§ Enrolment in the Home Guard shall not begin until the House of Commons shall have passed a resolution authorising such enrolment.—[Mr. Strachey.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ 10.15 p.m.
§ Mr. Strachey
I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
We have reached in this new Clause the main business of the Committee stage of the Bill. It is a Clause which, if it is embodied in the new Bill, is meant to suspend the main operation of the Bill, which is the enrolment of the Home Guard, in peace-time until such time as the House of Commons takes a subsequent decision. It would convert the Bill into what we think it ought to be, a Bill which takes the preparations for the Home Guard right down to the point of enrolment, but no further, and suspends that actual point of enrolment until the Government come to the House of Commons and say that the apprehensions of an attack upon the country are now so great and immediate that they consider that we ought to pass to the enrolment of the Home Guard.
I do not want to go over once again the arguments which were put out both by myself and my right hon. Friend the ex-Minister of Defence and by other hon. Members as to why we take that view. But, rightly or wrongly, we think that there is no military advantage in going to immediate enrolment today and that, on balance, there is military disadvantage.
I do not deny that there is some military advantage in early enrolment. The Secretary of State, in his Second Reading speech, made that point very effectively. There is some advantage, undoubtedly, in having the Home Guard enrolled now so that there shall be no delay in the early weeks of a war when one is concentrating very hard on getting the Reserve Army battleworthy, and any distractions on guard duty of any sort are a disadvantage. But for the reasons I gave, I think that that undoubted advantage is outweighed by the very great disadvantages of an early enrolment of the Home Guard.
There may be conditions when the members of the Force cannot be given uniforms or premises, and in which we divert a great deal of the organisational ability and the training ability, both of 1650 which are necessarily limited, and highly skilled staff officers and officers skilled in training and the like, which is concentrated today in the Reserve Army on very big schemes like the call-up of the Class Z reservists, which strain all these resources to the very limit.
From the military point of view, we think that the balance of advantage—I put it no higher—rests in the postponement of the actual enrolment of the Home Guard to a date on which the Government come to the House and say that in the interests of national safety it can no longer be postponed; and, of course, at that point the House of Commons would not hesitate in giving the authorisation for enrolment.
There is not only the question of military advantage. There is the question of the economic position. There is the burden—I think, considerable and significant—which the enrolment now, in peacetime, of the Home Guard must place on a very hard-pressed people, who are asked to do a lot of other things, who are asked to carry the very considerable effort of the re-armament programme and the effort of restoring the balance of payments, and who are being exhorted to give of their last ounce of productive effort. I do not want to over-state that. A part-time Force like this is not an enormous diversion from the economic effort of the country, but it is some diversion. On balance, we think the advantage lies undoubtedly with the postponement of enrolment.
Finally, there is the argument that we believe a Home Guard prematurely enrolled for what we hope would be a long, and, indeed, permanent period of peace, might easily go stale so that, if war broke out some years later, we might have a weaker and less enthusiastic Force instead of a stronger one. For all those reasons we are convinced that it would be far better to pass the Bill but to hold in suspense the operation of its main purpose, which is the enrolment of the Home Guard.
§ Mr. Iain MacLeod (Enfield, West)
One thing puzzles me in the wording of the Amendment. It is common form when any positive action has to be taken, for instance an affirmative Resolution, for it to be taken by affirmative Resolution of both Houses of Parliament. When there is negative action, to be taken by a 1651 Prayer, it can be effected by the action of one House. I may be wrong; I am asking for information; but it seems in the highest degree unusual to give to one House of Parliament the power to take the affirmative action envisaged in the Motion. I should have thought it was unconstitutional.
§ Mr. Strachey
I do not think it is unusual. I think we can find precedents. Nevertheless, it is not a point on which we should wish to insist for a moment; we should be just as happy with an affirmative Resolution of both Houses of Parliament. What was probably in the mind of my right hon. Friend was a desire for a simple procedure so that if we confirmed the period of enrolment, then at the simple issue of the word "Go" by one House of Parliament, the Government of the day could pass to enrolment. There is not much in the point one way or the other.
