§ Sub-section (1) of Section five of the Act of 1917 shall not apply to Wales, and in lieu thereof the provisions contained in the Second Schedule of the Act of 1917 shall apply with respect to Wales as they apply with respect to Scotland with the substitution of the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries for the Board of Agriculture for Scotland.—[Sir R. Thomas.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
Sir R. THOMASI beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
I very much regret that the first of the series of new Clauses which stand in my name has been ruled out of Order. Of course, I am bound by the ruling of the Chair, but, in passing, I would like to say that had we in Wales been in a similar position to Scotland in the matter of having a Secretary, we should not now be in the unhappy position of having had this first new Clause, the most important of the series, ruled out of order. I hope the Government will take notice of the unsatisfactory way in which Wales has been treated in the matter of this legislation. In order not to deprive Scotland of her rights, I have been compelled to alter this Clause slightly from the form in which it appears on the Order Paper. The Clause is down in my own name, but I am speaking here in support of it as the hon. secretary of the Welsh National Party. It was because I wanted to economise in printing that I did not append the full list of Welsh Members, numbering in all 36 and consisting of Coalition Liberals, Unionists and Labour Members, to the Clause. We, the Welsh National Party, made a request to my right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of the Board of Agriculture months ago to take this matter into favourable consideration. It is a national demand. It is not only put forward by the Welsh National Party as a whole. That is not a small matter. It is something the Government should not turn aside lightly, because very careful note is taken of these matters in Wales and some day, perhaps not just now—for the Government are not at the moment in need of the help of 299 Members—they may be in need even of the few votes which the Principality can use in this House. I have said that it is a national demand from the representatives of Wales—Liberal. Unionist and Labour—a united demand. A resolution was passed in the Welsh party advocating this Clause. That was sent to my right hon. Friend by myself some six months ago. He replied very courteously, as he always does, that it would receive his consideration. I brought it forward in the Committee on the Bill, and the favourable consideration was that it was turned down, and turned down on the ground—these are the words of my right hon. Friend—that:
If there were n separate. Ministry for Wales, it would be reasonable to have a separate Wages Board, but as there is not, it would be most unfortunate to have a separate Wages Board.Why? My right hon. Friend does not tell us why it would be unfortunate. Is it unfortunate to comply with the demand of a nation? Why should he say that it is unfortunate? It may be inconvenient, but I do not see how it can be unfortunate. It is unfortunate if he does not comply with our request, it is true, but surely it cannot be unfortunate that we are making this demand. The Welsh National Farmers' Union represents a body of some 40,000 smallholders, with small holdings under 50 acres. We are in Wales fundamentally different in the matter of agriculture from England. My right hon. Friend, although a Welshman himself, and, as I know perfectly well, a lover of his country, is blind to the fact that Wales is different from England. If I fail to prove that Wales is different from England, then I admit there is no substance in my Clause; but we are different. I am not going to deal now with the question of language. We know how different we are from England in that respect. We are the only country in the British Isles that has its own language that it makes any use of. We are more of a nation than any outside England; we are more a nation than Scotland, certainly. One of my hon. Friends from Scotland laughs, but I am quite sure that he cannot address the House in Gaelic, and I am afraid that he is not a true Scotsman if he cannot speak his country's language. I am not, however, speaking of Wales in that sense, but from the purely agricultural point of view. We 300 are a nation of smallholders, just as Scotland is a nation of smallholders. Scotland has its separate Board of Agriculture, and its separate Wages Board. We cannot get a Board of Agriculture, because we have no Secretary for Wales, but why cannot we have a Wages Board? I think it will be admitted that the fact of our not having a separate administration does not preclude our having a separate Wages Board. Therefore, I would ask my right hon. Friend, when he replies, to explain why it is unfortunate that he cannot grant this request which is made so unanimously?The experience of the Welsh farmer on this Central Wages Board is, in the words of my right hon. Friend, very unfortunate. I think I am right in saying that there are in this country about thirty-nine district committees, and of these thirty-nine Wales has six. The fact is, however, that these district committees have no power; the power is vested in the Central Wages Board. We all send representatives to the Central Wages Board; but what is their position? When representations are made by the Welsh representatives on that Central Board, we are in such a hopeless minority that no notice whatever is taken of them. Our vote is quite ineffective, and, as the English members have very little knowledge of Welsh conditions, the general rule is that whatever is brought forward by the representatives of Wales is disregarded entirely. The result is that there is a very strong feeling in Wales on this question, and I would seriously put it to my right hon. Friend that he should consider the question of granting this reasonable demand—a demand which, I repeat, is made by a united Welsh National Party of all shades of opinion, and which is made by the Welsh National Farmers' Union. I have here resolutions which have been passed since this Bill was in Committee. During the Recess Welsh farmers have held meetings all over Wales, and have passed resolutions demanding that this, amongst other things, should be granted. I hope that my right hon. Friend has something more to say as a reason against granting this request than that it is unfortunate. I hope he has some tangible reason to give. Wales is a very peaceably inclined country; we are long-suffering, as one of my hon. Friends points out. I 301 would like to remind my right hon. Friend, however, that Ireland was long-suffering for a great number of years. We are very similar to the Irish in blood and in temperament. We are a sentimental people. We can exercise a great deal of forbearance; but there is a limit, and I warn the Government, I warn my right hon. Friend—and I am not speaking without knowledge—that there is a limit to forbearance even in Wales. I would strongly urge him not to disregard in this summary fashion the sentiment of is whole nation, a sentiment of which he is perfectly well aware. As a Member of this Government, however, I am afraid he is overruled, and I am very much afraid that the Prime Minister also is overruled, because his sentiments, surely, must be in favour of a Clause which gives this small measure of justice to his country.
