MENTAL DEFICIENCY AND LUNACY (AMENDMENT) [MONEY.] (Hansard, 25 November 1919)

§ Mr. G. THORNE
Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman kindly give the Committee a little more information than we have in the White Paper?

§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Major Baird)
The difficulty of giving more detailed information arises from the impossibility of making an exact estimate of the number of people who will be affected by our proposal, but such estimates as we have been able to make are contained in the White Paper, and the House will see it is estimated that we shall have to deal with 21,750 cases, at a cost of £60 per annum for each case. The need for this measure cannot be questioned. The strong recom- 1757 mendations of the Royal Commission on whose Report the Act of 1913 was based, have not been carried out on account of lack of money. The treatment of defectives under that Act was placed in the hands of the local authorities, but they were not obliged to do more than was possible with the money at their disposal, half their expenses being paid by the Exchequer and the Exchequer's contribution being limited by Section 47 of the Act to a sum of £250,000 for the whole Kingdom. That meant that in England and Wales the expenditure was not based so much on the number of unfortunate people who ought to be dealt with, not only in their own interests but in the interest of the community at large, but it was limited by the amount of money at the disposal of the authority, and that in turn was limited by the amount which the Exchequer contributed. The removal of the limit will, we hope, enable the local authorities to deal with the situation as it deserves. It will limit their operations not by the amount of money which they happen to be able to raise, but by the number of individuals who require treatment in their area. No arguments will be required to justify that as a proper course to take. The only limit imposed with regard to work of this kind should be the limit of the numbers who happen to be affected. The expense is by no means negligible, but I think it fair to suggest that the State will gain largely by reduction in crime and in other indirect ways through the proper treatment of these unfortunate individuals. I trust the Committee will be satisfied with this explanation supplementing the facts set forth in the White Paper. From the very nature of the case I am afraid it is not possible to give any close estimate of the expenditure. We have given the best estimate we can in the White Paper, but I do urge that the nature of the work for which the money is required should ensure for our proposal the support of all members of the Committee.

§ Colonel GRETTON
The statement of the hon. and gallant Member was that the expenditure is by no means negligible. He told us there were 21,000 cases to be dealt with at a cost of £60 per annum per case. The expenditure involved, therefore, represents over £1,300,000 a year, and certainly that in these days cannot be treated as a negligible sum. No doubt, during the current financial year, while this new arrangement is coming into 1758 operation, the expenditure will be comparatively small, but ultimately it will become a very heavy item if this Bill is passed, and I hope therefore the Committee, if it agrees to the Resolution, will do so with its eyes open to the fact that it involves an addition to the national expenditure of £1,300,000. I should like to ask my hon. and gallant Friend if he can inform the Committee whether this increased charge was taken into account in the Estimates on which the Budget was framed and presented to the House this year. Or is this an addition that will be charged in excess of those Estimates which have already been passed by the House of Commons? I have no recollection of any charge under this head having been suggested, and I am afraid, therefore, this will be a new charge which was not contemplated in the general scheme of finance for this year.

§ Lieut.-Colonel RAW
I should like to give very strong support to this financial proposal. Every Member of this House will recognise that a serious change is necessary in the treatment of defectives in this country. As the law at present stands, the total amount which can be spent now in the aggregate is about £300,000, to which £150,000 only is contributed by the Exchequer. I am sure we all agree that that is absolutely inadequate to deal with the large number of mentally defective at present in Great Britain. When we consider that these mentally defectives are exclusive of the criminal type and those certified as insane, we must see that this expenditure is far the benefit not only of society in general but for those defectives who are suffering from mental incapacity. I am sure the Committee will readily pass any expenditure of a reasonable character which will maintain these unfortunate defective boys, girls, and young people generally, and so, in a great, measure, protect not only society but the sufferers themselves. I feel certain the Committee will give sympathetic consideration to this proposal, which will ultimately affect 21,000 defectives who ought to be protected and properly looked after. In that way society will be protected from these unfortunate people.

§ Mr. G. THORNE
The Committee is entirely in support of the Government in the object they have in view, but manifestly it will involve a considerable responsibility upon the local authorities. I would 1759 ask the Under-Secretary whether the local authorities were communicated with before this measure was introduced in order that they might understand what fresh responsibility will be cast upon their shoulders?

§ Major BAIRD
In reply to the last question, we have been in close communication with the local authorities on the subject. I would thank my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Burton (Colonel Gretton) for having called attention to an omission, for which I apologise, in my speech trying to explain the financial effect of this measure. The expenditure of £1,400,000 is the ultimate expenditure, and of that one-half will be borne by the local authorities. The expenditure which will be borne by the Exchequer this year will be quite small. The plan has not been sufficiently advanced and there are other reasons which will readily occur to hon. Members which make it impossible, with the best will in the 1760 world, to spend this year very much of the money we ask the Committee to sanction. The sum of £1,400,000 is the ultimate expenditure and probably will not fall to be paid for several years to come. That is the limit we foresee.