HC Deb 28 January 1929 vol 224 cc699-733

Amendment made: In page 67, line 15, leave out the word "quinquennium" and insert instead thereof the words "fixed grant period."—[Sir K. Wood.]

Consequential Amendment made.


I beg to move, in page 67, to leave out from the word "undertake," in line 29, to the end of line 31, and to insert instead thereof the words: to provide, centrally or locally, services for the welfare of defectives, including the ascertainment, assistance, or supervision of defectives whilst not in institutions. The Sub-section in question provides for the continuance of grants to associations assisting in the work in connection with mental defectives in this country. The Committee probably know of the Central Association for Mental Welfare, to which are affiliated all the voluntary associations in the country dealing with that work. That body was founded in 1913, the same year in which the Mental Deficiency Act was passed, and it has been conducting this work all over the country ever since that date. I have had the privilege of being its chairman from 1913, and the work has been carried out on uniform lines having local associations coterminus in their areas of activity with the areas of the local authorities concerned in the work. Owing to the War intervening, the amount of work that has had to be done by the local associations has very much increased, largely on account of the difficulty of finding money for the local authorities and providing the institutional accommodation which, for many types of defectives, is the best.

The Central Association, in addition to doing a certain amount of work in the direction of supervising and assisting, has also organised many services in connection with mental deficiency, such as training courses for visitors, for institutional superintendents, for doctors, and even to the extent of assisting magistrates in their work; and it has regularly had grants from the Government through the Board of Control, unlimited as to the extent of the services for which the grants are given, under Section 48 of the Act of 1913. That Section is drawn in very general language, which has permitted of the Government giving us assistance for all the various activities which we carry on, although many of those activities are practically speaking self-supporting; there has been no difficulty in connection with Government grants to us on account of any technical limitation in the language of the Section which enables the grants to be made. The Ministry of Health and the Board of Education have both been continuously good to my association, and have spoken of it always in very high terms, on account of the very rigid economy with which the work is done and the efficiency of the services rendered. On behalf of the association I have been very proud to receive those complimentary expressions of opinion.

Under this Clause in the present Bill, some of us feel some doubt as to whether there may not be a limiting interpretation upon this Sub-section (2) which would have the effect of limiting the services for which grants under the Subsection might be given. This is impor- tant because certain, though very few, of the local authorities have taken a narrow view, where they have been in contact with our associations, that it is desirable to limit the work of the voluntary associations to what may be called assistance to the local authorities, excluding that type of mental deficiency work which does not come within the Mental Deficiency Act as work to be done by the local authority. Those who are familiar with the problem know quite well that a very large proportion of the work that is done in this country to-day —the best work—is work which does not come actually within the Act at all, and is, therefore, not within the powers of the local authorities. The grants by the Government have been given largely to assist us in doing that extra-statutory, that non-statutory work. We want to make sure that under this Clause there shall be no limitation upon the character of the work to be done which is to be covered by grants as allowed under this Sub-section.

I hope I have made the point clear to my right hon. Friend who is in charge of the Bill. It is a matter of practical importance. Although I am sure he will not ask me to give the names of the local authorities in question, I could give the names of one or two which definitely take the view that the work of the voluntary associations ought to be limited. That, in my view, is a profound mistake. The country has had very good value, for these small grants to us, out of the voluntary work that is not within the scope of the activities of local authorities. The Committee will observe that the Clause as it is drawn in the Bill lays down that grants may be given under the scheme to voluntary associations which undertake the duty of assisting or supervising defectives whilst not in institutions. Leaving out for the moment the word "assisting," and dealing with the question of supervising, supervising is a statutory duty imposed by Section 30 of the Act of 1913 upon local authorities in respect of defectives who are liable to be dealt with under the Act. They come into different categories, such as those who have committed crimes, those who are in want, and so on. That is a purely statutory function. "Assistance" is a wide general word describing what is not in itself a statutory func- tion, but it does not cover the whole work, or may not cover the whole work, that is done by the voluntary associations. For that reason I have suggested in my Amendment the substitution of the words: to provide, centrally or locally, services for the welfare of defectives, including the ascertainment, assistance, or supervision of detectives whilst not in institutions. I realise, as we all realise, that the results of this Measure in the future will depend very largely upon the way in which it is worked both by the central authority and by the local authorities, and comparatively little on the precise legal signification of the words of the Section, because there is very little ground for thinking that it will often occur that the test of the law court will have to be applied to the Measure. Therefore, it may be that we should be safe in accepting the: wording of Subsection (2) as it stands if we can get a perfectly definite assurance across the Floor of the Committee from the Minister in charge that, under the Bill when it becomes an Act, there will be the same elasticity in the grants to the voluntary associations, central and local, as there is to-day. I am satisfied that nothing could be better than the way in which the work is carried on if we can get a perfectly definite assurance that there will be no limitation in the future, in which case I, speaking for the moment as a lawyer, would be willing to rest on the word "assisting" as sufficient to indicate under the Section that it is not intended in any way to limit the grants to work done by way of assistance to local authorities as distinct from work which is outside the scope of the activities of the local authorities under the Act of 1913; but, unless the. Ministry have a definite objection to putting in these words, I certainly, both as a lawyer and as a person who since 1913 has had the privilege of being at the head of these organisations which have worked so well, would very much prefer to see these words inserted.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip)

No one has a better right than my right hon. and learned Friend to present the views or the fears which he has expressed. His record and his interest in the matter abundantly qualify him to ask for the assurance which I am glad to be able to give him. He is aware that the Sub-section in question has been drafted strictly in accordance with the terms of Section 48, which is the existing statutory authority for the payment of the sums which the central association, of which he is chairman, has been in the habit of receiving. The Clause has been drafted not with the least intention of altering the scope of the work that can be done and in respect of which the grant is to be paid, but merely for the purpose of ensuring that the payment will in future be made not by the Minister but by the Council. The statutory duties that are performed by the local authority under Section 30 of the Act of 1913 -will continue to be performed by the local authority directly or through voluntary agencies, and when voluntary agency is used the payment to be made for services rendered to the local authority is a matter of mutual arrangement. But so far as the payments are concerned which have been made hitherto under Section 48, they will now be made under Clause 84 (2) of the Bill and I shall give in the most explicit terms the assurance my right hon. Friend desires and, on the whole, I think it is better that the Clause which has now to be put into the Bill should follow strictly the language of the Section which my right hon. Friend has been able to say has allowed the system to work with smoothness and with satisfaction to those concerned.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Consequential Amendment made.


I beg to move, in page 67, line 40, at the end, to add the words: (4) The Minister shall, before the beginning of each fixed grant period, make a scheme providing for the payment by councils of counties and county boroughs of such amount as may be specified in the scheme to the central council of an approved organisation which provides services, in the nature of general publicity and educational propaganda, in furtherance of the prevention and treatment of venereal disease. 9.0.p.m.

