§ Mr. LANSBURY(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Health if his attention has been called to the fact that certain Metropolitan Boards of Guardians have given a number of unemployed men resident in workhouses, and other institutions under their charge, 1186 notice to leave, these notices to expire almost immediately; and whether he is aware that at least 90 per cent, of these men form part of the living wall which divided the British people from their enemies during the late War; that their presence in London is entirely due to their desire to lay their grievances before the Prime Minister and the House of Commons; also that all of them are home-loss and penniless and in many cases are very badly clothed and without boots, except such as are badly in need of repair; and whether, in order to avoid the inevitable hardship and suffering and possible disorder which may follow this action of the guardians, the Minister of Health will exercise the authority vested in him by Statute and issue an Order instructing the guardians concerned to relieve these- men according to law until such time as their place of settlement is determined and their removal to such place of settlement has either been agreed upon or ordered by a Court of law?
§ Sir MONTAGUE BARLOW (for the Minister of Health)My right hon. Friend is aware that in certain cases men have received notices of their discharge from Poor Law institutions in London. The guardians are required by law to relieve destitute persons within their union, but the manner in which relief is to be given is within the discretion of the guardians, and my right hon. Friend has no authority to issue any Order purporting to interfere with such discretion.
§ Mr. LANSBURYThe question does not refer to the method by which relief shall be given, but asks that relief shall be given. The question of how it shall be given is not raised in the question. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Poor Law does not vest in the Minister of Health authority to see that boards of guardians relieve people within their union who are destitute, and, as these men are destitute, I want to know by what authority do the guardians turn them out of the institution?
Viscountess ASTORCannot the Government do something to get these poor misguided men home, and let it be a lesson to those who brought them here?
§ Mr. McENTEEDid not the Prime Minister bring them here?
§ Sir M. BARLOWMay I say, in answer to the hon. Gentleman opposite—and no one can, I suppose, claim to be more familiar with the Poor Law than he— that surely he must be aware of the fact that the Minister of Health is forbidden by law to interfere with the discretion of the guardians in cases like this?
§ Mr. LANSBURYI am sorry I am not allowed to argue this matter, but the question I put to the right hon. Gentleman is this: Is he not aware of the fact that, according to the law, if a board of guardians does not do its duty, then the Minister of Health has authority to compel them to do it?
§ Sir M. BARLOWI am perfectly aware of that. If I may say so, my hon. Friend is rather purposely evading the point. He suggests that the Minister of Health shall interfere, as I understand it, with the discretion of the guardians in particular cases. By law he is expressly forbidden to do that.
§ Mr. LANSBURYAs the right hon. Gentleman seems unable to give a satisfactory answer, I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, "the action of certain boards of guardians in refusing to continue public assistance to a large number of unemployed men who are at present charger able to the Poor Law according to Act of Parliament, and the refusal of the Minister of Health to take such action as would prevent the hardship and suffering, and possibly public disorder, that this action of boards of guardians may involve."
§ Mr. SPEAKEROn the information before me, this is not a question which can come under Standing Order No. 10. It is clear that the guardians, in the first place, have the responsibility. That has been stated and admitted, and a question under the Standing Order can only be raised in regard to a matter of Government responsibility.
§ Mr. LANSBURYMay I very respectfully ask how I can raise the question of the starvation of those men and the responsibility of the Minister of Health, 1188 who is at the head of the Poor Law in this country, and who has tremendous powers over boards of guardians about which there can be no dispute on the other side of the House?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI take it that, if a board of guardians are not carrying out the law, they can be dealt with by the Courts of the Realm.
§ Mr. W. THORNEIn view of the right hon. Gentleman's answer, can he tell the House, in the event of all the Metropolitan boards of guardians turning out all these men whom they have under their charge, and putting them on the streets, since they have no money at all to get them back to their homes, what does he intend to do?
§ Sir M. BARLOWThat is a hypothetical question with which it is rather difficult to deal.
§ Sir M. BARLOWWe have all of us great sympathy with these men—
§ Mr. McENTEEThey cannot live on sympathy. They want food, not sympathy.
§ Sir M. BARLOWMy hon. Friend's question is based on the supposition that certain boards of guardians do certain things. That is a hypothetical suggestion, but I say frankly, in spite of dissent on the other side, that there is real sympathy in all quarters of the House with these men. What I would suggest, if it meets with the approval of the House, is that we undertake to make inquiry into the circumstances, and, if the question is put down again to-morrow or next day, I shall be glad to give the best answer in my power in view of the further suggestions that have been made.
§ Mr. N. MACLEANIs it not the case that the responsibility for seeing that boards of guardians carry out their duties is vested in the Minister of Health, and that, if a board of guardians fails to carry out its duty, then the responsibility must rest upon a Government Department; and does not that, therefore, bring the Motion of the hon. Member for Bow (Mr. Lansbury) within the Standing Order?
§ Mr. LANSBURYThe whole point is that there is a misunderstanding on the part of the right hon. Gentleman who is answering. I am certain that if the Minister of Health had been here he could not possibly have answered as the right hon. Gentleman has done. The Minister of Health continually issues Orders to boards of guardians instructing them what to do, and those Orders we have to carry out. How it can be said that the Minister is not responsible, and his conduct cannot be called in question, is to me quite hopeless. [Interruption.] A number of these men are in London, and there is nowhere for them to go. If they break windows, you will be the first to say that they ought not to do so, but you are driving them to it.
§ Captain ELLIOTIs it not the case that there is a misunderstanding between the Minister and the hon. Member? The hon. Member has put a question asking whether it is proposed to discontinue the relief that is being given to these men, and the right hon. Gentleman has replied that it is in the power of the guardians to give relief in various alternative forms, but he did not answer the specific point raised by the hon. Member, which was whether boards of guardians have the power to discontinue relief. Is it not a case of misunderstanding between the right hon. Gentleman, who is answering for another Department, and the hon. Member for Bow?
§ Sir M. BARLOWThe matter is much too serious a one to have any misunderstanding about. I have already suggested, and I hope the suggestion meets with the approval of the House, that, in view of this possible misunderstanding, my hon. Friend should put his question down again to-morrow or next day. Meanwhile, the facts shall be inquired into, and I hope to give him an answer that will be satisfactory to him.
§ Mr. BROADIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that 160 of these men are to be turned out from Edmonton oh Wednesday?