Would the Under-Secretary explain further a point which he made on Second Reading, when he spoke as if what was in mind for January was registration rather than enrolment? I do not think he meant that there was an intention not to pass to enrolment. It would alter things if he told us now that all that was intended was registration, because we regard that as part of the preparatory work for which we agree there is a strong case. I think he intends to pass to enrolment, if not in January then at an early date. For the reasons I have given, we do not think that that is in the best interests of the country.
§ Mr. J. R. H. Hutchison
I appreciate the thoughts and fears in this connection which the right hon. Gentleman has expressed and which, indeed, have been expressed before. I do not know whether I am going over old ground in pointing out that one of the fundamental conceptions in our minds now is, if I may use a colloquialism, that we might easily "miss the bus" if we waited until the situation had developed to a dangerous point and then proceeded to enrol. I would also point out to the right hon. Gentleman that once we have proceeded to enrolment we have let the bullet go, so to speak, and lost control over it.
I thought what was causing anxiety in the minds of hon. Members opposite was the fear that we should proceed to enrol 1652 ment before the House had had a chance to see the Regulations under which enrolment would take place. That was not our intention. As I tried to point out on Second Reading, and the right hon. Gentleman has correctly guessed, we are, of course, proceeding only to registration now, in the meantime "cooking up," if I may use another colloquialism, Regulations, which would then be presented to the House, and only thereafter shall we proceed to enrolment. There would be a chance, I suppose, at that time, when the Regulations had been seen, to bring up the issue, but not necessarily—and I want to be frank and fair about it—of stopping enrolment.
One further safeguard over numbers—this is not quite the point of the right hon. Gentleman, but it comes near it, I think—is that we did undertake that the numbers of the Home Guard would be included—it may be automatic, but I do not know—under Vote A of the Army Estimates which come up annually in the House, and the numbers at that time could be controlled. I suggest that there is a good deal of control over numbers one way and another.
However, we do regard it as fundamental that we should not take the chance at this time of leaving to Parliament the decision that, say, Wednesday or next Tuesday or in a fortnight's time enrolment should start, because only a little while after the enrolling—and it is a complicated machinery—has taken place, and the organisation and training gone into, should we have a Force capable of dealing with what, we think may come much more quickly.
Then the right hon. Gentleman said that this was a question of assessing balances. He said this came down on one side. I suggest to him that it really comes down on the other. I hope he will not press us on this point.
§ Mr. Stephen Swingler (Newcastle-under-Lyme)
I hope that the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary of State will be willing to consider this matter again. I think that something which the Secretary of State said on Second Reading illustrates the difficulty in which we are when it is proposed to start enrolling this Force in time of peace. We on this have taken the view that the Home Guard should be enrolled in time of war, and that a skeleton 1653 organisation should be set up to bring it into existence in time of peace.
One of the most important factors is that we shall not know until an emergency arises who are the people eligible to join this Force.
On Second Reading the Secretary of State indicated some of the limitations there would be on people in joining the Home Guard. He said, for example, that all members of the Z Reserve would be eligible to join the Home Guard immediately who were over 46 years of age, and Regular Army Reserve officers and officers of the rank of colonel and above who were over 58, and lieut.-colonels and officers below over 53. It is quite obvious that there will be many other Regulations that the Secretary of State will be compelled to issue to lay down who is and who is not entitled to enrol in the Home Guard in peace-time.
He will have to consider a schedule of reserved occupations. He has already given an assurance during the Committee stage about the question of preventing certain key industrial workers from enrolling because of the interference that their enrolling might involve with production and overtime work. I suggest that it is already admitted that Regulations will have to be produced concerning enrolment in time of peace because if we form a Home Guard in time of peace we do not know the number of units that will be immediately available as soon as there is an emergency, because people will be called up for other duties. Class Z reservists will go into other units, and other people will be transferred to Civil Defence, or to some other area to work in Royal Ordnance factories.