I regret very much indeed that it is necessary to move an Amendment of this description. I am a fairly wholehearted believer in the Bill as a whole, and I am convinced that, except in this one case, the voluntary associations gain undoubtedly by the Bill and by the concessions that have been made. Why it was necessary to take a course which will destroy to a very large extent the activity of one of the voluntary associations which has done a very large amount of work in connection with the public health of the country I do not know, because the work that has been done by the British Social Hygiene Council is work that has been recognised not only by the Government but also very definitely by the Royal Commission upon Venereal Disease, and it is work which has been carried out, at any rate since 1916 when this burden was cast upon it, with expressed satisfaction from the Minister. The position is a somewhat peculiar one and is quite different in one sense from any of the other matters that are dealt with in this or any of the Clauses dealing with voluntary associations. The treatment of venereal disease is not a thing which local councils find it popular to advertise. It is not a thing that makes an opportunity for the making of sentimental speeches or getting support on those grounds, but it. has been realised with increasing force of late years that the effective treatment of venereal disease and, what is infinitely more important, its prevention, by social propaganda is one of the most important of the works in connection with health service. While other health services have been strengthened, in my opinion, under this Bill this is a respect in which a good many of them are being seriously endangered. The services in connection with maternity and child welfare, mental defectives and the blind will be materially affected if anything is done that diminishes the efficiency of the measures that are take on for the prevention of the curative treatment of venereal disease. The work of treatment is carried on under the Venereal Disease "Regulations of 1916 through clinics established by the local authorities. The Royal Commission reported in that year that an essential part of the work of those clinics was the work of propaganda, the work of disseminating knowledge both as to the circumstances under which venereal disease was acquired and as to the absolute necessity of immediate treatment and, in addition to that, the dissemination of knowledge as to the effects and consequences not only upon the generation which acquires the disease but on the generations that come after. Not only that nut, having regard to the fact that this was very definitely a hidden scourge, the Royal Commission recognised that the only effective way of carrying out treatment was that there should be such publicity as would leave no ground and no room for ignorance on the part of the population. The Royal Commission has definitely said: We recognise that the measures that we propose will need for success more than legislative and administrative measures taken by the Government. Continuous and consistent efforts will be required to keep the complex question of combating venereal disease before the public mind and to secure the constant assistance of the voluntary agencies concerned in prevention and rescue work. They add: We hope that the National Council"— that is the predecessor of the present Hygiene Council— established with this object will become a permanent and an authoritative body and will keep on spreading knowledge and giving advice in regard to this question in its varied shapes and that it will be recognised as such by the Government. Following upon that Commission the Council was recognised, and from time to time grants have been made for the publicity and propaganda work which that Council has carried on. In the first place, one part of the work has been to stimulate local authorities to carry on propaganda and publicity within their own areas, but it has always been recognised that publicity and propaganda work within a council's own area cannot be carried on effectively without the assistance and co-operation of a central and a national body. The Royal Commission saw that this was a national matter and that the national Press as a whole was the place in which to secure the greatest publicity in this respect. How has the work been done? In the first place, the Royal Commission recognised that knowledge could not be disseminated without appropriate literature. They recognised that the literature must be very carefully supervised. If there is no supervision of literature concerning a matter of this kind, there is the grave danger that it will be used, subtly, to provoke immorality rather than repress it. There is also the danger that it will lead to inadequate treatment and an inadequate understanding of the position. The Royal Commission sug- gested that literature dealing with these questions should require the imprimatur of some national body, and the body which was designated by them was the National Council for Combating Venereal Disease.

Apart from all that work, other educative work has to be undertaken. It can be undertaken, for example, by films and there is no doubt that a very large amount of work has been carried on by that means. There is very clear proof that wherever these films have been exhibited there has been at once a definite increase in the amount of advantage taken of the clinics provided. That does not indicate any growth of the disease; it indicates the thing which is really required, namely, that people suffering from the disease should place themselves under proper treatment. It is impossible for local authorities to organise film production. This can only be done by a central body which is able to rely upon sufficient support to make it possible to get somewhere near to the class of production and exhibition of films required. It calls for expert personnel and the films must be shown in a proper way and to the proper people. Shown indiscriminately, films of that kind may do much more harm than good.

Then, again lectures must be supervised by a central body. It is idle to think that a local authority can ask this or that person to lecture on a subject of this kind. There must be definite central supervision of the people who lecture. Furthermore, a central body can get together, as the British Social Hygiene Council has got together, a number of people who will voluntarily engage in this work. I have already mentioned publicity in the national Press. There the British Social Hygiene Council has been able to undertake work which no local authority could do, namely, the work of inserting discreet advertisements, intended for people who might be disposed to seek advice about matters of this kind. That is beyond the power of a local authority. Up to a comparatively recent date about 105,000 replies had been received to the advertisements of that character issued by the British Social Hygiene Council. In all cases where the person answering an advertisement was seeking advice, he or she was referred to the local clinic. The secrecy, which is not violated by those carrying on the clinics, has been pointed out to the person answering the advertisement and, I think I am right in saying that, calculating on the attendances at clinics up to the end of 1926, it was found that 13 per cent. of those seeking curative treatment were induced to do so by advertisements issued under the auspices of the British Social Hygiene Council.

There is another matter in connection with publicity which is of great importance. One of the troubles with all the clinics is that, unless the matter is kept continually before the public, people attend the clinic for a time and then drop off their attendances. It has been found that in every case where there has been active and continuous propaganda the percentage of attendances per case has risen, and there has been something like that continuous attendance which is so necessary. For example, in one county with over 320,000 inhabitants, where there was no propaganda, the attendances per head per new case were only 16.3; in another county with a population of 262,000, where there has been propaganda, the attendances per head per new case have been 31.1. In London, where there is continuous propaganda, the attendances are 42 per head per new case; and in other towns where there is no propaganda the figure is 18.9. It has also been found that wherever a film has been shown there has been, immediately, a very large increase in the number seeking the assistance of the clinics. Not only that, but they have been making the proper attendances which is of vital importance.

Within the last few weeks we have taken the trouble to inquire from a number of medical officers of health about this matter. They all state definitely that they consider public enlightenment on the subject of venereal disease to be essential in order to bring persons under treatment. One point in that connection is not without importance. This is not the sort of propaganda which can be indulged in for a shorter or a longer period and then left aside altogether. It has to be continuous. The age at which this disease is acquired in the main is from 19 years to 22 years. It is essential when dealing with young people who are in this grave danger—and it is a grave danger to the community—that propaganda should be continuous. These medical officers were unanimous in stating that no local authority could have a proper film equipment, and all but one considered that no local authority could carry on a national Press propaganda. They were unanimous in the view that no local authority would contribute to a central fund unless the contributions were made compulsory, and to that point I shall refer more definitely later.

