HC Deb 17 July 1939 vol 350 cc135-40

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to make provision for authorising the Board of Trade, in the event of war and in other circumstances, to undertake the insurance of ships and other goods, for the payment by the Board of Trade, in time of war, of compensation in respect of goods lost or damaged in transit, for requiring persons to insure goods against certain risks in time of war, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid, it is expedient to authorise—

  1. (a)the payment into the Exchequer of the amount by which the sum standing at any time to the credit of either of the funds established under the said Act exceeds the sum which, in the opinion of the Board of Trade and the Treasury, is likely to be required for the making of payments out of that fund; and
  2. (b)the issue out of the Consolidated Fund of the amount of any sum so paid into the Exchequer and the application of that amount in redeeming or paying off debt;
and to authorise the Treasury to raise money and to create and issue securities for the purpose of providing for the issue of sums out of ficiency in either of the said funds. — [Mr. Stanley.]

8.54 p.m.

Mr. Shinwell

I am sorry to be persistent, but I propose to take advantage of the Financial Resolution to put a point for the purposes of elucidation. In the latter stages of the previous Bill there appeared to be some confusion arising from the liabilities to be undertaken by the Government. Reference has been made to a statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 31st January this year, and to the statement made by the President of the Board of Trade in the course of the Debate this afternoon. There appears to be a discrepancy between those two utterances, and it is on that point that I desire some elucidation.

The Chairman

I am not quite sure whether the hon. Member is in order on this Resolution. This is a Ways and Means Resolution not the Financial Resolution; that comes next, but if the point of the hon. Member is not a long one, I think we can dispose of it now that the hon. Member has started it.

Mr. Shinwell

It is as well to deal with it now as at any other time, and as it is a point which relates to the matter before us, I think it can be dealt with effectively —at any rate, it can be dealt with, whether effectively, I am not sure, for that depends upon what the right hon. Gentleman has to say. The point which emerged in the course of the Debate on the Bill was whether, in the case of certain classes of property which are regarded as being outside the scope of the Bill, but which it is the intention of the Government to deal with at some stage, the Government propose to follow the statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in January last, and to meet claims at the end of the war, or whether they propose to do as the right hon. Gentleman appeared to indicate in his speech this afternoon—although that point is not quite clear—and to compensate after the damage has been sustained, in accordance with the circumstances, without waiting for a final assessment at the end of the war. I hope I have made the point clear. It is important from the point of view of the public that everybody should be informed as to his position in the event of damage to property occurring during war time. It is clear, as was made apparent during the proceedings on the Bill, that certain forms of property are to be covered by insurance, and in the event of damage, claims are to be fully met, and as it appears, they are to be met almost immediately. As regards other forms of property, it is not clear whether we are to rely upon the statement made by the Chancellor in January or the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman this afternoon. For the purpose of elucidation and for the purpose of removing apprehensions which I feel sure must exist in the minds of hon. Members and of people outside, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will clear up that point.

8.57 p.m.

Mr. Stanley

I am obliged to the hon. Member for raising this matter, in a very courteous way, and thus giving me another opportunity of trying to make it plain. I do not think there is any dif- ferentiation between the statement I made this afternoon and what was said by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 31st January. I am not sure whether the hon. Member has read the whole of the statement that was then made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. My right hon. Friend dealt at very considerable length with the question with which I dealt to-day, namely, the possibility of a complete form of insurance of house property. He stated the difficulties with regard to that, and went on to make a statement concerning compensation at the end of the war. up to the limit of the financial ability of the State in those circumstances, a statement to which reference has been made several times during the Debate to-day. Therefore, it is quite clear that the main provision as advocated by the Government —leaving aside, of course, any question of what the committee which we are going to set up may be able to suggest with regard to any mutual form of indemnity—is that at the end of the war the people will be compensated in full, if possible, and if not, up to the financial ability of the State at the time. That part is quite clear. If the hon. Gentleman will read further on in the Chancellor's statement, he will see the following sentences: I have dealt so far with private property in general, but I must now mention certain particular categories of property. The necessary deferment of compensation until the end of the emergency would, in the absence of special steps, result in the holding up of necessary repairs to essential property which has been damaged. Accordingly a plan has been worked out for the emergency reconstruction of essential property including, where necessary, housing accommodation." — [OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st January, 1939; col. 29, Vol. 343.] I do not think there is any inconsistency between the two statements. We say that as a general rule we will compensate for damage at the end of the war, but in cases of essential property, where the property has got to be restored at once, we make a special arrangement either for the reconstruction or repair of that particular property, whether it be house property or other forms of fixed property. I think the hon. Member will agree that there is no inconsistency between the statement that was made by the Chancellor and the statement I made this afternoon.