Mr. E. WOODOn a point of Order. I am in full sympathy with the Clause of my hon. Friend opposite, but may I ask your direction as to this: I was led by my hon. Friend's observations to look up the report of the Debate on this point in Committee, when this Amendment was moved in the same form. The Clause proposes to substitute the word "Wales" for "Scotland." The point of Order was taken upstairs by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kincardine (Lieut. - Colonel A. Murray)—who is not in the House at the moment—that the effect of that was really to turn what was supposed to be, to use his phrase, the enfranchisement of Wales—
Sir R. THOMASI am sorry to interrupt my hon. Friend, but he was not in the House when I made an explanation of that. I explained that I had met that point by altering the wording of my present Clause to meet it.
Mr. WOODIf that is so, I apologise to my hon. Friend. I was not able to be in the House when he moved the Clause.
Lieut.-Colonel PARRYI bog to second the Motion. My hon. Friend has made a very complete case, and there is no need for me to say very much on the matter. He quoted a remark made by the right hon. Gentleman when he rejected the Amendment in Committee, and the word used then, I believe, was "unfortunate." Before that the Parliamentary Secretary used these words: 302
I think it would be most inconvenient to have a separate Wages Board.I suppose that is because we have not a Ministry of Agriculture in Wales. Perhaps some day we shall rise to that high estate of possessing a Minister for Agriculture in Wales. In the meantime we should like something to be going on with, and I hope the Government will see their way to accept this Clause. The objection to it is not a very strong one. Whether the word used be "inconvenient" or "unfortunate," it is not putting the case very high, and I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, whose sympathy for Wales is so well known to us all, to use his skill and ingenuity to get round this difficulty. My hon. Friend has referred to the fact that you have a delegation of some powers from the Central Wages Board to six district committees in Wales. This is an admission that you have to delegate certain powers to Wales, at any rate. I agree that it is done in England as well, but certainly you have six special districts dealing with Welsh wage questions. They have to report and refer everything up to this committee. I think it sits in London. The district committees have full knowledge of all the facts of the district, and they know all the local conditions, and yet these questions have to be referred up here to a body that really can have no local knowledge of the difficulties of the situation. I submit, therefore, that, in view of all the different circumstances—and they are many—arising in regard to the industry of agriculture in Wales, it is important to have persons living in the district, knowing the people and understanding the language, who can deal with these questions, and I trust the Government will see their way to accept the Clause, which I think is a very reasonable one.
§ 9.0 P.M.
Sir A. BOSCAWENI am very sorry I cannot see my way to accept this Clause, not that I am in any way deficient in sympathy, as my hon. Friends know, with the national aspirations of Wales, but, as I said in Committee, we have not got a separate Ministry of Agriculture for Wales. An Amendment was put down to create one. It is outside the scope of the Bill, and therefore cannot be debated. But I hold, not that it would be very unfortunate, because I cannot see, reading my own speech—a very interesting occupation—that I ever used the word "unfortunate." [HON. MEMBERS: "Incon- 303 venient."] Exactly. I say that when you have got one Ministry for England and Wales, to have a separate Wages Board for Wales would be an exceedingly inconvenient, and, I will add, an expensive arrangement, and under these circumstances I really must ask my hon. Friend not to press this Amendment. They, of course, are perfectly right, if they so desire, to ask for a separate Ministry for Wales. That should be embodied, I suppose, in a separate Bill. If there were a separate Bill they might properly ask for a separate Wages Board. Really the two things go together, and I can see no reason whatever for granting a separate Wages Board when there is no separate Ministry. The complaint my hon. Friends make, that though they have District Wages Boards they are constantly over-ruled by the Central Board, is a grievance that they share with every county in England. There are 39 District Wages Boards, and six of them are in Wales. They are all treated exactly alike. English counties make precisely the same complaint, and I do not see, therefore, that that is any reason whatever for asking for a separate Wages Board for Wales. I suggest to my hon. Friends that they should accept the situation that so long as there is no separate Ministry there cannot be a separate Wages Board.
