§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £837,452, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1933, for the Salary and Expenses of the Inspector of Constabulary; Grants in respect of Police Expenditure and a Grant-in-Aid of the Police Federation in Scotland."—[NOTE.— £225,000 has been voted on account.]
§ Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAMI beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100.
The Secretary of State for Scotland on the last Vote defended the Government against any proposal which might be made to increase the emoluments of clerks in Register House, and he made it plain that in the present circumstances it was impossible to consider anything in the nature of an improvement in conditions as far as wages or salaries were concerned. But in the present Vote I notice that the inspector of constabulary is having an increase in his salary of £19. In many other items in the Vote there are considerable reductions, but the salary of the inspector of constabulary is to be increased from £1,013 to £1,032 a year in addition to which he is to get £25 a year for clerical assistance. I also note that the inspector of constabulary receives army retired pay of £134 10s., which means that he has a salary sufficient already without any further increase to enable him to carry on in an ordinary and decent way. He is almost as well paid as most of the sheriffs-substitute in Scotland. As a matter of fact, I believe he is paid better than some of them. I do not believe that the office which he holds is more important than the office held by the sheriff-substitute in any of the counties of Scotland. I should like some information from the right hon. 1742 Gentleman as to the reason why the economy proposals do not appear to apply in this case, while they are made so very general among all other classes of servants in the country.
There is a considerable amount of dissatisfaction in Scotland at the present time due to the administration of the law in reference to another matter with which I do not suppose that I should be allowed to deal at length. There is the application of the means test, which is considerably aggravating the already poverty-stricken conditions of a great many people in the West of Scotland. A number of meetings have been held protesting against the administration, and deputations have been appointed to meet public assistance committees, and in some cases there have been conflicts with the police. A demonstration was held in Kilbirnie, in Ayrshire, a few weeks ago, and a deputation was appointed to meet the public assistance committee. The members of the deputation, as far as my information goes, conducted themselves quite correctly and put their case, but, unfortunately, they had been accompanied by a large percentage of the population, a great proportion of whom are in receipt of public assistance.
I know that locality fairly well, and I do not think that there is a more law-abiding community in Scotland than is to be found in the whole of the county of Ayr, and certainly, as far as Kilbirnie is concerned, I believe it is the first time that anything in the nature of conflict has arisen between the people and the police authorities, certainly within my recollection. As to what, if any, provocation was given, I cannot say, but I know that the police charged the people who had gathered to hear the report of the deputation appointed to meet the public assistance committee. As a consequence of the conflict, a number of men were arrested, and varying terms of imprisonment were imposed upon them. Without knowing the actual circumstances which were presented to the sheriff, one cannot say very much upon the matter, but, as an ordinary outsider, reading the reports in the newspapers, and having the information which was sent to me in connection with the matter, I feel strongly that the sentences were a bit too severe.
There is very good cause for consideration of the matter by the Scottish Office and the remission of sentences. After 1743 all, the character of the people in the locality ought to weigh to a considerable extent with the Scottish Office in a matter of this sort, taking into account the very serious condition of the people and realising how natural and easy it is, when persons are suffering from the poverty which is rampant in the South-West of Scotland, and particularly in that part of Ayrshire, to be inflamed to the extent of disregarding the police regulations. I am not arguing—nobody on our side will argue—that the regulations promulgated by the police for the purpose of maintaining public order ought to be set at naught, but we want to put before the Department that the whole of the circumstances should be taken into consideration, and not least the fact that men and women, particularly those in prison, are suffering from what they believe to be—and I think rightly believe to be—a very strong sense of unfair treatment. I do not think that it is fair, and I do not think it makes the law any stronger in England, Scotland or Wales if the evidence in a prosecution of this kind is to be entirely police evidence.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI should like to have the guidance of the Minister on this matter. If this were a Vote for police in England the matter which the hon. Member is now raising would only be in order in the case of the Metropolitan Police, which is the sole subject for which the Secretary of State for the Home Department is responsible. I am not aware what is the corresponding responsibility of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and before the Debate proceeds I should be glad if he would tell me what responsibility he has for the police in Scotland.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRMy responsibility for the police is confined to the administration of the grant, which means that I am responsible for seeing that a general level of proficiency of the police is maintained, but the chief constable is the officer responsible for the discipline of the force to the local authority and takes his orders from the magistrates. If there is any complaint about the way that he exercises his authority complaint should be made to the magistrates or, if it be alleged that the police have broken the law and given ground for a criminal complaint, to the Procurator-Fiscal.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODSo far s the chief of police is concerned in Scotland he is officially responsible to the Secretary of State for Scotland. In regard to the appointment of the chief of police, neither a county council nor a town council can make such an appointment without the appointment being referred to the Secretary of State. He has the final word in all these things. He represents the King in Scotland, and he has no right to say that a town council or a county council or the magistrate has the final word. He has even more power in this matter than the Lord Advocate.