HC Deb 10 February 1937 vol 320 cc537-48

Motion made and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Hope.]

10.55 p.m.

Mr. Sexton

I make no apology for keeping hon. Members here late to-night, and indeed I should be lacking in my duty not only to my own constituents, but to the constituents of the Special Areas, if I did not draw the attention of the House to the disgraceful way in which they have been treated as far as afforestation is concerned. The problem of the Special Areas is engaging the attention of the Government. The only way they have offered up to the present for solving it is by transference, and the only transference to which they have referred is that of transferring our young people from the Special Areas to round about London. We have to educate those young people and bring them up to manhood, and after we have spent very much money in so doing, all of it increasing our rates, we have to send them to the more prosperous areas, which are low-rated. We have to send men ready-made from the North and from Wales, and we object to that.

I would like to remind the Government that transference is not a one-way scheme. It is not only possible to transfer men to industry, but possible, where there is the will to do it, to transfer industry to men. The Government have had a chance of transferring industry to men in this matter of afforestation. We have been told by the Government that they could not exert any compulsion with regard to the location of industry, but neither have they given any compassion or consideration to the people in the distressed areas. As far as afforestation is concerned, we have an abundance of acres in the North of England and in Wales, and over a year ago, Sir Malcolm Stewart, in his first report, recommended the Government to take the question into consideration. The Forestry Commissioners were asked to assist the Government and they promised to plant 200,000 extra acres in or near the Special Areas.

Colonel Sir George Courthope (Forestry Commissioner)

In ten years.

Mr. Sexton

So far that pledge has been practically an unredeemed pledge. I attended a conference on forestry and afforestation in Newcastle last April, and at that conference various opinions were expressed, but we heard nothing from the landowners. On 19th May, 1936, I asked the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Rye (Sir G. Courthope) the following question: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say how many unemployed have been set to work on this scheme? The reply was: I am afraid that I cannot answer that question, but the number must be considerable."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th May, 1936; col. 994, Vol. 312.] On 26th May, 1936, I asked the following question: How many unemployed persons in the Special Areas have been engaged on the additional planting scheme outlined at the recent conference at Newcastle-on-Tyne? and I received this reply from the hon. and gallant Gentleman: None have been engaged on the planting scheme referred to, as the planting season does not begin until November, but draining and fencing will be undertaken as soon as possession has been secured of new land."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th May, 1936; cols. 1832–33, Vol. 312.] Again, on 17th November, 1936, when the planting season should have started, I asked a question and I received a reply from the hon. and gallant Member for Barkston Ash (Colonel Ropner) on behalf of the Forestry Commissioners. I asked how many men had been engaged from the distressed or Special Areas, and I received the numbers, which were 15 in the North of England and 17 in South Wales, and on that occasion, of course, the North of England did not include Durham.

It being Eleven of the Clock, the Motion for the Adjournment lapsed, without Question put. Question again proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Hope.]

Mr. Sexton

A week ago I asked the hon. and gallant Member for Rye how many men had been engaged from the Special Areas. The answer was that in South Wales the number was 35 and in the North of England 17, and in Durham none. I do not know whether the Special Areas outside Durham are satisfied with that number. They are able to speak for themselves, but I am speaking for Durham County when I say that we are deeply dissatisfied with the disgraceful condition of the countryside, considering the wonderful land there and the wonderful people there who are eating their hearts out in idleness. This part of Durham is one of the hardest-hit districts in the country. There are villages in my constituency with 50 per cent. or more unemployed. It is true that the numbers are not large—in some cases only a couple of hundred—but even 200 people in the case of a country village is an alarmingly high figure. It is not that we have not the right kind of land. I saw in some of the papers last week, after I had asked the question on this subject, a sort of apology to the effect that the land was too near the pits and was affected by smoke and fumes. I live in a district which is at least 20 miles from the nearest pit and three or four of the largest sanatoria in the country have been placed there on account of the clear bracing atmosphere. Not only is the air clear, but the land will grow the finest trees to be seen anywhere. Thousands of trees were cut down there during the War and we have fine examples not only of coniferous trees, but of oak, ash, beech, birch, and elm, which can be matched against any produced in the South or Midlands.