My hon. Friends say Wales is a long-suffering country, and the time will come when even gallant little Wales will kick over the traces. I do not believe for a moment there will be any trouble in Wales because they have not got a separate wages board. There may be other things that Wales wants and that Wales ought to have which are really important national institutions, but to suggest that there is going to be serious trouble because they cannot get a separate wages board, though they are treated precisely the same as English counties, is really going too far. It is not true, as my hon. Friends have suggested, that I having also national aspirations, am overruled and never do anything for the benefit of the country. On this very Bill I accented an Amendment moved, I think, by the hon. Member (Mr. Haydn Jones) that in all cases of arbitration, where a knowledge of the Welsh language was required, the arbitrator should be a man who under- 304 stood the Welsh language. I am always only too anxious to meet the special local conditions arising in Wales, especially in connection with the Welsh language. I cannot think there is any case made out for this Clause. Hon. Members have not got a separate Welsh Ministry at present, nor do I know that they ever will, but I am not arguing that for or against at present. We do all we can to decentralise our work at the Ministry of Agriculture. We have got our special Welsh office at Aberystwyth, under a very eminent Welshman, and all Welsh questions of local interest are dealt with, not from London, but from that Welsh office. In every way we are trying, as far as we can, to meet Welsh national aspirations. Really, to ask for a separate wages board when you have not a separate Ministry is a most inconvenient course to take, and although I realise that hon. Members may feel it necessary to press the matter to a Division, I can hold out no hope whatever that the Government can accept this Clause.
Mr. ACLANDIn the interest of truth, and as the only member of the Wages Board here present, I may perhaps be allowed to make two observations. Since the Board was formed there has never been a question that I remember in which the Welsh counties or committees have wanted something done, and have been overruled by the representatives of England. There have never been any wants expressed separate from the wants of England. Some Welsh counties are very much the same in their character and wants as English counties, and some English counties are practically just as much smallholding counties as some Welsh counties, and there has never been a single case in which you could say the representatives of England wanted one thing and the representatives of Wales wanted another. Therefore I do not think, if you read through the whole of the Minutes, you could ever say there had been any injustice to Wales because Wales had been overruled by England. The second fact is that of course there have been cases where one Welsh county has wanted one thing and other Welsh counties have wanted another thing, and the Board in their wisdom or unwisdom have had to come to a decision. But that would have happened in any case whether the Board was composed of representatives of England or represpn- 305 tatives from Wales only. They would have to use their common sense where one District Wages Committee asks for one thing which is not in accordance with what another District Wages Committee desires.
It is a fact, as the Minister has said, that possibly the Board is to blame that they have ridden rather too hard the necessity for unanimity in some cases. We have tried to get something like unanimity in the standard of wages and something like unanimity in the standard of overtime and the method of paying for overtime, and also in the hundred and one other things we had to regulate, and there has been a very general complaint from the district wages committees that their particular views, which have seemed to suit them, have been disregarded by the Board, which has laid down some general line applicable to the whole country. I can assure the movers of this Amendment that this feeling has been even more strongly felt by district, wages committees in England than by district wages committees in Wales. To a very considerable extent we have been trying to mend our ways as far as we can, and in matters where it seemed possible to have some variation suitable to the circumstances we have been doing our bust by consulting the local district wages committees The fact of the matter is, and I now address myself to the movers of this Amendment, that so long as Welsh Liberal Members and Welsh Liberals generally are as absolutely faithful supporters of the Government as they recently declared themselves to be it is utterly impossible for them to get any of the concessions for which they are asking. The Minister in charge of this Bill knows perfectly well that, although the Welsh Members may possibly go into the Lobby against the Government in this matter, and the vast battalion who have not heard the arguments will go into the Lobby and swamp their vote, yet in 99 cases out of a 100 the Welsh Members can be relied upon to vote with the Government upon anything. That is not the way to get things in this House, and the sooner the Welsh Members realise that the better.
Mr. E. WOODI do not know that I need follow my right hon. Friend in using this Amendment as a peg on which to hang the advocacy of the peculiar form of Liberalism that is at present rather- 306 meagrely supported in the House and in the country. I rise to express my regret that the Parliamentary Secretary has not seen his way to meet my hon. Friends from Wales rather more generously. I was disappointed by the arguments by which he justified his refusal. It will be within the recollection of the House that his main point was that it was impossible to grant Wales a separate wages board owing to the fact that there was no separate Ministry of Agriculture for Wales. After giving as much thought as I could to the matter, I entirely fail to trace the connection between the two, because it is one of the complaints among farmers, and it has of ton been expressed by agricultural bodies, and admitted by the Ministry of Agriculture, that the Ministry of Agriculture has no authority over the Wages Board, which is a statutory body. If that be so, I fail to see what damage is done to an authority, which admittedly does not exist, by the establishment of another Wages Board in Wales which, ex, hypothesi, the Ministry of Agriculture would be able to control as little as it controls the Central Wages Board in England.