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRThe position is, that such an appointment is made by the local authority, but as I am responsible for half of the chief constable's salary, which comes on my Votes, I have to be consulted, and I have to see that the local authority does actually appoint a chief constable in accordance with law. The appointment is, however, made by the local authority. It is to the magistrates of the borough that the chief constable is responsible for the maintenance of order. The obligation is laid upon the magistrates of the borough to maintain order, and the chief constable is responsible to them.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODThere is more in this matter than appears on the surface. If a town council or a county council wish to get rid of the chief constable they cannot do so without first getting the sanction of the Secretary of State for Scotland. In the same way there is the greatest difficulty in England if a town council wishes to turn off a chief constable. The Secretary of State in England could keep him on. For example, there was the case at St. Helens.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANI think the point raised by the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) would be in order on this Vote if he sought to criticise the action of the Secretary of State for not consenting to the appointment of a chief constable or, if his consent was necessary, he declined to consent to a dismissal. It would appear that the case in Scotland is the same as in England and that the police are responsible to the local authority. Therefore, the question of the conduct of the police under a local authority does not arise on this Vote.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRWhile respectfully expressing agreement with your Ruling, I would only add for the information of the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs that in regard to the dismissal of a Chief Constable the matter rests entirely with the local authority. They have the power to dismiss their chief constable, but the chief constable under the Police Appeals Act has the right of appeal.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMWe are discussing the salary of the Inspector of Constabulary for Scotland. If the Secretary of State for Scotland is not the authority that controls the police, I take it that the Inspector of Constabulary has some authority over them, and it is his salary that we are discussing. Kilbirnie is not a burgh. It is a local district authority under the county council. If the police in a village like Kilbirnie take some action that is unwarranted then, surely, a Vote dealing with the payment of the chief of the police this is the proper. time to raise the question of the conduct of the police. I understand that no one with any real authority other than a sergeant was in control of the police there when a charge was made upon the people. I do not think it should lie in the hands of a comparatively small official of police to charge and baton people who are meeting together for a lawful purpose. We are not asking for anything in the nature of chaos, neither are we asking that there ought not to be respect paid to police regulations, but we do say that before people are batoned by the police there should be someone in authority who will give the people an opportunity of dispersing before any such action is taken.
My main object in raising the matter is to appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland. Most, if not all, of the men who were incriminated and put into prison are of good character, and I see no reason why the right hon. Gentleman should not exercise the clemency which his position entitles him to do and to remit a considerable part of their sentence. Now that the whole thing is over, that would be the most satisfactory way out of it. I have had some communication with the Secretary of State on the question, and I am raising the matter for the purpose of endeavouring to ascertain whether he can exercise some little 1746 authority over the police and induce the local authorities concerned to exercise a little more discretion in dealing with organised meetings during this period of unexampled poverty in that particular locality.
I should like to raise another subject. There is a feeling in the minds of a number of people in certain parts of Scotland that a, system has grown up, or is growing up, under which omnibus companies give free passes to officials of the police. I do not know to what extent that statement is true, but if it is true, it is an evil habit. The Secretary of State has informed me that he does not approve of the practice, but I think it is well that the matter should be referred to here so that attention will be drawn to it by the authorities in different parts of Scotland.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI rise to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham), and I want to appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland—for I understand it is within his jurisdiction and power—to review the sentences of men and women throughout Scotland.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANIt may or may not be that it is within the power of the Secretary of State to reduce sentences, but that is a matter which, if raised at all, must be raised on his own salary. It cannot possibly be raised on this Vote.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI want to deal with the question of police action, and, from the rulings given, it is becoming very difficult to discuss police action at all in relation to this Vote. I want to deal with the fact that the police in one or two parts of the country have been acting, to put it moderately, with a lack of tact and a lack of understanding of the spirit of the people who have been congregating together in demonstration to protest against the infliction of poverty and hardships. These people have limited opportunities of protesting against Measures that were put hastily through, and certainly not understood by the people of the country at the last election. It was after the period of the election that they fully understood the Measures put through by the House, and therefore their opportunities were limited to making their protest against the means test especially. In various parts of the 1747 country, they got together in demonstration to protest against the infliction of this poverty and hardship, and no one in this House would deny that men and women at least should have the right of reasonable democratic expression in every area against what they conceive to be the hardships to themselves and to their families.
