HC Deb 18 May 1939 vol 347 cc1594-7
32. Mrs. Adamson

asked the Minister of Health the reason for classifying Gravesend as a neutral area; and whether, in view of the proximity of the big Tilbury Docks, extensive petrol dumps, large armament works, and Woolwich Arsenal, he will reconsider this matter with a view to classifying Gravesend as an evacuation area?

33. Miss Ward

asked the Minister of Health whether he can now state what boundaries have been fixed for the area to be evacuated on Tyneside?

The Minister of Health (Mr. Elliot)

I propose to make a general statement covering the country as a whole in reply to a later question, and would ask the hon. Members to await this statement.

37. Miss Ward

asked the Minister of Health whether he will assure the House that it is his policy to use, within the general scheme for evacuation, large occupied houses for billeting children; and the percentage of the total available accommodation provided by houses taking four children and upwards?

Mr. Elliot

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Information as to the second part of the question is not available.

Miss Ward

In view of the fact that there appears to have been some misunderstanding, could my right hon. Friend say whether the same provisions apply to Scotland?

Mr. Elliot

I could not answer questions relating to Scotland.

Mr. Gallacher

You never could.

44. Mr. Kirby

asked the Minister of Health whether he has considered the representations made by various local authorities as to their classification for the purposes of the Government evacuation scheme; and whether he is now in a position to make any statement on this matter?

Mr. Elliot

I must apologise for taking up the time of the House while I read the answer, which is somewhat long.

Yes, Sir. I have considered this matter in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal. Our desire has always been that every practicable effort should be made to get the maximum number of children, whatever their circumstances, from congested areas to safer conditions. I am satisfied that there are certain towns, in addition to those now covered by existing plans, for which, a measure of evacuation should, if practicable, be carried out. In this connection I have also considered the representations made by a number of authorities to the effect that their districts are not suitable as reception areas. I have decided that the following districts should not be required to act as receiving areas under present conditions:

  • Boroughs.—Chesterfield, Dover, Goole, Hedon, Rugby, Scunthorpe.
  • Urban Districts.—Bolsover, Dronfield, Leyland, Staveley.
I recognise that a number of other districts, by reason of their position, or their proximity to works of military importance, may be considered to be open to criticism as receiving areas. We cannot, however, escape from the fact that in this small and industrialised country, under the possible conditions of air warfare, safety is only relative. But clearly, even with these disadvantages, the reception areas offer a much better chance of safety than many districts in which children now live. I am sure that those authorities who have quite properly put before me what appear to them the disadvantages of their districts as receiving areas, will recognise the force of this view.

I am happy to say that, after allowing for the reduction mentioned, a margin of accommodation remains potentially available for the extension of the evacuation scheme to certain other areas not covered by present plans. It will be appreciated that the extent to which plans for additional areas can be worked out depends on a number of factors, but I intend to review the following:

  • County Boroughs.—Coventry, Derby, Grimsby, Middlesbrough, Nottingham, Rotherham, South Shields, Sunderland, Tynemouth and West Hartlepool.
  • Boroughs.—Hartlepool, Jarrow and Wallsend.
  • Urban Districts.—Felling, Hebburn and Whickham.
There are, in addition, portions of certain areas on Thames side or on the borders of the Metropolitan evacuation area, and also in the neighbourhood of Birmingham, which will be included in the review.

Other towns not included in this list have made representations that their areas should be evacuated. I have examined the case that they have put up with great care, and willingness to respond to their appeal if it were possible, but have been forced to the conclusion, in view of all the factors, that further extensions of evacuation plans, beyond what I have already stated, are impracticable.

I have instructed my officers to take up forthwith with the local authorities concerned the question of working out plans for the areas under review. It will, of course, be understood that until detailed plans for any additional areas and arrangements for putting them into effect can be worked out, the present evacuation plans stand without modification.

I should like to pay tribute here to all those, both in evacuating and receiving areas, and especially the latter, who are working so hard, and showing so fine a spirit, in their efforts to ensure the safety of the youth of our nation.

Mr. Kirby

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his very informative reply, will he be good enough to get in touch with the local authorities concerned as quickly as possible?

Mr. Elliot

Yes, Sir, I am getting in touch with them forthwith.

Mr. J. Griffiths

Has the right hon. Gentleman received any representations from certain industrial areas in South Wales, and have they been considered?

Mr. Elliot

I have, as I say, received representations from other areas, but I am afraid that this reply must be taken as final.

Mr. Griffiths

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain what are the reasons why every port in the Bristol Channel except Port Nevin has been scheduled as neutral?

Mr. Elliot

I am afraid that it would not be possible to go into details of every question in addition to the rather long statement which I have made.

Miss Ward

Is not the Minister aware that he has been reviewing this question since February, and may we have the result of the review, which was the purpose of my original question?

Mr. Elliot

I think that my hon. Friend will realise that it is impossible to give a statement on one area without the other, and judging by the length of the list I have given to the House, it will be seen that it is not an undue length of time to spend on a review of what is a very important matter.

Miss Ward

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter for the second time on the Adjournment.

49. Lieut.-Colonel Acland-Troyte

asked the Minister of Health what arrangements he is making for the supply of mattresses or palliasses and blankets for women and children who are moved into reception areas under the Government evacuation schemes?

Mr. Elliot

The Government are ordering considerable supplies of blankets and bedding for use in the reception areas, to supplement the present resources of these districts. Arrangements for distribution and storage which will be on a basis of decentralisation are now being worked out.

Forward to