The right hon. Gentleman spoke of the inconvenience of the arrangement. The inconvenience of the Ministry of Agriculture, very little regard being had to the inconvenience caused to the people affected by the Wages Board's decisions in Wales. On that point I would like to follow a remark made by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Acland) who has the advantage of inside knowledge of the working of the Central Wages Board. I do not deny that he and his colleagues have a very difficult task, and I have no doubt that they have always endeavoured to discharge it to the best of their ability, and to hold the scales as even as they may; but T do know, and it. is admitted, that a great deal of trouble— well ill-founded or well founded, I am not concerned to say—has been caused by the feeling in the districts that in a matter that essentially demands local touch, inadequate appreciation is given to local committees, and that the thing is over centralised. The right hon. Gentleman said that he had had more complaints from Wales than from Yorkshire or from any other English county. That may be per fectly true. If I had my way I should prefer to see the whole of the work of the Wages Board far more decentralised in the districts. I would like to see the 307 counties of England grouped under District Boards and the powers of the Wages Board very largely given to these District Boards. Because I cannot get that, it is no reason why I should not support my hon. Friends from Wales when they come before the House with a very clear claim on what is a national division in respect of Wales. For that reason I shall support my hon. Friends if they go to a Division, and I hope that my English friends will do the same as an example of what we ultimately hope to get in England.
§ Mr. GRIFFITHSThis is not a political question. It is not a controversial question. It is a national question so far as we are concerned in Wales. The Mover of the Clause pointed out that the Welsh National party, the Coalition Members, the Conservative Members and the Labour Members are unanimous in their demand so far as this Clause is concerned. I do not see, as a trade union leader, why the farm labourers in Wales should be treated different from other workers in other industries in Wales. If you take the steel industry, which extends from Scotland down to Wales, we have our own Board in Wales and we deal with Welsh conditions and Welsh wages. In England you find exactly the same thing. They have a 'Board in England. If you go to Scotland you find a. Board there. I canot see why the farm labourers in Wales should come up to a Central Wages Board in order to deal with their wages and conditions of labour. The farmers and farm labourers in Wales would prefer to do their own business in their own country rather than be contaminated by coming to England. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"] I know something about Wales, and hon. Members may be surprised to know that in several of the colliery districts, and in other industrial districts, the Welsh people carry on their negotiations at the present day in Welsh. They can express themselves in the Welsh language far better than in the English language, and I can quite see the hardship and difficulty of a Welsh representative coming to England and having to express himself to English people in the English language. Very often they make a "bloomer." They often cannot express themselves in English as they can in the national language. The Government is 308 putting Wales into exactly the same position as Ireland, unless you can meet us in some of the demands which we put forward. We are a small nation, but our soul is stupendous. This is not a political question, not a controversial question. There is nothing in it. It is simply allowing us as a small nation to do our own things in our own way. That is what we ask. Leave us alone. I appeal to the Solicitor-General to think over the arguments of the Mover of the Clause and the claim of this brave little nation, and accept this Clause.
§ Mr. HAYDN JONESI listened with considerable surprise to the remarks of the right hon. Member for Camborne (Mr. Acland). He said that as a member of the Wages Board he had not received more complaints from Wales than from English counties. Since this Bill has been before the Committee I have been down in Wales, and I have been called to task by my Constituents for supporting this measure, simply because they feel that no step is too extreme to take unless Wales is recognised for separate treatment in the matter of Wages Boards and also a Land Court for Wales.
§ Mr. JONESThere is some substance also in the demand for a National Wages Board. The right hon. Gentleman is speaking as an English Member, but I am speaking as a Welsh Member. Our farmers complain that it does not matter a pin what the Wages Board in Wales recommends to the central body, the central body over-rides its decision. Why not give autonomy to Wales in this matter? I agree with the Member for Ripon (Mr. Wood), it is not possible for Welsh Members to be more clear than he in the expression of their views. We want autonomy in this matter. The only reason alleged against it is that it would be inconvenient. I fail to see that we require a seperate Board of Agriculture in Wales in order to get a separate Wages Board. Why should there not be two, three, or four separate Wages Boards? The right hon. Gentleman takes pride in the fact that he has delegated certain business from his own board to a separate office in Aberystwith, and set an eminent Welshman to preside over that office. Why not do the same with the Wages Board? I am using no threat, but unless 309 this demand is conceded you will never carry conviction to the mind of the Welsh farmer or to the Welsh labourer that you are dealing justly. Do not let us ask in vain for a thing that is mere elementary justice. I was asked to attend a meeting to give an account of my stewardship. They made it clear that unless Wales got what they regard as their just demands they would be voting against the Government at the next election. They look upon the Government at present as being in a unique position. There ought to be agreement. There is a Coalition Government. Here is a question on which we ought to be united. It is mere elementary justice that a country which has a separate language and separate conditions of agriculture should be denied this elementary justice. I appeal to the Government to accept this Amendment.