In every part of the country there was a spontaneous coming together of ordinary, decent men and women against these hardships,, and I do not think we are entitled to expect that, if legislation is passed hastily through this House and not explained or understood previous to a democratic appeal to the country and, as I think, cunningly hidden when they went to the country, these people should have to wait for four or five years before they can have the right again to express their discontent and their resentment against this proposal. Therefore they come together and express, in a reasonable, democratic manner their aims and their desires. I do not wish to be unreasonable or to make any wild or savage attack on the police in the country. In many ways I have a respect for and understanding of the police and their duties, and I recognise that law and order must be maintained in any kind of civilised society; but I do want to say that we can understand that passions are easily aroused when men are driven to the stage when they feel they are enduring tremendous hardships and, as they believe, unnecessary hardships at the present time.
9.30 p.m.
They come into the streets and other places, and protest against this legislation. It may be true that in many places there has been in the crowds a minority of the people who may have been determined to exploit the feelings and the passions of the people for ulterior purposes. I am not going to deny that there are sections at times who are more concerned with that than with the real sufferings and feelings of the people, but I hold that the great mass of people are orderly and law-abiding, though they certainly believe that in a democratic civilisation they have the right to express their antagonism and resentment in some way. How could we ever have progressed to the present state of democracy if we had not had that right throughout the ages for sections of 1748 the people to express themselves in that fashion?
The vote was won by men and women having some right to express their discontent in the country and at various stages they were batoned down, sabres were drawn and rifles were used, in order to suppress them, when they were demanding their rights. These people come together to protest against scales of relief, which they consider are totally inadequate. Many of these people to-day, according to what we read in the Press, are driven to commit suicide because they cannot feed, clothe and house their wives and families. There was a case of suicide reported in the "Glasgow Evening Times" last evening where a man committed suicide by jumping through a window, and it was stated that he did so because his unemployment benefit was cut off, and he was without funds of any kind. There are large masses of the people without lighting of any kind in their homes or the necessary fuel to generate heat in the bodies of their wives and children during the winter months. They are being evicted from their homes in various parts of the country because of their inability to pay rents and they cannot keep a shelter over their heads. They come together in the streets to protest against this lack of humanity in the 20th century. They got into a crowd, the police see the crowd, and, naturally, passions are aroused on both sides.
It may be a very small incident which compels the police to take action without the application of reason, and the result is sometimes that some person makes a suggestion to which, in the heat of the moment, the people respond, and they are arrested in consequence of that act. I do not deny that there have been actions taken that one cannot commend, and which one would condemn, but allowance should be made in some degree for the circumstances in which these people find themselves. If I may cite one example, there was a demonstration and police action in the city of Glasgow which was brought up in the trial there. Two minutes before the police batoned and rode down the crowd, according to the evidence given by the police themselves, I requested that time should be given to confer with the other people who had organised the demonstration to see what was going to be done. My intention at that stage was to urge the people that, as 1749 there was a danger of riot and trouble, they should march back and be satisfied with the demonstration that had taken place, in order to prevent anything of that nature arising. The sheriff practically agreed that there was no evidence to prove that I came there to create disorder. Had time been given probably no riot of any kind would have taken place.
