been brought over from Ireland in order to express their views? Since the conditions in Ireland,. as the Home Secretary and as everybody knows, are in so many respects different from those in this country, surely it would have been a good thing, if Mr. Neville Chamberlain is prepared, as I believe he is, to modify certain aspects of his scheme in order to meet the desires or fears of organised labour in this country, that before applying his scheme to Ireland, he should have ascertained the opinion of Ireland upon this matter. I believe that is a very important thing, and I am sorry to say that the speech of the Home Secretary does not give us very much light as to how this matter is going to be worked out. Personally, I am con- 877 vinced that the whole scheme is more and more going to become unmanageable, even in this country, and if it is unworkable in this country, it is likely to be far more so as far as Ireland is concerned.
§ Mr. DEVLINI am somewhat surprised at the latter portion of the speech of the hon. Member who has just sat down. He said that he is astonished that Irish Members have not been consulted. He ought to have know by this time, although he has not been so long in the House of Commons, that the Irish Members are never consulted. As I have previously pointed out on another Amendment, if Irish Members do come together and confer in order to render National Service and public service, and make suggestions to the House, those suggestions are turned down specifically because they had come from the Irish Members. I could see the value of the argument that Ireland is not fit to govern herself and ought not to have national responsibilities imposed upon her, if the Chief Secretary, or any governor of Ireland, could have stated at that box to hon. Members, "I have consulted Irish opinion through the only constitutional means, namely, the Irish Members." Never, however, are we consulted about anything. On the contrary, as I told a more or less empty House to-night, we spent over six weeks drafting schemes, and trying to devise plans for better food production in Ireland, and our plans were turned down by the bureaucracy in Ireland. I suppose you are going to set up another under this scheme. The Prime Minister came along weeks afterwards and actually accepted our report word for word, and stated it as his own plan for dealing with food production in this island. The right hon. Gentleman was not quite as skilful as usual in his speech to-night.
§ It being Eleven o'clock, further consideration of the Bill, as amended, stood adjourned.
§ Bill, as amended, to be further considered To-morrow.
878§ The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
§ Whereupon Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 12th February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."
Mr. HAZLETONBefore the House adjourns I would like to ask the Government if they intend to proceed with the National Service Bill To-morrow, or is the original programme to be followed?
§ Lord E. TALBOT (Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury)No; we intend to go on To-morrow with this Bill.