What has been the position? It has been said that local authorities ought to do propaganda for themselves, and that they can perfectly well do so; and it has even been suggested that they are now budgeting for fairly large sums to spend on prapaganda. That is no new feature. As a matter of fact, the amount which the local authorities have budgeted for propaganda has been shown to have a direct relation to the amount granted by the Ministry to the central body. When the Ministry granted to the central body £20,000, the local authorities spent £10,000; when the Ministry granted £9,000, the local authorities spent £6,000, and when the Ministry granted £8,000, the local authorities spent £5,000. Of the amount which the local authorities spent, the greater part was spent in association and in co-operation with the central authority, because a great deal of it was spent in taking advantage of the supply of lecturers which the central authority were able to give, of the films which the central authority were able to produce, and of the literature. Last year the local authorities spent on propaganda £5,500. Every penny of that amount was spent, directly or indirectly, in conjunction with the Council, except a sum of £384, which was spent on local propaganda without the cognisance of the Council. Therefore, when it is said that the local authorities are budgeting for a particular amount in any one year, it is clear and it is understood that the amount for which they are budgeting will be or would be spent in conjunction with the facilities for propaganda which are supplied by the central body.

There is one branch of the work of the central authority which does not seem to have received quite adequate attention at the hands of the Ministry. When it is said that local authorities are carrying out propaganda, it must not be forgotten that in many cases they have only carried out local propaganda because they have been stimulated to it by the central body. I could give instance after instance. I will not give the names of authorities, but I could give the names, if necessary. I might, for example, point out that one local authority which to-day is carrying out work of propaganda required eight years of work by the British Social Hygiene Council before it could be induced to carry out a little bit of propaganda of its own. One county, during 10 years, was visited by representatives of the Council on seventeen occasions, on eight of which meetings were addressed which had been arranged in co-operation with local voluntary associations. Then, a branch of the British Social Hygiene Council was formed and, at last, after all that attention had been given to it, the local authority proceeded to bring out a scheme of propaganda but in order to carry it out they had to go for assistance to the British Social Hygiene Council, which had stimulated the work.

Although the Royal Commission recognised that work of a propaganda character was absolutely essential, there are still, out of 146 bodies responsible for the work or treatment, 30 counties and 24 county boroughs in which no work of propaganda of any kind has been carried out during the last five years. When one realises that you cannot carry out treatment of this kind effectively unless there is propaganda, it follows that there are 54 counties and county boroughs which have shown continuous neglect of their duty during the last five years. It may be said: "The central body has not induced them." No, but the central body has induced the remainder. It has induced 92 of the county and county borough authorities to carry out their work, and in the course of time if it carries on the same work which it has carried on up to now, it will induce the other 54. If you will remove the body which has taken the lead in bringing about this propaganda, the chances are that these 54 districts will remain in the abysmal ignorance in which their councils at present leave them.

What is the position in regard to this matter? It has been suggested, more or less recently, that this should be left entirely to the local authorities. What has been the result? I believe a calculation was made that the cost of propaganda, local and Imperial, was somewhere about £l per 5,000 of the population. It was suggested that of that amount, 15s. per 1,000 would be right to be spent locally, and 5s. per 1,000 should be given in the way of a grant to the central body by the local authority. In order to get the local authorities to do that, the 75 per cent. grant was applied to propaganda as well as to treatment. What has been the result? In the first year that the scheme was in operation, instead of £9,000 being sent to the central body, which would have been the result had 5s. per 1,000 been sent, £1,248 was sent, not because the local authorities did not take advantage of the work which is done by the central body, not because they did not regard it as being important— the replies we have from the medical officers of health, and our own knowledge, show that they take full advantage of it and appreciate what is done—but simply because local authority "A" says, "We are not going to send £250, when local authority 'B' takes exactly the same advantage of what the central body does, and sends nothing at all to it."

It is obvious that unless we have an equitable scheme we shall not get a real contribution from the local authorities. The Amendment which I have put down enables the Minister to make a scheme which would provide for this contribution based upon 5s. per 1,000 of the population. I realise, and those who are associated with me in this matter realise, that it is not a very easy principle to force a particular contribution upon a local authority. If that be so, some other means must be taken. The only suggestion which has been made to meet the position has been the suggestion that, instead of the Amendment which we have put down to Clause 84, it will be sufficient to accept the New Clause which the Minister has put down to follow Clause 85. As first indicated to me, that Clause contained nothing at all that could help the voluntary associations which are concerned with venereal disease, and for this reason, that it was merely a Clause suggesting that the local authority might apply to the Minister to give a contribution, and then deduct that from their grant.

The local authorities have shown already that without compulsion, which makes the thing fair all round, they will not give a voluntary contribution. Are they, therefore, going to be induced to do it when they are told: "You can make application, but if you do so, it will reduce the block grant which is sent to you." It seems to me that that is rather an idle way of dealing with the matter. I find that, as now put down, the New Clause is framed in such a way as to indicate the sort of service in respect of which these contributions may be expected. The Minister has included in his Clause the words: Services relating to maternity and child welfare, lunacy, mental deficiency, and the welfare of the blind. Any local authority reading that Clause would say: "These are the things which the Ministry are aiming at; therefore they are not aiming at venereal disease." That makes the Clause still worse, and it is certainly no alternative unless you make it a fair one by requiring a local authority to do this. I do not know whether the Minister thinks that he might be able to deal with the question by inserting some words which would include venereal disease in Clause 86. It might be that he would be able to deal with it by bringing it under the efficiency scheme. If he can assure me that that is the case and that that would deal with the contribution to the central authority, then, speaking for myself, and I think for those associated with me also, we should be content with something of that kind, but to leave it as he has done at the present time—that it is the one case where so far from helping the central body he is seeking to destroy whatever influence it may have on the treatment of this vile disease—is, in my submission, something which is not only entirely unnecessary, but which is a very serious blot on the Bill that can only be removed by putting an association, which is doing so much preventive work in connection with this terrible peril, in the same position of strength as he has put the other voluntary associations which are dealing with matters of public health.


The hon. and learned Gentleman has, with his usual fairness and power, presented the case for this Amendment. He proposes that at the beginning of each fixed grant period the Minister shall make a scheme providing for the payment by councils of counties and county boroughs of such amount as may be specified in the scheme to the central council of an approved organisation which provides services in the nature of general publicity and education propaganda in furtherance of the prevention and treatment of venereal disease. In other words, he is seeking— following, I suppose, the precedent which has already been established in relation to the maternity and child welfare service—to secure that the local authorities shall be obliged to pay an annual contribution to the British Social Hygiene Council or some corresponding body. I want at once to say, on behalf of my right hon. Friend, that, so far as this council is concerned, he shares with the hon. and learned Gentleman the feeling of appreciation of its work. Undoubtedly, the council has done very good service, and no one to-night desires to decry in any way the excellent work that it has done, particularly in the days when that kind of work was much more unpopular than it is to-day and when local councils were not playing that part which they are playing to-day.