I suggest that there may be a lack of tact and understanding on the part of the police. In regard to the incident referred to by the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham), a number of people whose characters were absolutely clean and who were opposed to disorder certified in their evidence that unnecessary and most inhumane action had been taken. Whether that was true or not I do not know, I was not on the spot, and I can only judge from the evidence given. Let, me put this point to the Secretary of State: is it not rather a remarkable thing that the evidence for the defence is always completely discounted and the evidence for the police is completely accepted on every occasion.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member is not in order in criticising the decision of the courts. That is a thing he cannot do unless he tables a Motion.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI will try to keep within the limits of your Ruling. A clash took place on the 1st of May in Dundee because the authorities in that area prohibited the demonstration taking place.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member is now getting outside my Ruling. As long as he confines himself to the general recommendations of the Secretary of State, who has a certain control to issue orders dealing with these matters, he is in order. When he deals with specific eases he is criticising local bodies for whom the Secretary of State is not responsible.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI am citing these instances in order to make an appeal to the Secretary of State. I am using these examples not to criticise the action of the local authority and their refusal to grant permission but to show what led up to the clash and how the police should have taken more tactful action in the discharge of their duties. In this case the police took action, according to the evidence, and used their batons at the beginning. Is it not much better for the police 1750 on every occasion to approach someone responsible for the demonstration, to try and get an agreement not to break the law completely, but to allow them to make their protest, to have their procession, and to make it as thorough and democratic and legitimate as possible? I appeal to the Secretary of State to consider with his advisers the issuing of some instructions that in all these demonstrations the utmost tact and understanding and leniency should be shown to people who are trying to make an effective protest on behalf of their wives and families. The brute: beasts of the forest have the right of tearing from nature what they require. Human beings have certain rights of food, clothing and shelter, and they can only make themselves heard in very limited ways. If the police were considerate towards these people and sympathetic and not simply go out with the determination at all costs—I do not allege that they do in every case—to prevent the demonstration we should have fewer clashes and less trouble in the country.
I believe in demonstrations, in showing to the ruling classes and to the governing bodies what is in my mind and the minds of my fellow men. I believe in protesting. I do not believe in throwing defenceless men and women against the police. It is cruel and unjust for any person to bring people together in the street and throw them against the drawn batons of authority. I am not in favour of doing that, but I am in favour of every legitimate means of protesting and showing the Government of this country that human beings have a right to food, clothing and shelter in a civilised centre. I ask the Secretary of State to review the sentences which have been imposed especially on the women, to wipe out these sentences, as a gesture to those who are helpless and unemployed, to show to them that if they have exceeded the limits allowed by the police that at least he is sympathetic in his understanding of their demands and is prepared to concede—
§ Mr. McGOVERNI have said all I want to say; but it seems to me that the limits drawn by you have been absolutely unreasonable.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMANThe hon. Member must not criticise the Rulings of the Chair. He must withdraw that remark.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI certainly will not withdraw it.
§ Mr. McGOVERNI certainly will leave the House. I bow to your Ruling in that respect, but I still have my opinion.
§ The hon. Member withdrew accordingly.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENThe police have very difficult tasks to perform, and no task is more difficult than the handling of a large number of people, called in the language of the law a mob, which may rapidly become a riotous mob. The law should be known to the gentleman who has just retired, quietly I am glad to say on this occasion from the Committee, that if you are one of a mob, although you may be a perfectly peaceful person and are only looking on, if the mob becomes disorderly you are guilty because your presence there encourages them to go on. It is no use you saying that you were there just out of curiosity. You have no right to be there at all out of curiosity. It is one of the occasions on which you may get three months in gaol or a tap on the (head from a policeman's baton, a very painful thing to get. But yet one of the few occasions when idle curiosity gets what it deserves. The hon. Gentleman who has just retired was telling us about a particularly disorderly mob which he had witnessed somewhere in Ayrshire. He did not tell us anything about the mob at which he and the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) were present about a fortnight ago in Glasgow. I do not know the exact place, but I saw it in the newspaper, and it appeared to me that the police there took a hand on behalf of the hon. Gentlemen who were being dragged from the platform by a very disorderly mob. I think that they must have been profoundly grateful to the police on that occasion. I think the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs was so indignant that he called them "a lot of dirty rats" and used words of that description. I do not 1752 know that they really came to blows, but that is very likely. I am not so sure that these hon. Gentlemen would have been very much annoyed if the police had drawn their batons and given a few pats to those who were molesting them. "The policeman's lot is not a happy one." The police are always comparatively few in numbers. When there is a mob it is often a case of one hundred to one against them and they cannot stop to engage in a Parliamentary discussion with individual orators in the mob. If you could guarantee a number of police equal to that of the multitude round about, they might engage in such a Parliamentary discussion.
