CLAUSE 1.—(Guarantee of Palestine Loan) (Hansard, 1 June 1934)

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
I beg to move, in page 1, line 11, to leave out from "Act" to the end of the Sub-section.
I need hardly say that I do not move this Amendment with a view to getting it embodied in the Bill, but with a view to getting information from the Secretary of State as to one or two matters. In the first place could we have information from him as to how much of this £2,000,000 loan has been already spent? Secondly, the right hon. Gentleman was good enough to say the other day that there was no money being spent out of this £2,000,000 for the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. I merely wanted to be assured of that, and also to know that that assurance applies to money already spent and to be refunded out of this loan. Many of the arguments which the right hon. Gentleman used in the previous discussions were in favour of the expenditure of fresh money beyond that which has already been spent. He told us, too, that the accumulated reserve of Palestine amounted to £1,500,000. I wish to know, was that £1,500,000, after this refund had taken place, or was it £1,500,000 left after certain sums had been spent from the reserve on the purposes specified in the Schedule? As a matter of fact, is the 514 actual accumulated reserve not really more than £1,500,000?

§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister)
I appreciate the fact that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman does not desire to have this Amendment made in the Bill. It would indeed be contrary to all precedent and, if I may say so, it would not be a sensible thing to do. The Government of Palestine has gone ahead with its programme of works. I cannot say actually how much money has been spent out of the surplus balances already which would be repaid out of this loan. There has been considerable expenditure on water-works, resulting in the placing of orders in this country, and I think it will be agreed that where the work is of tremendous urgency and is patently in the interests of Palestine and also in the interests of employment in this country, that work ought to go ahead. There is always a certain amount of balance which might be called working capital where there are large public works being carried out in a Colony. I gave two figures. I gave the budgetary surplus on the annual income and expenditure over a succession of years, and I also gave the position of the reserve fund. The budgetary surplus is, of course, the actual balance of income over expenditure in a year, and I gave the amount credited to the reserve fund, as I estimated it would stand at the end of this financial year.

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
Does the figure of £1,500,000 exclude what has already been spent; and cannot the right hon. Gentleman give an estimate of how much has been spent?

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I should hesitate to give an estimate. I should not like to say with certainty what is the actual amount expended. If I might take it, however, on the ground of commitments and of orders which have been placed and work carried out, I should say that probably £.300,000 or £400,000 has already either been spent or is involved in contracts which have been placed. Finally, as regards the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, no part of this money is going towards the work on that church.

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
I think the figure of £1,500,000 was given as the accumulated reserve and not as the surplus 515 on the year. I wish to be clear as to whether that £1,500,000 includes this £300,000, or whatever the amount is that has already been report.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
No, I said at the beginning that it was my estimate of how the reserve would stand and that was the reserve entirely untouched.

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
So that when the loan has been passed through the actual reserve will probably stand at nearly £2,000,000?

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I gave the figures to the House on the last occasion.

§ Mr. RHYS DAVIES
Before we part with this Clause which is the most important Clause in this very short Bill, I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman some questions. May I first draw attention to the report for 1933 which has been issued by the Jewish Agency in Palestine to the League of Nations for their consideration, note of which appears in the Press this morning. It is worth while to say in passing that that report indicates considerable progress in Palestine in every sphere of life during 1933. It also shows that the improvement and progress of previous years have been maintained and that is all to the good. The first question which I put to the right hon. Gentleman is, who will be the contractors who are to carry out this work? I understand that the work in Haifa Harbour was carried out in the main by our own engineers. I wonder whether the contracts in connection with this expenditure will be carried out——

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain Bourne)
I think that question will arise on Clause 2 which deals specifically with the allocation of orders.

§ Mr. DAVIES
In that case, I leave that point for the present. But I would ask the right hon. Gentleman if it is possible, before the close of the proceedings today, to clear up the point raised by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) as to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. There is a great deal of apprehension about it. I do not know 516 whether the question can properly be raised at this stage, but perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would find it convenient and possible at some point in the Debate to let us know the exact situation with regard to this great monument. There is another question. Everybody knows that the River Jordan in Palestine is below the sea level and in connection with this expenditure it would be interesting to know how it is proposed to deal with the water supply particularly in Jerusalem which is I believe some 2,000 feet above the sea level. Is it proposed to bore wells or to pump water from the river? Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to deal with those simple questions.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
As regards the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, if I may refer to it, without transgressing the Rules of Order, I think I gave all the information the other day in reply to a series of questions. The Government of Palestine felt that it was urgently important that this great world monument should be preserved and they took the responsibility of advancing or rather paying the money which was urgently required for this purpose and that money has been paid. Discussions are going on with various religious bodies to see how far what the Government has already paid and what will be necessary in the future can be defrayed by contributions from the various religious bodies. I think the whole sense of the House is with us in regarding this matter as being in a class by itself, and in approving of the steps taken by the Government of Palestine.

§ Mr. HOLFORD KNIGHT
Are we to understand that these religious communities are hesitating about finding the money necessary to keep the Holy Sepulchre in proper order?

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I understand that no part of this Bill relates to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and therefore it is not in order to raise the matter at all.

§ Mr. KNIGHT
The only reason I asked a question was because the matter had been raised.

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
On that point of Order, I would like to point out that 517 the Colonial Secretary has made an entirely unfounded observation in saying that the expenditure of the money on this church meets with the entire approval of this House. Nothing of the sort.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I am always ready to except the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's views.

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
On the point of Order. The Colonial Secretary is making the matter worse. He is not merely saying that it has the approval of this House, but that I am the only person who disapproves it. Therefore, I must ask for the right of reply to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that in this matter I am not speaking for myself at all, but for the vast body of opinion in this country which knows that church. Therefore, I ask to be allowed to reply to the right hon. Gentleman's entirely unfounded assumption. This is a most damaging principle.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I think I was wrong in allowing the Secretary of State for the Colonies to raise this matter at all, but he was giving a reply to the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies). As it is clear that there is going to be no expenditure on this church under this Bill, the matter cannot be raised.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I was only trying to be courteous to the hon. Gentleman who raised the question. With regard to the question of the wells of Palestine——

§ Colonel WEDGWOOD
May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is acquainted with the work which has already been done and the expenditure which has already been incurred in providing a water supply? Is it intended under this scheme to pump the water from below up to Jerusalem? How much money has been spent on that business already, and has it succeeded or failed? I am nervous lest a large part of the money advanced under this loan will be used simply to wipe out money which has already been spent and largely wasted in trying to produce a water supply for Jerusalem. I think that we are entitled to know before we leave this Clause how much of the money is to make good the loss which the Palestine Government 518 have already incurred in failing to find water for Jerusalem.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
There is no question of repaying any money spent in the past. This money is entirely for new work. It is to be spent in carrying the water which can be obtained from the springs. The whole of the technical side has been most carefully considered, and I think the Committee may rest assured that what is being done is based on expert advice.