The Secretary of State must appreciate the position, because he has already laid down a number of limitations. He will have to produce complicated Regulations about eligibility for enrolment in the Home Guard in time of peace. I think that the Under-Secretary will admit that, and what we ask is that the Committee should have the opportunity to discuss these complex matters of eligibility. What are the problems? There is the question of interference with production, and the question of the schedule of reserved occupations; there is the matter of whether "key" workers will be eligible. What about the eligibility of Class Z reservists? 1654 All we ask is that we should have the opportunity for expressing our points before the actual process of enrolment begins.
§ Mr. Wigg
The Under-Secretary told us that he and his right hon. Friend were going to "cook up the Regulations." He said that that was a colloquialism, but I think that perhaps it was an accurate description of what is to happen. The size and complexity of this problem with which he has to deal should be fully understood. The registration of the man is a comparatively simple matter; that should not cause any headaches, nor should the equipping of the man present much difficulty; but, when the Under-Secretary starts to weave that man, and many others, into an effective pattern so that they can take their places alongside the Regulars and the Territorials, he will find that he really has something to think about. When he says they are going to "cook up the Regulations," one wonders what is going to happen.
§ Mr. Hutchison
I do not like to bring up personal history, but I was what is known as G.1, Home Guard, during the last war, and I know the Regulations which are involved.
§ Mr. Wigg
If I may say so, that is the very worst training that the Under-Secretary could have had for the appointment which he now holds. I served in a headquarters, and I know all about going round a mess, having a drink of whisky, and so on; I have seen advisors going round, and I know what happens, although I was never one myself. It is common ground between us that we all want a Home Guard, but this question of timing is of paramount importance. The Government find themselves in a difficulty if they accept this Amendment, but having got the Bill, the Government will then go on, regardless of the consequences, because they are committed to the production of a Home Guard. If I may say so, the Government have to do that for another reason; it was about the only constructive thing in the Conservative Election programme. There will be 150,000 men, more resembling Fred Karno's army than—
§ Mr. Wigg
Here are the facts. The Government are to raise 150,000 men on a 1655 completely new basis, with little experience to guide them, and in a few months, it will have to be turned into an effective fighting Force. That will be a job of some complexity, and as has been said before in this debate, it may be a case of more haste, less speed, unless these problems are fully realised and tackled in time. I hope very much that if we cannot get satisfaction on this point, we shall carry the issue to a Division so that we can make it plain to the country where responsibility rests when things go wrong, as I think they will.
§ Air Commodore A. V. Harvey (Macclesfield)
The hon. Member says that the formation of the Home Guard should be timed. Can he say how he would time it correctly?
§ Mr. Wigg
Very well, I shall be glad to withdraw it, Sir Charles. If the hon. and gallant Member will read HANSARD of 15th November, 1950, he will find that my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) when challenged on what he would do, dealt with the machinery he would establish to bring the Home Guard into being, a Home Guard based upon the Territorial Associations, and using the normal command. In the same announcement he said he was setting up Home Guard advisors, and later he announced a ceiling of 200,000 men, the Force to be brought into being when the necessity arose.
§ Air Commodore Harvey
The hon. Gentleman need not be so touchy. I was only seeking information. He must know with his great experience in these matters that in modern warfare one does not get much warning.
§ Mr. Head
I can assure the hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. Wigg) that both the Under-Secretary of State and I are well aware of the difficulties that will confront us after this Bill goes through and after we have carried out registration and enrolment. Whatever any hon. Member in any part of the Committee thinks about the advisability of this Bill, they all wish the Force that eventually is created to be an efficient one and not a Fred Karno's army.
The point that is raised here is the ability of the House to see and consider the Regulations before we start enrolment. I can assure the Committee that that will be the case, because the plan we have in mind is this—assuming the passage of the Bill through the House, owing to various administrative reasons it will be impossible for us to start registration, as I said on Second Reading, until very early in January. When we start registration it will be purely a case of submitting names on a postcard through local post offices to the various centres for consideration. That will take a bit of time.
When that is concluded it is proposed to start enrolment, but there is no possibility of enrolment starting before the House once more starts to sit in January, and hon. Members will have an opportunity of seeing the Regulations. I am also aware that in drawing up these Regulations we shall have to have a great deal of consultation. We have many administrative and other questions to sort out and disentangle. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State used the word "cooked up." I know that "cooked" as regards certain figures has a dishonourable connotation, and I am quite sure that the hon. Member for Dudley did not think that.