Mr. Shinwell

I think that the right hon. Gentleman's remarks to a very large extent clear away the trouble, apart, of course, from the main issue as to whether there should be a comprehensive insurance scheme, but I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman on behalf of the Government, will, not necessarily now, but at some future stage, give some indication as to the kind of plan that has been worked out. I should like to ask whether hon. Members may be acquainted with the terms of the plan, and also whether something in the nature of a schedule of properties included in this particular category could be drawn up. I know that it would be difficult to have a schedule —

Mr. Stanley

The hon. Gentleman will realise that I could not do that, because it is not a question of the type of property. It may depend upon the actual location of a particular property. For instance, reference has been made to a bakery. Whether or not the bakery was restored as being an essential thing might depend upon what other facilities of that sort existed in the neighbourhood. Therefore, it would be impossible to give a schedule of types of property.

Mr. Shinwell

I safeguarded myself to some extent by saying that it might, be difficult to prepare a schedule, but at a later stage it might be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give hon. Members some indication of what the plan is. If that could be done, I think it would be very useful.

9.2 p.m.

Mr. Barnes

The President of the Board of Trade, in clearing up the difficulty regarding the conflict of statements, has raised rather a grave issue of discrimination. In the case of any type of property which the Government consider to be essential, there is to be immediate compensation. The vast amount of property which might be considered to be immediately essential is to be left to problematical compensation at the end of the war. With regard to the Treasury Committee that will examine the whole problem, am I to take it that those will be their terms of reference, and that any possibility of a comprehensive insurance scheme to meet this form of liability will be ruled out, or will that committee have full powers and an opportunity to examine the cover of all property?

Mr. Stanley

I made a very careful statement as to what the committee would inquire into, and the position that the Government took up. The hon. Gentleman will be able to read that state-men in the Official Report to-morrow; it represents the position of the Government, and I have nothing either to add to or subtract from it.

9.3 p.m.

Mr. Bellenger

There is one question I should like to ask—

The Chairman

I think the discussion is now getting very near the limit of what we may discuss on this Resolution.

Mr. Stanley

Further to that point, Sir Dennis. In view of the fact that we have now started on this Resolution and that it might be more convenient to clear up these matters now, would it not be possible for you to take a lenient view of the matter?

The Chairman

The right hon. Gentleman rather anticipated what he thought I was going to say. I was about to say that so far the discussion has been all right, but when it comes to a discussion of the details relating to this other matter of insurance of buildings and other property which is not dealt with under the Bill or the Resolution, then it is quite another matter. The right hon. Gentleman has shown that certain buildings and properties which it was thought would not be covered are so covered as to be the subject of compensation immediately. Those are things which come within what is to be dealt with under this Bill. When it comes to matters which are definitely outside the Bill, but to which some reference is inevitable. I wish to give a warning to hon. Members that we cannot on this occasion discuss the details of any such scheme for paying compensation after a war. That is the limitation which I desired to make clear.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

Is not the point at issue one between the scheme adumbrated earlier by the Minister, and the scheme suggested which would include all property? One is limited in its terms while the other is more widely extended. The right hon. Gentleman, if I recollect aright, spoke of some mutual insurance scheme, whereas the scheme suggested from this side was of a more comprehensive nature. Is it not open to us to discuss the distinction between the two?

The Chairman

The hon. Member is referring to the very thing which, I have said, is beyond the scope of this Resolution. It was against discussing details of that sort that I wished to warn the Committee.

Mr. Bellenger

I merely wish to ask a question arising out of the statement just made by the right hon. Gentleman. Will the compensation which it is proposed to pay for what the Government term essential property, be on the basis of an insurance scheme or will it be paid out of Government funds?

Mr. Stanley

The hon. Gentleman will realise that just now I was reading part of the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I did not speak necessarily of compensation. Steps taken to repair property might well take the form of giving some terms or other—it might be payments to be set against eventual compensation, or it might be the actual repair of the property itself. There is no question of compensation.

Mr, Bellenger

Will that not be compensation, whether the Government provide it in the form of the actual physical work of repairing the building or by allotting a certain sum of money for that purpose? Whichever it is, will it be on an insurance basis or will it be paid for out of national funds without any insurance premium?

Mr. Stanley

In those circumstances it would be possible in an individual case for the Government to do it on ad hoc terms, subject, of course, to the condition that at the end of the war the man would be liable to be compensated on the same basis as that which was found possible in the case of anybody else. In a particular case of restoring essential properly the Government could make what plans were necessary.

Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.