Having said that, we must, on the other hand, look at the position so far as the local authorities are concerned, and, while endeavouring to appreciate the work that the council is doing, at the same time have regard to the undoubtedly increasing number of steps which are being taken and increasing work which the local authorities are themselves now carrying out in connection with (he stamping out of this very unfortunate disease. I can say without exaggeration that to a very large extent the work of the local authorities in connection with this disease is in full swing. The local authorities are to a very large extent—the great majority of them—alive to the imports ance of dealing with this matter. [HON. MEMBERS: "Not one-third."] That is a great advance; it is a large majority; two-thirds. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I will amend what I said, but it, at any rate, shows that two-thirds of them are actively engaged in this work. During the present year some £7,500 will be spent by local authorities. What is the position in a proposition of this kind? The position is that the Public Health Act of 1925 conferred on local authorities the power to undertake measures of propaganda and education, and many authorities have desired to include venereal disease as one of the subjects in their general scheme of health propaganda. I think there is a great distinction to be made between the position of voluntary agencies who are carrying out maternity and child welfare work— actually having homes—and that kind of work and purely propaganda work as carried on by this institution. After all, responsibilities, and increasing responsibilities, as a result of these proposals for health services, rest with the local authorities, and we have an additional provision, as regards local authorities who are not doing that work, under Clause 86.

Therefore, I say, in the first place, you have local authorities to a large extent carrying on the work; secondly, that power has been given under the Act I have already cited; thirdly, that you have their responsibilities made still greater under the proposals in this Measure; and fourthly, if they are not carrying out their work in that connection, you have the operation of Clause 86. I say to the Committee without hesitation that I think local authorities would strongly resent being obliged, as the hon. and learned Gentleman is seeking to make them obliged, to contribute towards the expenses of a body that they might or might not care to employ and whose methods they might or might not approve. It is a different matter altogether, when you come to propaganda and films and methods of that kind, from maternity and child welfare work, and I think it is a very strong demand to say that the local authorities must be compelled to contribute to this kind of propaganda work by an organisation, however good, which, on the other hand, they may not desire to use, and, secondly, when they might not approve of the exact methods of propaganda that are being employed in this connection.

My answer to the hon. and learned Member is this: I see no reason why the work of this council should not continue in conjunction with the work of local authorities, but there is considerable objection to giving this compulsory power to the Minister of Health and compelling them to contribute. I think that is going to an extreme length. We are proposing in the new Clause standing in the name of my right hon. Friend to give power to the Minister to pay a contribution to voluntary associations out of the sums payable out of the general Exchequer grant. What my right hon. Friend has in mind is this: that, in the course of a communication he will have to make to local authorities when this Bill becomes law, he should point out that under this particular Clause they are able to make a contribution to this particular work if they so desire, and if they intimate to him that they desire to make such a contribution that he himself should make a payment out of the general Exchequer grant in order to help this council and obviate the necessity of their having to go round collecting considerable sums of money from various local authorities.


Did not the Minister in both the years when the contribution was taken from local authorities make exactly the same representations that the Parliamentary Secretary suggests he should make now, and that there was a reduction of £400 in the contribution of £1,200.


That may be the case. I want, however, to make my point plain. After all, the main object is to get on with this work, and if local authorities are themselves spending money in this connection you must not expect them to make a contribution of the same amount to this particular Council. It does not show that there is any desire on the part of local authorities to avoid this kind of work, but rather that they are undertaking it themselves. My right hon. Friend suggests that he should make this communication to local authorities to which I have referred with the view of obtaining their authorisation for some contribution to be made in this way, thus avoiding a great deal of work on the part of the Council themselves in collecting the money. The reason why the words "venereal disease" are not mentioned in the Clause is because they come under the statutory definition in the Bill. That is perfectly plain, and there need be no doubt about it.

The real issue before the Committee is this: Is it right, in connection with propaganda and education work of this kind, to make it obligatory upon local authorities to contribute to the work of this association when they themselves may not utilise the association at all and when the propaganda may be of such a kind that they do not approve? The question is whether in those circumstances it is right that the Minister should be given the power to say to local authorities that they must pay this contribution to this particular council. That power is very drastic and perhaps can be defended in some connections it can be defended in connection with maternity and child welfare, but I can understand the objections which local authorities might take on the ground that they are the people to conduct their health services and to determine what should be done. But if it can be defended in the case of maternity and child welfare it is a different matter to give power to the Minister of Health, however capable and competent he may be, to insist that local authorities should contribute, whether they like it or not, to the propaganda efforts of a particular council whose services they may not even utilise. For that reason my right hon. Friend feels unable to go further than he has indicated in his efforts to help this particular association.


The Parliamentary Secretary has not put the issue quite fairly in the last few sentences of his speech. The real issue is whether this work can be done locally or whether it should not be done nationally, and it is because some of us think that behind all the local work there must be an organisation pursuing this propaganda on a national scale that we support the Amendment and ask the Minister to consider very carefully whether he cannot meet us in this matter. I want to emphasise particularly this point. The support for this proposal, or some modified proposal, is not a party support; it comes from all sections of the House. It is not one to destroy the Bill. Some of us on this side of the House strongly disapprove of the Bill, but many hon. Members opposite are strong supporters of the Measure. Nevertheless, we believe that this Amendment will not destroy the Bill, but will strengthen it in so far as it will make it better in this respect. Not only is it not a party support, but it is a support which does not divide the House upon matters which have hitherto divided the House on the question of venereal disease. The right hon. Gentle- man will remember that early last year a proposal was brought forward on behalf of the City of Edinburgh for an alteration of some of the existing regulations with regard to venereal disease. It divided this House, and I found myself on that occasion supporting the Minister, or, strictly speaking, the Scottish Board of Health supported me in opposing that proposal. Those who took one view on that occasion and those who took the opposite view that day are united now on this occasion in pressing the Minister to reconsider his attitude in this matter.

The position as I see it is this: The Bill is inimical to the treatment of venereal disease. The particular point we are discussing on this Amendment does not stand alone. The percentage grant for venereal disease has been fixed very much higher than it has in any other matter because of the necessity, which was discovered, for giving every encouragement to local authorities to prosecute this campaign. Whereas for other purposes it reaches 50 per cent., it has hitherto been 75 per cent. The Exchequer pays £3 for every £l paid by local authorities in the matter of the treatment and prevention of venereal disease. The Bill removes all that and substitutes the block grant. Therefore, on that ground alone it will be open to say that this Bill is certainly taking a step that many of us think is very dangerous. But that is not the subject of discussion at the moment. It is open to the Minister to defend his block grant. But why should the Bill go further and in this other question, in which the principles of the Bill are not concerned, not be prepared to meet us? It is not as if the proposal to support this national organisation stood on our recommendation alone. It stands upon the recommendation of a Royal Commission which went fully into the matter and gave us a definite decision, not that it should be originally and for a limited time a national organisation, as we should rather imagine from the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary, but stated definitely: We hope that the National Council established for this object will become a permanent and authoritative body in spreading knowledge and giving advice with regard to this question in its varying aspects, and that it will be recognised as such by the Government. If we take what the Parliamentary Secretary said, we might imagine that it was desirable to form this body in order to start the campaign, and that after the campaign had been set going it would be adequate to leave the matter to the local authorities. That was not the view of the Royal Commission at the time, as I have shown. Beyond that, I think that there are good grounds for holding that this must be a permanent and national organisation in order that the campaign may be continued. The Parliamentary Secretary attempted to argue that it was not necessary because many local authorities were now spending money on this question. Yet it is true that 60 out of 164, or something like two-fifths of the local bodies, are spending no money at all. We say that it is necessary to have a national organisation in order to stimulate the local authorities into taking this question seriously. It is a very grave matter that two-fifths of the local authorities are doing nothing, in spite of the encouragement that they receive at present from the National Exchequer, to stamp out this terrible disease.

