§ 25. Mr. Shinwellasked the Home Secretary whether asbestos products now 539 being manufactured for protective measures in air raid precautions have been tested and found to be impervious to all known forms of incendiary material?
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd)Various asbestos products have been tested to determine their utility for protective measures in air raid precautions. The results have shown varying degrees of resistance to incendiary material.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs the hon. Gentleman aware that private tests have been carried out, and that it has been found that asbestos products are of no value whatever against incendiarism?
§ Mr. LloydI do not think that the Air Raid Precautions Department would accept that view at all, but the matter is under test by them.
§ Mr. ShinwellAs the hon. Gentleman himself agrees that the results have been of a very indifferent character, does not that indicate that no complete protection has been afforded; and is it wise to mislead the public as to the efficacy of these air raid precautions?
§ Mr. LloydI am not aware that a public statement has been made on the use of asbestos for this purpose. At the moment it is in the stage of confidential investigation, not at present it is under consideration to issue a performance specification for the guidance of manufacturers.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs the hon. Gentleman aware that certain firms producing asbestos products are claiming that these products are a complete safeguard against incendiary material; and is it wise that the public should be misled in these matters?
§ Mr. LloydI am not aware that firms are making these claims, but I am not responsible for claims made by private firms. If and when a statement is made by His Majesty's Government on the subject, then will be the time for the hon. Member to criticise.
§ Sir Ronald RossDo not hon. Gentlemen opposite claim to have a complete safeguard against war?
§ 26. Mr. Shinwellasked the Home Secretary whether he is satisfied that grey canisters issued to Air-raid Precautions departments, police, and ambulance corps 540 are effective against known gases likely to be used in actual warfare?
§ Mr. LloydThe grey containers which have been issued with service respirators to the police, etc., are for training purposes only and give effective protection against most gases but not against all. In the event of emergency this container would be replaced by another container, similar in shape, size and resistance to breathing, but containing chemicals and pads which give protection against all gases likely to be encountered in war.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs it not desirable that the canister used in practice should be an effective canister? What is the use of using a canister which is not intended to be used in the event of aerial raids?
§ Mr. LloydObviously, considerable value can be derived from the use in training of a canister very similar to that used in war, and I think the House will appreciate that it is desirable not to make too widely available the actual Service canister.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs it not also true—
§ Mr. ShinwellOn a point of Order, may I ask by what rule of order an hon. Member is deprived of the right to ask a supplementary question which is quite relevant to the main question on a subject of such substantial importance?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member cannot keep on asking the same supplementary.
§ Mr. ShinwellI have not asked the same supplementary. With very great respect I deny that I have been asking the same supplementary question. The fact that the Under-Secretary has replied in a different fashion proves that I have not asked the same supplementary question. I object to the suggestion that I have done so.
§ Mr. SpeakerI must be the judge in these matters.
§ 71. Mr. Banfieldasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of anti-gas training recommended to the Civil Service, his Department proposes to suggest contracting out of the training on the part of the staff or contracting in?
§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Lieut.-Colonel Colville)Civil servants are being asked to volunteer for anti-gas training of a specialist kind, that is, for first aid duties in Government Departments. In addition instruction will be provided for the staffs as a whole in regard to personal protection against the effects of gas. This instruction will be in official hours and will not be compulsory, although it is hoped that staffs will avail themselves of the facilities provided. For this instruction it seemed most convenient both to Departments and to individuals to ask those who did not desire to take advantage of the arrangements to inform their Departments to that effect. Representations in a contrary sense have been received from certain staff associations and these are under consideration.
§ Mr. BanfieldDoes the right hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that this matter is causing a great deal of discontent? Is he aware that practically the whole of the staffs are in favour of contracting in, but do not like the idea of contracting out, and that this may lead to serious difficulties?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleAs I said, certain representations have been received and are under consideration, but I am bound to express the view that, from the Departmental standpoint, the present arrangement seems the most convenient both for the people concerned and for those who have to run the scheme.
§ Mr. BanfieldBut does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that there is always the possibility of the victimisation of those who may stand by certain principles?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleI cannot agree with that statement. The hon. Gentleman must bear in mind that while it is possible to contract out of taking this instruction, it is not possible to contract out of the risk of air raids, and we desire to ensure that as many as possible shall receive this instruction, which is entirely voluntary.