Lieut. - Colonel MURRAYI hope that the Government will reconsider the decision at which they have arrived. If there were any practical difficulties to be urged against this Clause something might be said for the view of the Government, but the speech of the hon. Member for Ripon disposed of that. There is no practical objection, but national sentiment is involved, and as a Scot I support my Welsh colleagues in this matter. We from Scotland have to fight in this House for measures very much of a similar nature as that before the House, and I shall be prepared to support this Amendment. But there is one question to the Lord Advocate before I make up my mind. The Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General will remember that in Committee the hon. Baronet who has moved this Amendment came forward with a proposition to carry out the object which he had in view, but in doing so to deprive us of our Board of Agriculture in Scotland. I am glad to say that some of us were able to prevent them at the time from doing that, but if the Clause as it is on the Paper in achieving that object would deprive us of our Board—
Sir E. POLLOCKI do not think that the hon. and gallant Member was in the House when the explanation was given that the Clause has been modified from the form in which it was introduced.
Lieut.-Colonel MURRAYI would ask the Lord Advocate whether he is satisfied from the Scottish point of view that the 310 Amendment of the hon. Baronet will leave us the Board of Agriculture in Scotland?
Mr. MORISONPerhaps my hon. Friend will allow me to give the assurance that that is so. Our Board of Agriculture would not be touched.
§ Captain FITZROYIt is very difficult to understand the attitude of the Government. They are only creating difficulties for themselves, if this Bill is going to be successful it must give as much satisfaction as possible to all the different sections of the country, and above all things, secure confidence. I propose to support the demand of the Welsh Members for a separate. Wages Board for Wales. Our great trouble in England has arisen from exactly the same reasons as these given by the Mover and Seconder of this Amendment. Our complaint has been that instead of the Central Wages Board considering, as was intended under the Corn Production Act, recommendations made to them by the various District Wages Boards, they have taken upon themselves, without any recommendations coming from the District Wages Board, to make new recommendations. That has been one of the chief complaints with regard to the action of the Central Wages Board. Though, of course, many parts of it have agricultural conditions very much like these in England, Wales is essentially a country where a great many smallholders exist under different conditions, and obviously when recommendations come down from the Central Wages Board in London, without any request from the District Boards for increased wages or shorter hours, as the case may be, they create dissatisfaction and want of confidence on the part of the agriculturists in Wales. When the right hon. Gentleman says that he cannot set up this Wages Board in Wales because there is no Minister of Agriculture in Wales, I fail to see what connection that has with the matter. As my hon. Friend pointed out, the Ministry of Agriculture in England has no control over the Central Wages Board, and how in the world has it anything to do with a Wages Board for Wales. It cannot be necessary to set up a Ministry of Agriculture in Wales in order to set up a Welsh Wages Board. I hope the hon. Member will carry the Amendment to a Division, and I propose to support him.
Sir E. POLLOCKI hope we may consider this question from perhaps rather wider bearings than have been presented by some of the speeches to-night. I recognise, as my right hon. Friend does, the appeal which has been made on behalf of Wales as a nation. I am quite sure that all English Members in this House are prepared to recognise the great position that Wales occupies as a nation; that she has a peculiar case to be regarded as a nation, and that the use of her language does constitute a bond between her people which is, I think I may say, unique in the British Isles. Also, we call Wales "gallant little Wales." The mere fact that she is a small country does not at all diminish our respect or regard for her. We are quite ready to accept the statement made by my right hon. Friend opposite, that Wales has a stupendous soul. He might claim to have that himself. I must put in this caveat that perhaps he will allow an Englishman to claim that he has a correspondingly large soul, whatever the word "stupendous" may mean. Perhaps it is on that ground that I rather deprecate these suggestions made, in one case by the hon. Baronet, with finger outstretched, who offered me a very serious warning? I think another hon. Member offered me a threat, while the hon. Member for Merioneth made an appeal which was in no sense a threat, and he himself disclaimed that there should be any threat Again, the right hon. Member for Cam-borne used a note of seduction to Members in order that they might cease their allegiance to the Coalition and join the party to which he belongs. I am not sure that that sort of atmosphere, created in that manner, is the best condition in which to discuss what, after all, must be a practical proposal. If we are to regard it as a matter of threats or warnings, or anything else, I feel confident that a certain number of these who are English-born will have the requisite courage to stand up against threats or warnings. Just as I should expect a Welshman, if I threatened him, immediately to speak in somewhat strong language to me, and certainly to refuse what I asked him to do under a threat, so perhaps a Welshman may understand that there is a sufficient gallantry in Englishmen to withstand any threats from any quarters, and we hope by that course still to maintain the respect of Welsh Members.