§ Mr. C. R. Hobson (Keighley)
The Member for Carlton (Mr. Pickthorn) shuddered at the use of the phrase "cooked up."
§ Mr. Head
The Regulations are of great importance and will need a great deal of thinking about. We have already started to draw up these Regulations, and the hon. Members will have an oppor 1657 tunity of seeing them before enrolment will start. It is only registration that will start early in January, and enrolment will be subsequent to that. In those circumstances, I hope that the Committee will be satisfied with that assurance and that the Motion will now he withdrawn.
§ Mr. Swingler
Does the right hon. Gentleman mean we shall have an opportunity to debate these Regulations? He kept saying "seeing the Regulations."
§ Mr. Callaghan
The Secretary of State for War has been very conciliatory in what he has said about the Regulations, but that really does not touch the real point of our criticism. There is a real difference here between the Government and ourselves on this issue. It is a sharp difference. I can state it clearly, shortly, and simply, and without heat. My right hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Strachey), in moving this new Clause, made it clear that in this particular instance he was not concerned about seeing the Regulations. That was not the point of criticism.
The real point of our criticism is that, in our view, this is the wrong time at which to establish the Home Guard. I think I should say, it is the wrong time at which to enrol the Home Guard because there is a difference between establishing and enrolling. We agree with the Secretary of State that there is a case for establishing the Home Guard. We do not agree with the Government that there is a case for enrolling it at this moment. That is the simple, short difference between us.
We do so for certain reasons, some of which the right hon. Gentleman has given himself. He said, during the Second Reading debate, that the establishment and enrolment of the Home Guard did not mean that, in his view, war was any nearer than it had been before this force was enrolled or established. That is, in our judgment, a reason for not doing it now. I believe the view to be commonly shared that war has not come nearer during the last few months.
1658 I was reading this week an interview given by Dr. Adenauer, who is living in the front line if anyone is. In it, he was asked what was his estimate of the likelihood of war in the measurable future. His answer was, "I do not believe there is great danger of a hot war." Dr. Adenauer went on to give various reasons for it. In our view, if he, of all those who are best qualified to judge, says that there is no immediate danger of a hot war, then that is a very important reason for not enrolling the Home Guard at this moment.
If we had no other burdens on our shoulders and if we had nothing that we were particularly carrying, perhaps the Secretary of State could come to the Committee and say he believed that this burden could be easily carried and that the Government ought to enrol the Home Guard. But, as the right hon. Gentleman knew only too well from his experience in the War Office so far, he has a very great burden to carry, not only in his administrative capacity, but in relation to, and fulfilment of, the armaments programme which has been undertaken. However much this responsibility may be devolved upon others. there can be no doubt that the enrolment of the Home Guard will mean additional calls upon supplies.
We know that it will mean additional finance—in certain circumstances, a maximum of £2¼ million—from the figure given. We know it will mean an additional drain upon the administrative resources, such as they are, which the right hon. Gentleman has at his command and which are themselves strained. For these reasons, we believe the right hon. Gentleman is not establishing his priorities in the right order by bringing this Bill to the Committee at the moment.
I hope that because we say that the Under-Secretary will not think that we are doing this merely on party grounds. I do not wish to raise unnecessary heat about this, but I do think that if the hon. Gentleman reflects on what we have been discussing during the last two days he will agree now that his comment made at the end of the debate last week was unjustified. The hon. Gentleman said:In Committee we shall, of course, welcome constructive criticisms.I think he will agree that he has had constructive criticisms, and I should like to thank the Secretary of State for the 1659 conciliatory way in which he has accepted a number of our Amendments.
The Under-Secretary went on to say:…but I say to hon. Members opposite: play the party game if you must in lesser matters, but leave the defence of this country out of it."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd November, 1951; Vol. 494, c. 700.]That was in relation to the major criticism that we were making, that this was not the right time to establish the Home Guard. We do not make it on party grounds.