I recollect seeing a riot in Glasgow in 1919. I was standing afar off like the Levite. I took very good care that my curiosity was situated geographically at a very long distance. But I saw there the late Member for Linlithgowshire, Mr. Shinwell, who evidently knew the law quite well. For if ever I saw a marathon runner when he realised that the mob was getting disorderly, it was Mr. Shinwell. I believe he ran all the way home to Partick. When there is trouble about you must assist the police or get home to your bed. I believe that he got under the bed. But the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs did not know the law. He sought to argue with the police, as he does here with the Chair, and the policeman gave him a crack on the head with a baton. It was very painful. He told me about it; he told me He was unconscious for 25 minutes. He has been far, far too sanguine. For those of us who have heard him speak question if he has yet recovered his senses; I do not believe he has completely got the better of it. The people ought to understand that when a huge mob collect? without proper leadership there is all the material for a crash.
I remember reading of that in the old volunteer days, in the time of Napoleon III, when the volunteers went out for sham fights care had to be taken that different regiments did not get close enough to each other, because the tendency was, when one mass of men got opposite another mass, for them to come to blows. I remember an old picture of a man coming home to his wife after one of these sham fights, and when asked how he had fared said he had enjoyed himself 1753 but he wished they had been real bullets. That is what the nature of mankind is. Men get to blows with very little provocation. When you get a comparatively few police dealing with a big mob it is almost like a Department of State against the taxpayer, one is disciplined and the other is not, there is grave danger of disorder. Bismarck once said that private interest is an organised force, but public interest is a mob. I have seen hundreds of stalwart miners scattered by a scare of police. In Fife, 5,000 miners were scattered by 45 policemen. Yet miners are generally extraordinarily law-abiding people. You get these largo assemblies, these demonstrations, and most of those who take part have not even a thought of being disorderly. But once the trouble starts you never know where it will end. You are obliged to leave these things to the police.
I remember once congratulating a superintendent of police on his military skill in scattering a large mob of very troublesome characters with only 22 police He told me that he had had an early experience of riots. He said that as a rule not 1 per cent. of men were inclined to be lawless, but that if you get 7,000 of them together they become a mob and troublesome riots are likely to develop. He added, "I lie in wait for the small nucleus of evildoers, and I give them a few taps with the baton. It is extraordinary what a civilising effect that has. Of course I try to get my police not to hit on the head, and if they do so to loosen their hold on the baton at the moment it touches the bead, so that it will not cut a man's head. But it leaves a large lump the size of an egg, and that lump remains so sore that the man cannot put his hat on for about a, fortnight, and as long as the lump is aching he takes no interest in public affairs."
I recommend the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) to take into consideration the extraordinary difficulties of the police. There is no class of men for whom I have more respect than for the police. To begin with, they have to undergo a severe physical examination. It would be a good thing if the Members of this House underwent a physical examination. Many of us no doubt would be rejected, but there would at least be the assurance that legislation would be passed suitable for the fit man, whereas an unfit man is 1754 apt to pass legislation for those only who are morally and physically unfit. There is no more humane body of men than the police. I remember a murder or serious crime of some kind that was committed in one of the worst districts of a large Scots town. An old woman was the first to come across the tragedy. When she was asked what she did she replied, "I ran out and cried, 'Police, police.'" That is the first thing that is done when there is trouble. Then the policeman comes in and acts sanely and judicially. The policeman has to be a man very much above the average in intelligence and physique.
I put it to the hon. Member for Shettleston, and I am sure that the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs would agree with this proposition, that the police, on the whole, do their duty faithfully and well and with the minimum amount of aggression. I do not think that any special instructions are necessary from the Secretary of State for Scotland, or from the Home Office. I do not know as regards the Secretary of State for Scotland, but I certainly do not think that the Home Office know the duties of the police as well as the policemen themselves. Otherwise they would not have enforced that extraordinary charge for the giving of information by policemen in the case of certain actions—a charge which the policemen themselves repudiate. If you leave the police to do their duty conscientiously, I think they will carry out their duty just as well in time to come as they have done in the past. I think there can be very little criticism of their action, either in the case of which the hon. Member for Shettleston spoke, or in the case in which they protected the hon. Member himself and his colleague opposite from the fury of a Communist mob.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRI know that the Committee wishes to pass on to other Votes and I mast be brief in my reply to the points raised by Members on this Vote. The hon. Member who opened the Debate referred to the salary of the Inspector of Police. The increase, which is only an increase of £19, is one which the State is bound to give him. It is an increase in the normal incremental scale given to all civil servants, according to the terms on which they are engaged, and there is no difference between the 1755 treatment of the Inspector of Police in this matter and the treatment given to any other public servant. His salary is, of course, subject to the economy cut on the bonus. The hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) and the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) raised a question about the action of the police in connection with disturbances which occurred as a result of protests against the means test. Let me make it quite clear to the Committee that the Government fully recognise the right of the public to protest against the Government or against anything else, and there is not the slightest desire on the part of the Government to put any restraint upon those measures of protest and those demonstrations other than that which is necessary in order to safeguard the rights of the public.