312 Let me therefore dispose, if I can, of this atmosphere, and come back to what is the practical proposal. The question of dividing up the country for certain purposes has been considered very largely of late, and we have a report which has been laid on the important question of devolution. Further, we have in a number of matters considered that it is possible to accede to the demands which from time to time have been made by different parts of the community, or nations, if you please, which constitute the whole of Great Britain and Ireland. All these questions are part of a larger whole, and the argument which is addressed at the present time to this House is that Wales is a nation, and that therefore it ought to have a Wages Board of its own, is really an argument which goes far beyond the point at issue. If Wales is desirous of being treated as a nation, and as a whole itself, it is entitled, upon that reasoning, to have its own Secretary, as Scotland has. It is entitled to have a great deal more than a mere Central Wages Board. I am far from saying that at the appropriate time that will not have to be considered and may not be considered. What I am pointing out is that that is a matter which ought to be considered as a whole, and that to ask for what may be called the demands of Wales as a nation, and then to say that it is on that ground that, while you maintain the unity of government with Wales on a great number of questions—I will not put it higher than that—you are to dissociate this particular matter and to deal with it individually, is really to misunderstand the reason and argument put forward in favour of this claim. I want to come to a particular point. A good many arguments have been addressed by an hon. Member from York shire and the hon. Member for Northamptonshire, who support the claim because they think it would be right and just that there should be far greater decentralisation. I think the right way to deal with that question is not from the point of view of Wales alone, but from whether or not there ought to be decentralisation, and decentralisation which, as my right hon. Friend pointed out, would be actually due in the case of Yorkshire, if it were admitted in the case of Wales.
Sir E. POLLOCKThe hon. Gentleman knows that I am not really in charge of the Bill, and I have not really had an opportunity of considering the question with my right hon. Friend. Perhaps I may continue my argument. What I think the House has got to make up its mind to is this. Is it prepared to deal with the question, not merely from the point of view of Wales as a nation, but from the point of view of asking that there shall be a large measure of decentralisation? The immediate question you have to consider is whether it is necessary, while giving a just measure, and of properly dealing with the question, to have a system of co-ordination in respect to which you can maintain your central authority. I do not think these who ask that you should sever the country into various areas have realised the fact that if you do that you will still be obliged to have something like co-ordination set up in order to have a standard maintained in these areas which are contiguous to one another, and where undoubtedly you may come upon a very large number of hard cases because of an artificial line drawn through the area. I hope I have said nothing which can be interpreted as otherwise than respectful to or as otherwise than in cordial admiration of Wales. At the same time I hope I have demonstrated that a much larger question is involved.
Mr. HINDSI am very glad to see a little gleam of hope in the speech of the learned Solicitor-General. As far as we Welsh Members are concerned, we do not mind for a moment whether there is a separate Board in every county in England as long as we have one in Wales. I want to impress upon the House the fact that this is a national demand. We have here 36 Members, representing Welsh constituencies, making this simple demand for a separate Agricultural Wages Board for Wales. It is astonishing to learn that the right hon. Member (Sir A. Boscawen) in charge of the Bill, with all his sympathies, still says that this concession is inconvenient. The Government could give Wales a National Health Insurance Commission, and why not this concession? We are asking for it because 314 the conditions in Wales are so different from these in England. Wales is a land of small holdings. There are something like 60,000 of them throughout the country. We who come from Wales know these things, and without any threat we ask the House of Commons to give us this concession. We ought to be strong enough to get it. The man who talks most in this House gets most. We Members from Wales have long been too silent. The Government give us cheap sympathy. They say it is inconvenient, that it does not pan out and a heap of other things. We do not believe it. Our people in Wales ask us to get this concession to-night in spite of everything, and I am here to voice their demand. You talk about decentralisation; we want it. We could do our business far better in Wales than it is done in Westminster. Nobody knows better than the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill the conditions in Wales. He knows our ambition with regard to this thing. He knows that when our people pay large fares in order to come to London with proposals, these proposals are turned down continuously, because the people who deal with them cannot know the conditions in Wales. The whole land of Wales is asking for this simple thing, and every farmer in the country will know to-morrow whether it has been denied or not. The agriculturists concerned are largely poor men. The Welsh farmer is afraid to come to the magnates here in London because very often he does not understand the language; he is a Welshman and cannot speak the English tongue, and he fears coming to the great metropolis to air his grievances. I appeal to the Governent to reconsider the matter.