At the conference in Newcastle-on-Tyne we were told that mountain and heath land was required. That is exactly the sort of land which is to be found in my constituency. I do not say it is all land which can be planted, but at least 200,000 acres could usefully be planted with the kind of trees we want, yet in Durham County not a single tree has been planted under this scheme, not a man has been engaged and not a pound has been spent. I understand the Government made a grant of £200,000 this year towards this extra scheme. We hear a lot in this House about the wide open spaces of the Empire. If hon. Members come to my division they will find that there are wide open spaces there and that it is not necessary to send people out to the Colonies to find such spaces. We have the land there and we have the men, and we want some of this money. The hon. Member for Morpeth (Mr. R. J. Taylor) has told us about wide open spaces in Australia which are all scrub land, overgrown with prickly pear. We have none of that in Durham. Our land is ready and waiting. The labour is there and I want to know why Durham has been excluded.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman said a great deal has been done in neighbouring counties, which would give relief in Durham. But over a year has gone, and no relief has come to the county of Durham. Later on, in answer to a supplementary question by the hon. Member for Seaham (Mr. Shinwell), he said: The Forestry Commissioners are under an obligation to arrange special afforestation schemes for the Special Areas, of which the county of Durham forms a part. There is no obligation to select individual counties."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 2nd February, 1937; col. 1423, Vol. 319.] I think there should be no obligation to neglect individual counties, and Durham County has been sadly neglected. The people of South-West Durham are aching in heart and wondering how this wonderful prosperity about which we hear is coming to them. When I go down to my constituency and talk about this wonderful prosperity that I hear of from the Government, they say, "Where is the prosperity? We have seen none of it. We have partaken of none of it." The type of men that you get in these districts is the very type that the Forestry Commission want. They are hardy men, hardy dalesmen, the South-West Durham miners, the very build for the job. They are used to it; every man of them is used almost to afforestation itself. They are used to horticulture, digging and trenching, and so on, and it is high time that something was done for them. They have asked for long enough. I have had meeting after meeting and suggested afforestation to them, and when I come here and ask about it, I find that nothing has been done in Durham County.

If you look at Durham, you will find that nearly all the local councils are run by Socialist majorities; on the county council we have had a Socialist majority for 12 years; and when you look at the Parliamentary representation of the administrative county of Durham, you will see that we have a 100 per cent. Socialist membership of this House. We are beginning to think that the people of Durham are being penalised for their politics, and the whole business, to my mind, wants fairly investigating by the Government or somebody else. We are not satisfied to be penalised for our politics. There is no chance of getting us to come to the political penitents' form, and if they want to get us there, the best way is not to ignore us. The people in my division are ground down. The Government, like the mills of God, "grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly small," and they have got the South-West Durham people "ground exceeding small." It is time that this shameful neglect, so far as Durham is concerned, was seen to. In conclusion, I would like to ask the hon. and gallant Member how he reconciles the figures that he gave to me last May, and what has happened to the considerable number who were engaged one week and dropped the next. Does he think that 35 people in South Wales, 17 in Northumberland, and none in Durham make a satisfactory response to the Government when they ask the Forestry Commission to take into consideration and to help the Special Areas in working afforestation schemes?

11.9 p.m.

Sir G. Courthope

I may owe you, Sir, and the Members of this House an apology, because of an answer which I gave to a question last week, for keeping you here late to-night, but I am clear that the Commissioners whom I represent owe no apology whatever to the constituency of the hon. Member for Barnard Castle (Mr. Sexton) or to the county of Durham. His complaint is based on an entire misconception of the facts. Let me explain the position. It was explained about a year ago, or rather less, when the Treasury first authorised the expenditure of additional money on special forestry schemes for the Special Areas. It was then explained quite clearly that it would be necessary, not only to find and acquire land, not only to prepare and plant nurseries, but first of all to find and collect seed in the remote parts of the world where the necessary varieties of seed are to be found and to sow it in our seed beds. It was clearly explained that by the time we obtained the seed, from three or four years at least must elapse before the young plants were-ready for planting out in the plantations. Those who are familiar with forestry operations know these facts, but I explained them in the House to those who might not know them.