It is the duty of the magistrates to preserve law and order and I have to repeat that the police are not responsible to me but to the local magistrates. It is their duty to see to the preservation of law and order and the preservation of public rights such as the right of free passage through the streets. Subject to that duty, it is the custom of the magistrates in every part of the country to give opportunities for the free expression of opinion and that is in accordance with the wish of the Government. But if, as the hon. Member for Shettleston clearly admitted in the course of his speech, some person makes a suggestion, which people in hot blood may respond to, sometimes that suggestion leads to violent attacks on the rights and the property of other people, to the smashing of plate glass windows on a large scale, for instance, or the obstruction of traffic, and it is necessary then for the police to take measures for the preservation of the rights of the public. The hon. Member for Shettleston said that he believed in demonstrations and that he was in favour of every legitimate form of protest. On that there is no difference between us, but, as the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten) has said, the police have exercised great tact and discretion in the handling of the very difficult situations with which they have occasionally been faced in one or two of our big cities. There is no doubt that in some cases the burgh police have had very 1756 heavy duties to perform and I am convinced, according to my information, that they have exercised much discretion and forbearance and have carried out their duties properly and efficiently.
10.0 p.m.
The hon. Member for Hamilton also raised the question of free passes on public conveyances for chief constables. I have already said in answer to a question, and I am obliged to the hon. Member for the opportunity of stating it more formally in this Committee, that that is a custom which, I think, is open to the gravest objections. I hope that the publicity which has been given to this matter by has question and by my answer, may result in the ending of this custom if, in fact, it still exists, as I am disposed to doubt.
§ Mr. KIRKW00DI put a question in regard to an individual chief constable and mentioned the case, but I also asked whether it was not the case that councillors and magistrates in the counties were getting this privilege from the private omnibus companies and the Secretary of State said he did not think he had any jurisdiction over magistrates and councillors. I think he ought to emphasise the fact that neither magistrates nor town councillors, any more than chief constables, ought to get these privileges.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRI think it is quite obvious that anybody who exercises judicial functions in relation to these companies ought not to have free passes on these vehicles. That is strongly my opinion. But as regards county councillors who were also referred to by the hon. Member, their case I think raises a different order of considerations. The county councillor does not exercise judicial functions in relation to these companies, and I think it would be an undue restriction of the field from which you can recruit county councillors if you said that they were on no account to have free passes on these vehicles even if they themselves were directors of the company. I do not think it necessary in the public interest or desirable that such restrictions should apply to county councillors.
The Committee will expect when we are dealing with such an important Vote as the Police Vote, that I should say something about its broader aspects. The authorised strength of the forces in Scotland at the end of last year was 6,626, 1757 representing one constable to every 578 persons in the burghs and one constable to every 1,001 persons in the county area. The total cost to the Exchequer, including the salary of His Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary to which, the hon. Member opposite referred, for 1932–33, is estimated at £1,062,452, a reduction of £47,506 on the year 1931–32. This reduction is mainly due to the 5 per cent, cut in the police pay which was made last October, and to the new scale of pay for new entrants into the service. They were both brought into operation on the 1st October last.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMIs there any increase in the numbers?
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRNo. In fact, there is a steady decrease, due to reorganisation within the force, and one particular factor which is coming into operation increasingly, and that is the consolidation of forces. Hon. Members will remember that under the Scottish Local Government Act, 1929, we in Scotland took a different course from England; we took power to effect the amalgamation of police forces in small burghs in Scotland with the county force, and actually in eight small burghs the police forces were amalgamated with the county force, and two lots of two counties were also amalgamated at the same time. Further than that, this year Dumfries burgh and Dumfries county have come to an amalgamation agreement, which came into operation as from the 15th May, and the result of that is that there are now 48 grant-receiving police forces in Scotland, 29 county and 19 burghs. The police have, I think, by their conduct in very difficult circumstances during this winter, earned the confidence of this Committee and of the people of Scotland.
§ Mr. D. GRAHAMI beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ Sir A. SINCLAIRI beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.