Sir A. BOSCAWENWe have listened to a most impassioned appeal from the hon. Member. I can assure him that it is difficult indeed for me to resist such an appeal. I realise as well as any man in this House that the position of Wales is different in many respects from that of an ordinary English county. I realise the great difference made by language and that this appeal is brought forward practically unanimously by Welsh Members. It has been supported, moreover, by Members for English constituencies. I confess, too, that I have to some extent misjudged the situation. I did not realise 315 that there would be this very great interest taken in Wales in the establishment of a separate Wages Board. The matter did not appear to me to be of special importance. I could quite understand Welsh Members asking for a separate Ministry, and with a separate Ministry a separate Wages Board would undoubtedly follow, but I did not realise—I suppose it is owing to the fact that I have lived in England, with rare intervals, for some years—that on this particular question there would be such strong national sentiment arising. I do not go back for a moment on what the Solicitor-General has said, or on what I said earlier in the Debate and in Committee. I think the course proposed is inconvenient. I must warn hon. Members that it may be expensive—it will certainly be more expensive to have a separate Wages Board for Wales than to have a joint Board for England and Wales. It is only right and proper that I should make that statement, which I know to be true. At the same time, if there is—and I gather there is—this strong demand, if it is felt, having regard to any difficulties and differences that distinguish Wales from the ordinary English county, that it is desirable in the interests of Wales that Wales should have a separate Board, if it is felt that Welshmen have not got confidence in the decisions given, and Welsh agricultural labourers feel that their interests are not being properly studied, and if tenant farmers feel that they may be unjustly dealt with by a predominantly English Central Board, then I say that, though the cost may be more, it is worth while, in order to get content in Wales among all these interested in agriculture in Wales, to make this concession.
I realise, of course, that there are considerable differences in farming operations in Wales from these in England. Wales is predominantly a grass country, and cannot be otherwise, and it has a higher proportion of upland farms and a much larger number of small holdings than in most places in England. You may find in some English counties, such as Westmoreland or Cumberland, similar conditions. There is in Wales also the national spirit and the feeling that they require separate treatment, and the language difficulty, which is a great difficulty and which does not exist anywhere 316 else in the United Kingdom in the same degree. Therefore, if it is the wish, as I gather, of practically every Member from Wales and also of a large number of English Members, as the Amendment has been supported by many of them, then, even though at an earlier stage I resisted the Amendment and my hon. and learned Friend has taken the same line, having regard to the feeling of Welsh Members and to the differences that exist, though Wales has not and is not to have a separate Ministry of Agriculture, if it is the general wish of the House that it should have a separate Wages Board, I am not prepared to carry my opposition any further, and I am willing to accept the Amendment.
Sir F. BANBURYThe Parliamentary Secretary, in the course of his speech, stated that the acceptance of this Amendment will cost the country more. This being the Report stage, I ask whether it is in order to accept an Amendment which the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill has twice informed the House will add to the expense?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI have not heard the whole of the discussion. The question is, will this impose a fresh charge?
Sir F. BANBURYThat is what the Minister says. [HON. MEMBERS: "It is a matter of opinion."] He has twice said that the result of this will be to impose an extra charge upon the country. I do not know whether it will be so or not, but the Government having admitted that it will do so, I submit that the Clause is not in order.
Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAYIs it not pure conjecture on the part of the Minister? Can the House accept as a proved tact what the Minister put forward as a conjecture? The Minister brought forward no figures to prove that this will actually impose a charge upon the taxpayer.
Sir E. POLLOCKI think my right hon. Friend (Sir F. Banbury) is wrong in saying that it is admitted that it will impose a charge. That is his translation of what my right, hon. Friend said. What my right hon. Friend did say was that the system would be more expensive. He did not indicate or suggest that under this Clause a charge would be imposed. The system of the 317 Wages Board might have to be rearranged by some method whereby the difficulty of greater expense could be met, if in fact that were the case. That is what he foreshadowed. He did not use the words which the right hon. Gentleman attributed to him, that there would necessarily be a charge imposed.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe point is, will it impose a fresh charge?
Sir A. BOSCAWENOn that point of Order. May I say there is a charge already for the payment of the expenses of Agricultural Wages Boards? I anticipate that that charge may be increased, but there will be no fresh charge. That charge may, of course, be increased in other ways. Mr. Speaker asked whether there would be a fresh charge, and my answer is I do not think there will be. We know that existing charges are constantly increased by the automatic increases which lire going on. This will undoubtedly entail additional expenditure; but, as my hon. and learned Friend said, there will be specifically no fresh charge.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think that disposes of the difficulty of a fresh charge. If there is no fresh charge, the House can consider the Clause on Report.
Mr. ACLANDMay I ask will Wales, with its new Wages Board, start with the same regulations with regard to levels of wages and other matters as now apply to England, or will they start de novo and work out their own levels of wages and other conditions?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe right hon. Gentleman has already spoken.
Mr. ACLANDI am asking a question. The Debate has taken a very fresh turn by the concession made in the last minute. I do not want the new Wages Board to go back to a lower wage than the amount of 46s., but to start from that.