The Forestry Commission were so confident that the scheme that we had already submitted to the Government in order to assist the Special Areas would be approved to some extent—it was, in fact, approved entirely—that we made arrangements for the collection and purchase of seed before we got authority last February to spend £200,000 this year and to plant 200,000 acres in 10 years. We obtained the seed and started work on the necessary extension of nurseries in order to raise the plants. The seed was sown in the spring of last year, within a comparatively few weeks of the Treasury authority for the expenditure.

Mr. Lawson

It is not long since heard the hon. and gallant Member ex plain to the House that they had disposed of a great surplus of young trees, and there was quite a hue and cry about it. It was about 1,000,000 trees.

Sir G. Courthope

It was more than that. At the time of the May Report, the normal programme of planting of the Forestry Commission, which had previously been approved by Parliament, and for which preparation was made by the growing of plants in the nurseries, was cut down severely. We found ourselves with 50,000,000 surplus plants in our nurseries—I mean little plants a few inches high. Our programme was cut down as the result of the May Report, and we had these alternatives. If we had thrown these surplus seedlings on the market for what they would fetch, every professional nurseryman would have gone into bankruptcy. They had the stocks which the normal demand of the country could absorb. After consideration, and after arranging that a certain quantity of the surplus stocks should be taken over and planted by local authorities in catchment areas in connection with water schemes, we decided that the only proper and economical course was to destroy the balance. We actual destroyed about 50,000,000 young plants. If the May Report had not been made these young plants would have been invaluable a few years later. They would have been too old to transplant out in the forests now.

Mr. Attlee

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman estimate the loss that the country has sustained by this so-called May economy?

Sir G. Courthope

No, it is too big a thing for me to do that. My recollection is that we estimated the 50,000,000 plants that we had raised and the preparation of the nurseries in which they had grown as worth something approaching £50,000. I give that figure with reserve because I did not know this question was going to be asked. It is past history and I may be inaccurate in the figure. [Interruption.] They were plants of one year, two years and three years—three years was the maximum. The three-year plants had been transplanted once; it is our practice to move two-year-old plants from the seed beds where they were sown into nursery land.

But let me come back to the speech of the hon. Member for Barnard Castle. In May of last year he asked me two questions. The first was, How much employment had been given in connection with this scheme? He did not limit it to planting, and I told him, as was the fact, that a considerable amount of employment was being given, though I could not give it in terms of men or of money, by the expansion due to this scheme. We were already at work extending nurseries on quite a large scale, and a very large amount of seed had already been sown, and was being taken care of.

Mr. Sexton

I asked how many unemployed had been set to work on schemes.

Sir G. Courthope

Exactly; and a number of men had been taken on in connection with the very considerable extension of our existing nurseries. They were extended for the purpose of this special scheme, but because it w as an extension of existing nurseries I could not separate things out. But it meant a good deal of additional employment, and a very large quantity of seed which, as I have already explained, we had taken the risk of getting before we received authority, had already been sown before I answered that question. A few days later the hon. Member asked another question about the number of people employed on planting, and I answered with perfect truth that it was not the season for planting, and that none were employed on planting. As a matter of fact none are employed yet on planting in connection with these Special Areas, because, to begin with, we have not got any plants ready for them to plant, and, secondly, we are only just beginning to get the land to put the plants in, except nursery land.

The question which the hon. Member asked last Tuesday and on my reply to which he raised this subject to-night—in quite moderate language: I make no complaint—was how much money had been expended out of this grant. Up to the present all we have been able to spend, all the acreage which we have been able actually to acquire, is confined to those cases in which we have reached the stage of a contract to purchase and been able to complete it. The acreage which we have already "secured"—that was the term in his question—by purchase is a very small part of that about which we are negotiating and which we confidently hope, as soon as the lawyers have finished negotiations and investigation of title and so on, to acquire. Already we have had reports on something considerably over 300,000 acres in connection with these special schemes—that includes the three Special Areas—and we have completed negotiations in respect of something between 29,000 and 30,000 acres. When I say "completed negotiations" I mean that we have not only satisfied ourselves that the land is suitable, that it is not required for growing food, but that we have arranged terms with the owners of the land, and all that is necessary to complete the purchase is, as I say, the formal investigation of the title and the completion of the contract; but I could not include that land in the answer to the hon. Member's question, because it is not actually secured until the contracts are signed.

