§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £730,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1924, for Relief arising out of Unemployment, including Grants-in-Aid.
§ Mr. WHEATLEYThe sum mentioned in this Estimate covers work done by a number of Departments. The amount for land improvement and drainage relates to work under the Board of Agriculture, and that for light railways comes under the Ministry of Transport. The sum for women's training comes under the Ministry of Labour, as does the sum for Juvenile Unemployment Centres. If there should be any points arising on these matters the Ministers in charge of the work will give the Com- 1880 mittee any information that is desired. After the discussion we have had on the previous Estimate I hope that we shall get this Vote through. Of the total Estimate, a sum of £335,400 comes directly under the Ministry of Health and is wanted in connection with loans to boards of guardians and distressed local authorities.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI should have thought that we were entitled to a much more detailed explanation of this Vote. The grant in aid of land improvement and drainage comes under the Board of Agriculture; that for light railways under the Ministry of Transport; that for the training of women in domestic work and for the maintenance of Juvenile Unemployment Centres under the Ministry of Labour, while for loans to local authorities there is a very big item which comes under the Ministry of Health. These matters we have not dealt with under the previous Vote. We have here non-revenue producing relief work on which we pay 60 per cent. of the wages. The loans to distressed local authorities for general purposes and the loans to Poor Law authorities in necessitous areas cover a very large sum. Yet my right hon. Friend says that he hopes he will get the Vote now, and that if anybody has any questions to put, the Ministers responsible will answer them. I am not dealing with these matters in any critical spirit.
§ Mr. STEPHENYou are wasting time.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI think that is a very unwarranted remark. I am here trying to see that money for the unemployed is sufficient, and that, if you please, is wasting time. I plead guilty to no other motive. In 1922–23 there was provided for all the purpose I have described a sum of £2,500,000. This year, 1923–24, the sum provided is £2,360,000. Is it a waste of time to point out that; £140,000 less is being provided for these important purposes than was provided last year? I quite understand that these are not my right hon. Friend's own Estimates, but one would have thought that in the provision made for these unhappy men something better could have been done than an Estimate of less than last year. I propose to go on gingering up the Labour party 1881 to something approaching their professions of regard for the unemployed. I am quite prepared to hear that I am wasting time.
§ 8.0 P.M.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODYes, of course; we ken ye.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI think in this varied field of opportunity for finding work, which is far more important than giving money relief, that my right hon. Friend, even in the short time at his disposal since he took office, could have touched up these Estimates so as to provide at least as much as last year. The next thing I have to say is in reference to the form of the Estimates. This is not new at all; it is the common form in every Department, but it is rather bad form in this particular case, and my right hon. Friend here is not to blame for it. If you look at the bottom of page 24 you will see that many things are lumped together under the heading of "Sundry services." They are all put together in footnote (a). Would it not be a very great advantage, instead of lumping all these sundry services together, if we had them all together—land, drainage, afforestation, relief works by public utility companies, work for women, and so on--and if we had a detailed statement under each head, showing what was the original estimate, and what the revised estimate is going to be?
§ Mr. KIRKWOODDo ye no' mind when you were in office yoursel'.
§ The CHAIRMANMay I point out that these unnecessary interruptions are wasting time?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI am not asking my right lion. Friend to tell me these facts to-night; I know he does not know them, but, now that we are dealing with such a large body of classified services, I hope that in next year's Estimates we will have the amounts put down in detail. For instance, no one can tell what the original amount proposed was in regard to land drainage. No one can tell what additional work for land drainage is to be provided out of the total of £680,000. Surely to make this point is not precisely wasting time.
§ Mr. STEPHENWill the right hon. Gentleman tell me why he did not do this, or get this done when he was in the Government himself?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAIt is never too late to mend, and I did not suggest that it was done before. With experience comes wisdom, and that is what the Front Bench is going to find out.
§ Mr. WHEATLEYI am sorry to interrupt, but as I am extremely anxious to get this Vote through before 8.15, I would be very grateful to the Committee if I could get it.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAAnd I will be very glad to oblige. Let me say that I do know some of the details under each of these items. I want to go through these Supplementary Estimates, because I think not enough has been added for the purpose which, I think, we all of us have in view. I take the case of the training of women for domestic service. This year nothing was voted, but the Estimate does not show that. In the year before last, when I was responsible, £50,000 was voted for this purpose. Of that sum, £15,000 was spent last year, and the rest was revoted. There is no original vote this time. There is only £35,000 of a re-vote, but for all we know there might be an enormous sum in addition lumped in this £680,000. I am the last man to wish to delay the right hon. Gentleman in getting his Vote, because I know too much of the anxiety of getting a vote for services like this put through. I would like, however, to refer to some points.
In 1921–22 we voted £336,000 for land drainage and improvement. In 1922–23 we voted £343,000 for this purpose, but it is not in this document. The original grant for this year was brought down to £250,000, I am sorry to say. How much, I would ask, of this £680,000 is in respect to that? The President [...] the Board of Agriculture will tell me, I have no doubt, when the opportunity offers. I heard him tell us of the hardships of the agricultural labourer, particularly in Cheshire. He knows that these men are not covered by the Insurance Act, and the case of these men is harder than a year ago, yet less money is being voted than in the original Estimate. The money which is to he voted for land drainage and improvement must be particularly useful to the agricultural labourer. Then there is the question of afforestation. It is a separate item in this Vote, on page 25, the amount given being £50,000. The total expenditure in 1883 1921–22 was, I think, £162,000. In 1922–23 the total expenditure was cut down to £83,000, and I am sorry for that falling off. This year, as I have said, the original Estimate is £50,000, and it is with great satisfaction I see that this Estimate does show that they are going to double the amount. Why cannot we have the details of all those other things involving far larger sums and which are now unclassified? I make that appeal in no party sense, and I hope we may have, from the Ministers concerned, the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Agriculture, some further details of this Vote.
§ The MINISTER of LABOUR (Mr. T. Shaw)I am glad of the assurance of the right hon. Gentleman who has just spoken that we can look to him for support. We shall shortly, from every Department, put before the House complete schemes, and I am glad to know in advance that we are assured of his kindly help. His speech to-night has been a revelation; his action. when he sees our schemes will, I hope, be equally pleasing. On one point he is quite wrong. The Supplementary Estimates do not contain any money to be devoted to the payment of 60 per cent. wages.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAQuite right. I beg your pardon.
§ Mr. SHAWThe small sums that are d[...]alt with, so far as the training of women and employment of children are concerned, are Supplementary Estimates that are merely carrying us on for the time being, and I can give the right hon. Gentleman my personal assurance that in the near future he is likely to see definite schemes for the employment of young people and for the training of women.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAWhat are to he the sums this year?
§ Mr. SHAWThe sums are, for the women £14,000, and for juveniles £50,000, but these are merely in anticipation of schemes which are to be put before the House.
§ It being a Quarter past Eight of the Clock, further Proceeding was postponed without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 4.