But that is not all. It is only in the case of doing anything that there are as many as 90 out of 154 who are acting at all. In the matter of propaganda there are very much fewer. It is true that today a few of these authorities—I do not think the Parliamentary Secretary gave the number—are putting up a certain amount of money for local propaganda That is not enough. It is essential that such propaganda shall be national and shall be spread over the whole of the country, and that unless it is so spread a great deal of the effort that is being made by certain of these authorities is being wasted. You cannot set up barriers in, this matter, and persons will travel across frontiers and spread the disease into other localities. We feel that responsible opinion up and down the country is with us. It is imperative that the national organisation which exists should be maintained, and if this Bill acts in a way that is detrimental to the continuance of national propaganda, it strikes a very severe blow at the health of the people. We hope that even now, or between now and the Report stage, the Minister will reconsider his position and do something to meet us in the matter.


The gist of the Parliamentary Secretary's reply, as I understood it, was that it was no good to expect local authorities to contribute to funds when they might or might not approve, and that they might object to the making of payments to one specified council for propaganda. Those arguments do not seem to me to be well founded. If there is any disease in the world in regard to which national and continual propaganda and fairly expensive propaganda is required, it is this disease. Moreover, counties might be able to afford the kind of propaganda that is most valuable, through cinemas and the like, but there are not many county boroughs which could afford to keep plant idle for certain periods of the year, as it necessarily would be. Now that we have that kind of publicity so ready to our hands, the best use to make of it is to spread the knowledge as widely as possible up and down the country. That is why we should be on better ground if we attempted something like the proposal that is made in the Amendment. The wording of the Amendment would safeguard the Minister's position vis-a-vis the local authorities. If he found that during one fixed grant period certain authorities were able to afford to do all that they required, then they could be excluded presumably from the scheme on a future occasion. The fact that the Amendment speaks of an approved organisation gives the Ministry a means of seeing that the council concerned carries out the right kind of propaganda, and of such propaganda no local authority could reasonably be expected to disapprove. The words "approved organisation" enable the Minister to see that the methods of propaganda are really up-to-date and are on proper and economic lines. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will take account of the great feeling that there is in the matter and see whether he cannot reconsider it before the next stage of the Bill.


I support the Amendment. The time has come for a national propaganda which rests upon the various local authorities of the country. The case has been overwhelmingly argued that nothing less than some kind of national authority can get this particular piece of work done. The Parliamentary Secretary has admitted that without the assistance of this particular national organisation the work that is being done to-day by the local authorities would not be done, and we should not be in our present national position. The right hon. Gentleman put forward the view that he could not place this particular propaganda work on the same level as the maternity and child welfare service because it was different. Of course it is different. But its aim is precisely the same. The propaganda work is essentially aimed at preventing the disease from occurring. It is work of prevention in exactly the same sense as maternity and child welfare work, and from that point of view, as a great preventive work, it has the same claims upon us as the maternity and child welfare service.

10.0 p.m.

I wish it were possible to present to the Committee a photographic representation of the present incidence of this group of diseases. I think the right hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health is exaggerating in a very dangerous form the efficiency of propaganda work through local councils or the national council. There are all manner of quack agencies at work. We have to deal with delicate religious and psychological attitudes of mind. There is an overwhelming need that there should be gathered together great organisations of workers to carry this work a great deal further. No local authority, however well disposed, can possibly undertake this work. If we do not get the substance of this Amendment carried, we shall be thrown back on the educational and propaganda efforts of the local authorities concerned. At this time, confronted as we are with a problem of very great importance, it is much too early to pluck out this lynch-pin of national propaganda by undermining the whole financial basis which has been built up in the last few years. On all these grounds, I appeal to the Minister to consider this Amendment. We are not necessarily asking that this particular national organisation should be further charged with the responsibility. The Minister himself and his department might undertake the work. Why does the Minister not take it on?

Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE

I beg to support the Amendment. I take up this attitude with the greatest reluctance and after the most sincere and continuous study of the Bill. I feel as a matter of conscience that I am bound to do so. The situation has not been met by the Parliamentary Secretary not by anything which I have heard from those connected with the Ministry of Health. I hope it may be recognised that there is a strong feeling on this subject. One does not like to take up a position of superiority; but I cannot help feeling that the attitude which has been taken up by the right hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health is that of one who has struggled to learn the subject without having had great experience of it. The right hon. Gentleman says that this propaganda can now be undertaken by the local authority. Look at the money which has been expended on propaganda and publicity in connection with this subject last year. In England and Wales the amount in question was £5,579 spent on this publicity by local authorities in connection with venereal disease.


Where do you get the figures from?

Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE

Those figures come from my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Norwood (Sir W. Greaves-Lord), who is accustomed to exercising the greatest care in studying his briefs. Out of that money there were direct payments to the British Social Hygiene Council, in respect to personnel and equipment supplied, of £3,094. The local expenses in connection with council campaigns were approximately £770, and the only expenditure on the propaganda independent of the council was £.384. It is quite clear to my mind that if those figures of my hon. and learned Friend are correct and not grossly exaggerated, the work of propaganda of the local authorities really depends upon this council. This council has come into being as being the most central, as being what was called by an hon. Member opposite the lynch-pin, recommended by the Royal Commission, and adopted by the then Government when the whole machinery was being set up. Look back to that time. There was no machinery for dealing with this disease at all. The matter was taboo. It was not even mentioned in the reports of the medical officers of health, and not a single individual in those days dared even mention it in this House.

The Royal Commission recommended that it should be dealt with, and the whole scheme got up by that Commission hung upon this body that was to be founded. The body was founded, with the co-operation and collaboration of public men of experience on every side, men who have come back from being Governors in outer parts of the Empire and ex-Ministers of the Crown. We still hear that two-thirds of the local authorities have got some kind of publicity, for which they still depend on this Social Hygiene Council, which through its various emissaries, lectures, and publicity of one kind or another arouses the interest of the local councils and sooner or later gets to work. If that has been the way in which we have had to work so far, and the work, although it has extended nominally to two-thirds of the local authorities, has really touched only about one-third or one quarter of the land, if you come to analyse the population, it has not really got down to the actual individual conscience of the whole population. It is a most difficult thing to say you are going to pluck this matter up by the roots or to leave it to itself.