Let me say a word about the county of Durham. I have had the figures taken out, although we are not dealing county by county, but by areas, according to the instructions that we received from this House. It happens that in the county of Durham, the areas from which we have had reports from our special officers, are 22,700 acres. One block of 403 acres has been definitely sanctioned for purchase, but we have not got the contract signed. The terms are agreed, and the contract will be signed. Another block of 500 acres has been definitely offered and no doubt very shortly will be added to the "secured" figure.

With regard to the complaint that Durham is neglected, I would remind the hon. Member that, under our ordinary schemes, quite apart from the Special Areas, we have a plantation at Hamsterley extending to 5,104 acres and one at Chopwell amounting to 817 acres. I wish we had a lot more. I could express the same wish in regard to many parts of the country. We have established 17 forest workers' holdings and in addition, in conjunction with the Ministry of Labour, a training centre has been established at Hamsterley for 200 men for the making of forest roads. Having said that, I want to emphasise that it is not our work to distribute among counties or constituencies the amount that we get. We have to do the best we can to make the money which is granted to us go the longest possible distance and to carry out the task of providing these large additional areas of afforestation within 15 miles of the specified Special Areas. The largest proportion of land for which we have completed negotiations happens to be in the same Special Area as the county of Durham. Most of the land is in the adjoining county of Northumberland.

Mr. Sexton

How many miles?

Sir G. Courthope

I cannot give the figure in miles, but it is within 15 miles of the distressed area. Then authority was given to us to establish additional forest workers' holdings. We saw no necessity to wait until we bought special land, and we have been establishing additional forest workers' holdings on land in Northumberland which we already held in our hands. There are 81 additional forest workers' holdings which would not be established yet but for the Special Areas scheme, already in being in Northumberland. We hope that the work will continue and that Durham will get its full share of the extra employment and relief which this additional afforestation will give.

I hope the hon. Member and the House will realise first of all that the fact that 11 months have passed and that only a very small expenditure has been made, does not mean that substantial progress has not been achieved. When we received the Treasury's authority for this scheme at the end of February of last year, we were instructed to limit our activities for the time to the acquisition of 100,000 acres in three years. We have already completed negotiations for between 29,000 and 30,000 acres. In spite of the fact that we had to establish a special staff, who had been at work for about six or seven months, we have got that area already. I do not say that I should not have liked to see more done—I should like it to be doubled or trebled—but I do not think it is a very had start on a very big task. The hon. Member for Barnard Castle said we have not used any compulsory powers. That is quite true, and we hope we may never have to. If a scheme of this kind is to go smoothly, it must be done with local good will. Directly you start compulsion you stir up trouble somewhere, and we want the help, not only of the owners from whom we are buying, but from the farmers who have sheep on their land and whom we may be disturbing, from the labour which they employ and which we hope will be transferred to our employment, and so on; and we think it very important, as long as we can, to get the work carried through with complete local good will.

We have not done another thing which we may have to do. We may have to come to this House to ask for legislation to authorise the enclosure of a certain amount of land over which there are common rights of one kind and another, of which very little use is made. There are a large number of areas of land, some in Durham, some in South Wales, some in West Cumberland, which is very suitable for planting, but from which we are excluded by the fact that a limited number of folk have rights which they are not using, but still they are rights. Only last spring, in company with a number of my colleagues on the Forestry Commission, including the hon. Member for Gower (Mr. Grenfell), a very valued colleague, we visited some areas in South Wales. There was a big block of suitable land—I will not mention names—with which the owner was willing to part. There were livestock—sheep—on the land belonging to six individuals, with all of whom we had made terms, and our officers thought they had got a very large block of planting land comparatively easily.

Inquiries went further, and we found there were a very large number of others who had not any stock there, and did not own any stock, but still had a right, if at any time they acquired stock, to graze it on that land, and consequently that is lost to us. We believe it would be to the national interest that special legislation should be passed enabling some of that land to be used for the growing of trees. The difficulty is that plantation with any prospect of success is impossible unless you fence. You must have enclosure, and to authorise enclosure you must have the authority of legislation. I hope I have said enough to satisfy the hon. Member that he has no cause of complaint. I quite understand his feeling aggrieved that the money has not been spent faster, but there is every prospect that the full programme will be carried out within the period laid down, and the fact that no more money has been spent is due to natural causes and not to any slackness on the part of the Commission for whom I speak.

Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.