Mr. GEORGE ROBERTSI think the right hon. Gentleman has made a mistake in agreeing to accept this new scheme. I am rather surprised that Members of the Labour party are not representing the view of the agricultural labourer in this matter. The agricultural labourer has as much right to be considered here as the Welsh farmer, and the whole tendency of the labour movement is against splitting up the country in regard to wage matters. In my experience of the agricultural 318 labour movement we always viewed the disposition on the part of Welsh representatives to demand distinct treatment as representing a desire there that a lower standard of wages should be established. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no!"] I am simply representing the case as I used to know it when working in the agricultural labouring movement, and I can only say it is a suspicion existing in the minds of these who control that movement. No trade union in the country splits up on that basis. Trade unions are international because of the fact that general labouring conditions are similar throughout the whole country. We considered this matter, I remember, when the original Corn Production Bill was being drafted, and I know then that I sought the opinion of the party with which I was then closely identified, and acting on their instructions, or at any rate with their concurrence, I resisted the tendency towards the creation of a number of these Wages Boards. There is no getting away from the fact that it would tend to cause friction in labour matters, and moreover it must be a most costly expediency. I confess to some amazement when I find the Government being pressed to undertake fresh commitments involving very heavy expenditure coming from these who are the first in their constituencies to speak in favour of the Government practising economy.
What must happen? You will have an entirely new Wages Board, consisting, I suppose, exclusively of Welsh representatives, but in my opinion you will find that utterly impracticable. The agricultural labourer must be represented by competent persons, and he will select them from his trade unions not according to their nationality but according to the amount of confidence he has in them and according to their competency to represent him in his demands, and it may well occur that you will have men sitting on the Welsh Wages Board coming from remote parts of this country, and being compelled to make frequent and sustained journeys to Wales in order to carry out work which in my opinion—and I speak with some knowledge—is being efficiently carried out now by the Central Wages Board. Altogether I am afraid that my right hon. Friend will soon find that he will be subjected to pressure from the labour movement and that he has made a mistake and certainly has not moved in 319 the direction of economy or greater efticiency in this matter. When the original Insurance Bill was before this House, we know that the House yielded then to these national demands, and the House had not yielded long before we found that it was a most inefficient method of administration, and a more costly method, and the labour movement has persistently put. forward a demand that there should be one administrative authority for the United Kingdom. I am sure that the principle they adopted in respect of the Insurance Act is the one they would prefer to be applied in respect to this wage matter, and whilst I am not entitled to speak on behalf of the Labour party, I fear that they have committed an error on this occasion and that they have net followed their usual course of being very watchful of the interests of organised labour, and of the agricultural labourer in particular.
§ 10.0 P.M.
§ Mr. LANE-FOXI should like to point out that the ground on which the Parliamentary Secretary has accepted the new Clause is an entirely different ground from that on which the Solicitor-General supported it. The Solicitor-General told the Welsh Members that it could only be accepted as part of the scheme of general decentralisation, that it was not a concession to Welsh nationality but to the general need for decentralisation, and he quoted with some approval the demand for a Board, for instance, for Yorkshire and other parts of the country. The Parliamentary Secretary took an absolutely different line. Following immediately in the Debate, he made the concession entirely on the ground of Welsh nationality. Personally, I approve of the concession, and I am glad to see it made, but I should like again to point out how much easier and better we should get on in this House if Members of the Government could make up their minds which leg they would stand on, and having made up their minds, to remember which leg it was.
Sir DAVID DAVIESAs a Member representing the largest agricultural constituency in Wales, and also as a member of the existing Board, which has been very much abused here to-day, I should like to refer to the danger suggested by the right hon. Member for Camborne (Mr. Acland) as to the minimum wage. 320 I can assure the right hon. Gentleman! that not only the minimum wage has been paid throughout Wales, but a wage which far exceeds that, and he may be quite sure that wages in Wales will not be less than in other parts of the country. As to the point mentioned by the right hon. Member for Norwich (Mr. Roberts), there are an equal number representing, labour and the farmers, and we have had, to show you the real necessity of a Board for Wales, a unanimous opinion of the District Wage Board that I sit on, of both labour and employers, sent up to London, and it has been turned down, and they have sent out a different regulation. That shows that these gentlemen do not understand the conditions in Wales, and I plead very strongly with the Government not only to grant this right to Wales, but to use it in the very best interests of all parties.
§ Proposed Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.
Sir R. THOMASThe next two Clauses on the Paper constitute a Welsh Land Court and give security of tenure, but we are so appreciative of what has just been granted to us by the Government that I do not press them, and as the right hon. Gentleman assures us that under no circumstances can he grant us the Land Court and security of tenure, it means wasting time for us to proceed. I therefore do not move either of these Clauses.