It is possible that the apologists for the Bill as it stands may say they are not interfering with the British Social Hygiene Council, and that if the Council is really worth its salt it will still attract the contributions of the charitable and so on. But that is not the case. Indeed, the Minister of Health has himself said, again and again, that the maternity and child welfare and other services attract any amount of attention and sympathy, but that he is concerned for such services as mental welfare and venereal disease, because they are the unpopular services. If you are going to take away, suddenly, the main source of supply of the British Social Hygiene Council, you are going to allow everybody to say that the Government have finished supporting it. The local authorities will say, "The Government no longer feel strongly about it; see what the Parliamentary Secretary said in the House of Commons. The Government do not feel it necessary to press us, and, therefore, as we have to economise, we will economise on this subject and leave it to charitable subscriptions."

Those of us who have had to deal with voluntary societies and propaganda in the past know quite well that that is the way in which an unpopular movement fades away, and that is what will happen unless we get further powers in this connection. We have with difficulty, in the course of 12 to 16 years, built up a machinery that the Minister says is unpopular, and against the wishes of the public generally we have got it to this stage, but if we relax the grip for one moment, down it will go. Within 10 years, instead of it going ahead and spreading, as the Parliamentary Secretary said it would, it will gradually disappear, and the whole movement will be destroyed. Some of us will struggle on still for it, but it is impossible to expect it to go on spreading in the way that it should spread if we leave it to the option of the local authorities. I yield to none in my wish to give the local authorities freedom, and not to apply compulsion in things to which they object. The Parliamentary Secretary suggested that we should not compel them to subscribe to a society to whose methods they might object, but I think that point has been well dealt with by an hon. Friend behind me, because obviously that would depend upon the Minister's authorising it. He would not authorise anything to which he objected, and if he did not object, no local authority would have the bad taste to object either. Why, then, should we have this discrimination between the other parties to Clause 84, which is an ordinary method of dealing with the blind, with mental -welfare and tuberculous patients? Why not do exactly the same with this disease? We use the precedent of the Clause in other matters, and we ask that the same machinery for venereal disease, for the unpopular service, should be used. We cannot see why that should be left out. I see no result, practically or theoretically, but a great disaster if this Bill goes through as it is and we are not given some kind of reconsideration of the Clause in the direction desired by the Amendment.


I also, like the hon. and gallant Member for St. Albans (Lieut.-Colonel Fremantle), support the Amendment with considerable reluctance, but not for the same reason that he advanced. He was reluctant to oppose any part of the Bill, but I am reluctant to support the Amendment because I feel the force of the arguments advanced by the Parliamentary Secretary that we should not be willing to put any kind of compulsion on the local authorities. It is very well that we should be reluctant to do that, but we have to remember that in other parts of the Bill the Government have not shown the same tenderness for local authorities and have been quite ready to impose compulsion when they thought it was right. It is merely a matter of the comparative importance of the particular subject with which we are dealing to say whether or not it is an appropriate subject for compulsion. The reason why it is a proper subject for compulsion is very largely the reason given by the Parliamentary Secretary himself, namely, that it is an unpopular subject. If this were something on which one could raise a great wave of popular enthusiasm, there would be no need of machinery for propaganda, but by experience it has been proved to be the most difficult thing in the world to get this propaganda done on a proper scale, and because of that we have to employ compulsion of some kind.

The matter can be reduced to a comparatively small number of questions. First, is this propaganda really necessary? Everybody admits that it is necessary in the interests of public health. Secondly, if it is necessary, can it best be done by some kind of central body? Everybody admits, as far as I can make out, that it is best done by a central body. If you want a central body, is there any alternative to the Council which we are supporting? There may be some such alternative, but we have not had one suggested, and at any rate here is the body that is there and is functioning, and it can only function if it is given the kind of support that is embodied in this Amendment. Because the answer to those questions seems to me to be so simple, so inevitable, I feel that support ought to be given from all sides of the Committee to this Amendment to-night. If something of this kind is not carried, the progress which has been slowly and painfully won in this difficult field over so many years will be given away for once and for all, and the whole matter will have to be started again. I therefore humbly beg to support the Amendment.


This Amendment, I admit at once, has received very weighty support, and I confess that I find myself opposing it with very considerable reluctance, partly because i value very much the work that has been done by the British Social Hygiene Council, work in which I have in the past taken considerable interest myself, and partly because I admire the devotion with which my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Norwood (Sir W. Greaves-Lord) has thrown himself into a business which is certainly not of a particularly popular character. He has done that out of a sense of public spirit, and he comes therefore to plead his cause with the additional prejudice in his favour which we must all give to a man who is doing such public service. I want the Committee to consider this matter very carefully. I agree that this is not in any way a party question, and that it is a question which involves no vital principle in the Bill. From these points of view, therefore, it would be easy for me to say that I would abide by what is obviously the desire of hon. Members, and have this passed by the Committee. But I would like to try to put to the Committee considerations that have been in my mind when I have been thinking over these matters. I have given a good deal of thought to this particular question, for I knew some time ago what were the apprehensions of the British Social Hygiene Council, and, sympathising with those apprehensions, I did try to see how far it would be possible for me to meet them.

The history of this question is very much to the point. Quotations have been made from the Report of the Royal Commission. The Commission did, of course, point out that at that time there was need above all else for propaganda, and that that propaganda, working as it would have to do in an entirely new field, must clearly be central and national in character. They therefore gave their support to the proposal that this work should be entrusted to a body of this kind and given definite approval and encouragement by the Government. That was done.


A permanent body.


Yes, a permanent body. That was 12 or 13 years ago, and the very fact that this body has done its work so well has very materially altered the situation. At that time, I think that it would be fair to say that there was no local authority in the country that was at all enthusiastic about the subject. The whole pioneer work had to be done from the bottom. That, however, is not the case to-day. I am not going to argue as to the proportion of local authorities who are carrying out the work effectively to-day, but I do say that the position to-day is completely different from what it was 12 years ago. That has been illustrated by the fact that the amount of subvention which has been given by successive Governments to a central body has steadily decreased. It began with an amount of £13,000 yearly, and it has come down year by year until it is now in the neighbourhood of £6,000. The reason for that is that it is recognised that, step by step, one by one of the local authorities have come to realise the necessity for, and the value of the work of, preventing and treating venereal disease. My hon. and learned Friend quoted the figure of £5,579, which he said was what the local authorities had spent in the year before last. I asked him where he got those figures, because we have not got any such figures in the Ministry of Health. I do not know how he got his figures, but I know he is a careful man.


The figures have been given to me by those who have followed this matter very carefully indeed. I, myself, have every faith in them, and I am quite prepared to satisfy my right hon. Friend as to their reliability.


I am not going to challenge the figures. All I say is that I was curious to know how those figures had been obtained. Let us take it that those figures are correct. What I wish to draw the attention of the Committee to is the fact, which my right hon. Friend announced, that in the current year the expenditure of local authorities on this propaganda is going to be £7,500. You may say that that is not a very large amount, but I would point out that it is very nearly 35 per cent. more than what my hon. and learned Friend said the local authorities were spending in the year before. If the local authorities are increasing their expenditure on this propaganda by 35 per cent. in a single year, I think it is obvious that I am right in saying that the progress of the understanding of the value and the necessity of this work is very considerable among local authorities.

The hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. R. Smith) said that my right hon. Friend had declared in effect that the policy of the Government was to substitute local propaganda for central propaganda, that they had come to the conclusion that the time had come to change over from the one to the other. I do not remember that my right hon. Friend made any such pronouncement as that. I think it is true to say that there are in this country a number of local authorities, including some important ones, who would take the view that everything necessary in the way of propaganda can be done better and more completely by a local authority than by any central authority. It is not my personal view. My personal view is that while some of the work which was performed at the beginning of their career by this body is no longer of the same importance, in view of the success which they have achieved, that there are still things which a central body can do which no local authority is likely to do. Therefore, I do not desire personally to see the British Social Hygiene Council disappear. On the contrary, I should like to see them continue, and continue with the assent, the approval and the support of local authorities.

Why, then, do I oppose this Amendment? The Amendment is based really upon the analogous provisions in Clause 84, the provisions which deal with the welfare of the blind and the service of the mentally deficient. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for St. Albans (Lieut.-Colonel Fremantle) said: "All we ask is that you should give us exactly what you have given them; why do you make the distinction between us?" Surely the distinction is very obvious. It lies in the nature of the work. These other associations are carrying on work which is a vital part of the work of the local authorities. They are actually providing the homes, or running the homes; they are Ferforming individual service for individual patients. There is nothing of that kind in the case of this particular body. These are not individual services, or services in respect of which it can be said that this or that local authority cannot perform its duty. The two things which have been complained of are not in the same category but are in two different classes. While you can say to a local authority that they must make a scheme which provides for a compulsory contribution to services which are an essential part of the duties which they have to perform, you cannot take up that attitude on a matter of this kind, where things are so widely different, where the service is of so general a character and not necessarily connected with the particular work of the local authority. Therefore, it is impossible for me to compel these local authorities to contribute. It may be true that some of these local authorities are getting some advantage, without paying for it, from the publicity which is given by others, but, if you made it compulsory, you would be compelling some people to pay for things which they would not use.

I want to try to help the Social Hygiene Council, in the first place, by using such influence as I can bring to bear upon local authorities, and bring home to them that there is a real need for a central organisation of this kind to which they ought to contribute. Secondly, I want to make it easy for them to do so by offering to make the payments by the Ministry deducting that amount from the grant. That is the situation as it will be after this Bill becomes law. The grant which we have been giving to this body is no longer to be given to them, but it is to be given to the local authority and it will form part of the general Exchequer contribution. It will be distributed among the local authorities, and it is given to them in order that they may do their duty in regard to venereal disease.

The Minister is in quite a new position in regard to all these services. It is only right that the local authorities should perform their duties in an adequate manner, and, if they are not doing so because they will not use the services of this particular body, then it is quite clear that I have a very strong case for asking that they should make their contribution. I ask hon. Members to think well before they compel these responsible bodies to contribute to something of which they may not approve. I, as the responsible Minister, do not desire to see this body disappear, and I shall take all the steps I can within the limits of this Bill to assist it.


It seems to me that the Minister of Health has not been quite so logical in his reply as he usually is. The distinction which the right hon. Gentleman has drawn between making a claim on the local authorities to support the central propaganda body and his refusal to compel them seems to be rather a fine one. The right hon. Gentleman admits that national propaganda is essential for the prevention of these diseases, and at the same time he refuses to give support to the body which provides it.

It being Half-past Ten of the Clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of 12th. December, to put forthwith the Question on the Amendment already proposed from the Chair.

Question put, "That those words be there added."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 95; Noes, 204.

Division No. 131]. AYES. [10.31 p.m.
Adamson, W. M. (Staff, Cannock) Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.) Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hllisbro') Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Ammon, Charles George Gillett, George M. John, William (Rhonada, West)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K. Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin.,Cent.) Jones, Henry Hayan (Merioneth)
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston) Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Barnes, A. Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Batey, Joseph Griffith, F. Kingsley Kelly, W. T.
Bellamy, A. Groves, T. Kennedy, T.
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Grundy, T. W. Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Broad, F. A. Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton) Knox, Sir Alfred
Bromley, J. Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Lamb, J. Q.
Compton, Joseph Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland) Lansbury, George
Connolly, M. Hardle, George D. Lawrence, Susan
Cove, W. G. Harris, Percy A. Lee, F.
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro) Hayday, Arthur Lindley, F. W.
Dennison, R. Henderson, T. (Glasgow) Lowth, T.
Duncan, C Hirst, G. H. Lunn, William
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty) Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Mackinder, W.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan) Ritson, J. Tinker, John Joseph
March, S. Scrymgeour, E. Townend, A. E.
Morris, R. H. Scurr, John Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Sexton, Jamas Wellock, Wilfred
Mosley, Sir Oswald Shepherd, Arthur Lewis White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple-
Murnin, H. Short, Alfred (Wednesbury) Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Naylor, T. E. Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness) Wilson, C. H. (Shemeld, Attercliffe)
Oliver, George Harold Smith, Rennie (Penistone) Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Palin, John Henry Stamford, T. W. Windsor, Walter
Paling, W. Stewart, J. (St. Rollox) Wright, W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) Strauss, E. A. Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W. Sullivan, J.
Ponsonby, Arthur Sutton, J. E. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Potts, John S. Thorne. G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.) Dr. Drummond Shiels and Lieut.-
Purcell, A. A. Thurtle, Ernest Colonel Fremantle.
Albery, Irving James Foster, Sir Harry S. Meyer, Sir Frank
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S. Frece, Sir Walter de Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Apsley, Lord Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Waldses
Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent,Dover) Galbraith, J. F. W. Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Astor, Viscountess Ganzoni, Sir John Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr).
Atkinson, C. Gates, Percy Moreing, Captain A. H.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley Gauit, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Bainlel, Lord Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell Gower, Sir Robert Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Barnett, Major Sir Richard Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Nelson, Sir Frank
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Grant, Sir J. A. Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake) Greene, W. P. Crawford Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Bennett, A. J. Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E. Nuttall, Ellis
Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish Gunston, Captain D. W. Oakley, T.
Betterton, Henry B. Hacking, Douglas H. O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Bevan, S. J. Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.) O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Boothby, R. J. G. Hamilton, Sir George Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W. Hanbury, C. Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Brass, Captain W. Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive Harrison, G J. C. Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Brittain, Sir Harry Hartington, Marquess of Pilcher, G.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington) Power, Sir John Cecil
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I. Harvey, Majors. E. (Devon, Totnss) Preston, William
Broun-Lindsay, Major H. Haslam, Henry C. Price, Major C. W. M.
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham) Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M. Raine, Sir Walter
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y) Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Buckingham, Sir H. Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P. Remer, J. R.
Burman, J. B. Henn, Sir Sydney H. Rentoul, G. S.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Caine, Gordon Hall Hills, Major John Waller Richardson, sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Cassels, J. D. Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard Ropner, Major L.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. sir Evelyn (Aston) Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar) Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood) Hopkins, J. W. W. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Chilcott, Sir Warden Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mostley) Rye, F. G.
Christie, J. A. Hore-Belisha, Leslie Salmon, Major I.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C. Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.) Sandeman, N. Stewart
Clarry, Reginald George Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n) Sandon, Lord
Clayton, G. C. Hume, Sir G. H. Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Cobb, Sir Cyril Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. Savery, S. S.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. Iveagh, Countess of Scott, Rt. Hon. Sir Leslie
Cohen, Major J. Brunei Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l) Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert Shepperson, E. W.
Colman, N. C. D. Jones, W. N. (Carmarthen) Simms, Dr. John M, (Co. Down)
Cope, Major Sir William Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) Skelton, A. N.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. Kindersley, Major Guy M. Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend) King, Commodore Henry Douglas Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick) Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Smithers, Waldron
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert Leigh, Sir John (Clapham) Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford) Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil) Loder, J. de V. Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Davies, Dr. Vernon Long, Major Eric Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Dawson, Sir Philip tougher, Lewis Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley Lumlay, L. R. Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen Tomilnson, R. P.
Dunnico, H. Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Eden, Captain Anthony Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Catheart) Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Edmondson, Major A. J. McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) Macintyre, Ian Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Ellis, R. G. McLean, Major A. Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.) Macmillan, Captain H. Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith Macquisten, F. A. Watts, Sir Thomas
Everard, W. Lindsay MacRobert, Alexander M. Wells, S. R.
Falle, Sir Bertram G. Maitland, A. (Kent, Faveraham) Wingins, William Martin
Forestler-Walker, Sir L. Margesson, Captain D, Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Forrest, W. Meller, R. J. Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading) Wolmer, Viscount Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)
Wilson, Sir Murrough (Yorks, Richm'd) Womersley, W. J.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl Woodcock, Colonel H. C. Mr. Penny and Captain Wallace.

The CHAIRMAN then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded at half-past Ten of the clock at this day's sitting.

Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 210; Noes, 92.

Division No. 132.] AYES. [10.40 p.m.
Albery, Irving James Frece, Sir Walter de Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S. Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E. Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Applin, Colonel R. V. K. Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Apsley, Lord Galbraith, J. F. W. Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover) Ganzoni, Sir John Moreing, Captain A. H.
Astor, Viscountess Gates, Percy Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Atkinson, C. Gauit, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Cllve
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Bainlel, Lord Glyn, Major R. G. C. Nelson, Sir Frank
Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell Gower, Sir Robert Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Grant, Sir J. A. Nuttall, Ellis
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake) Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter Oakley, T.
Bennett, A. J. Greene, W. P. Crawford O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E. O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Betterton, Henry B. Gunston, Captain D. W. Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Bevan, S. J. Hacking, Douglas H. Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Boothby, R. J. G. Hall, Capt. w. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.) Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W. Hamilton, Sir George Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Brass, Captain W. Hanbury, C. Pilcher, G.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry Power, Sir John Cecil
Brittain, Sir Harry Harrison, G. J. C. Preston, William
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Hartington, Marquess of Price, Major C. W. M.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I. Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington) Raine, Sir Walter
Broun-Lindiay, Major H. Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham) Haslam, Henry C. Renter, J. R.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.( Berks,Newb'y) Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M. Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Buckingham, Sir H. Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Burman, J. B. Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P. Ropner, Major L.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey Henn, Sir Sydney H. Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Caine, Gordon Hall Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Cassels, J. D. Hills, Major John Waller Rye, F. G.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston) Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard Salmon, Major I.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood) Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar) Sandeman, N. Stewart
Chilcott, Sir Warden Hopkins, J. W. W. Sandon, Lord
Christle, J. A. Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Moesley) Sassoon, sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C. Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney.N). Savery, S. S.
Clarry, Reginald George Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd,Whiteh'n) Scott, Rt. Hon. Sir Leslie
Clayton, G. C. Hume, Sir G. H. Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Cobb, Sir Cyril Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. Shepperson, E. W.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. Iveagh, Countess of Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Cohen, Major J. Brunei Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l) Skelton, A. N.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Colman, N. C. D. Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Conway, Sir W. Martin Kindersley, Major Guy M. Smithers, Waldron
Cope, Major Sir William King, Commodore Henry Douglas Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L. Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities) Knox, Sir Alfred Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend) Lamb, J. Q. Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick) Leigh, Sir John (Clapham) Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Lindley,Gainsbro) Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert Loder, J. de V. Tomlinson, R. P.
Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford) Long, Major Eric Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) Lougher, Lewis Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. p.
Davies, Dr. Vernon Lumley, L. R. Wallace, Captain D. E.
Dawson, Sir Philip MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen Ward, Lt.-Col.A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Dean, Arthur Welletley Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. H. Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart) Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Eden, Captain Anthony McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Edmondson, Major A. J. Macintyre, I. Watts, Sir Thomas
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington) McLean, Major A. Wells, S. R.
Ellis, R. G. Macmlilan, Captain H. White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.) Macquisten, F, A. Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith MacRobert, Alexander M. Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Everard, W. Lindsay Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham) Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Falle, Sir Bertram G. Marriott, Sir J. A. R. Wilson, Sir Murrough (Yorks, Richm'd)
Forestler-Walker, Sir L. Meller, R. J. Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Forrest, W. Meyer, Sir Frank Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Withers, John James Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Wolmer, Viscount Woodcock, Colonel H. C. Captain Margesson and Mr. Penny.
Womorsley, W. J. Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)
Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock) Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose) Ritson, J.
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro') Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)
Ammon, Charles George John, William (Rhondda, West) Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston) Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth) Scrymgeour, E.
Barnes, A. Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Scurr, John
Batey, Joseph Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd) Sexton, James
Bellamy, A. Jones, W. N. (Carmarthen) Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W. Kelly, W. T. Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Broad, F. A. Kennedy, T. Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Bromley, J. Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M. Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Compton, Joseph Lansbury, George Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Connolly, M. Lawrence, Susan Stamford, T. W.
Dennison, R. Lee, F. Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Duncan, C. Lindley, F. W. Strauss, E. A.
Dunnico, H. Lowth, T. Sullivan, J.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.) Lunn, William Sutton, J. E.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. Mackinder, W. Thurtie, Ernest
Gillett, George M. MacLaren, Andrew Tinker, John Joseph
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.) Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan) Townend, A. E.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) March, S. Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Griffith, F. Kingsley Morris, R. H. Wellock, Wilfred
Groves, T. Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Wiggins, William Martin
Grundy, T. W. Mosley, Sir Oswald Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Hall, F. (York., W.R., Normanton) Murnin, H. Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Naylor, T. E. Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Hardie, George D. Oliver, George Harold Windsor, Waller
Harris, Percy A. Palin, John Henry Wright, W.
Hayday, Arthur Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Hirst, G. H. Ponsonby, Arthur TELLERS FOR THE NOES.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) Potts, John S. Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie Purcell, A. A.