§ Mr. Callaghan
I am glad to hear the hon. Gentleman say that he did not mean that, though I am not sure what it did relate to.
Let me put this to the Secretary of State for War. It is equally open to us to say that the real reason he has come forward with the Home Guard Bill is because it was included in the Conservative Party manifesto.
§ Mr. Callaghan
With respect, Sir Charles, this is the Second Reading of a Clause which suggests that the Home Guard should not be enrolled at the present moment. I was seeking to suggest that one reason why the Secretary of State thinks it ought to be enrolled is because he is fulfilling the statement that was made in his party's manifesto, and I submit, with respect, that that is pretty well within the bounds of order in a fairly wide debate such as this.
Yes, but this is not a fairly wide debate. It is a debate on the Second Reading of a new Clause.
§ Mr. Callaghan
In that event I shall not labour the point, but I shall at least endeavour to say this. When we are considering what is the right time to introduce this, and as party considerations influence one's support for it or one's opposition to establishing it at the present time, one is bound to have regard to what has been said by parties at various times.
The Secretary of State for War says that it is his best judgment, irrespective of what his party said at any time, that this 1660 is the right time for establishing it. I want him to believe that on our side equally it is our judgment, based on our view of the military situation and our view of what the proper priority shall be in a matter of this sort, that whilst it is right to establish the Home Guard it is not the right moment in which to enrol the men into a Home Guard. That is a perfectly fair and sound view which can be established and argued without any particular difficulty.
I would put this final point to the Secretary of State for War. I feel that there is a great danger of enrolling men too soon and then losing their enthusiasm as time goes on. I speak with some slight authority on this. I have never been a Home Guard, but I was, in its early days, a member of the L.D.V. I never got further than having a very old rifle and an armband with L.D.V. on it; I do not think we even had steel helmets, but I do remember the enthusiasm that went through everybody who was associated in those early days with the original L.D.V. People went round to each other's houses and gathered up their friends. They knew each other, and they talked. I suggest that it is something of that spirit which has got to be maintained if enrolment is to prove satisfactory in the long run.
What I fear is that with the best will in the world, those who come forward with enthusiasm may feel as time goes on and the edge wears off, "Perhaps we have enrolled too soon." I think the Secretary of State will understand that this is a valid criticism, and it is not because we wish to damn the Force in any way. We wish it success if and when it is established. We are prepared to see battalion commanders appointed and we are ready to see the organisation and the planning go on, but we feel that the Secretary of State is carrying it too far at the present time, that he is getting his priorities in the wrong order, and is in danger of allowing enthusiasm to run away into the sands if he enrols men at the present time. We must mark our division of opinion with the Government on this issue at this stage by going to a Division.
§ Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 148; Noes, 188.1571
|Division No. 21.]||AYES||[6.5 p.m.|
|Acland, Sir Richard||Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)||King, Dr. H. M.|
|Albu, A. H.||Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.).||Kinley, J.|
|Anderson, Alexander (Motherwell)||Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)||Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)|
|Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven)||Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury)||Lindgren, G. S.|
|Awbery, S. S.||Ewart, R.||Lipton, Lt.-Col. M.|
|Bacon, Miss Alice||Fernyhough, E.||Logan, D. G.|
|Balfour, A.||Fienburgh W.||Longden, Fred (Small Heath)|
|Bartley, P.||Finch, H. J.||MacColl, J. E.|
|Bence, C. R.||Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.)||McGhee, H. C.|
|Benson, G.||Follick, M.||McGovern, J.|
|Beswick, F.||Foot, M. M.||McInnes, J.|
|Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale)||Forman, J. C.||MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles)|
|Bing, G. H. C.||Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)||MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)|
|Blackburn, F.||Freeman, Peter (Newport)||Mainwaring, W. H.|
|Blenkinsop, A.||Gibson, C. W.||Mann, Mrs. Jean|
|Blyton, W. R.||Glanville, James||Manuel, A. C.|
|Boardman, H.||Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale)||Mikardo, Ian|
|Bowden, H. W.||Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Wakefield)||Mitchison, G. R.|
|Brockway, A. F.||Grey, C. F.||Monslow, W.|
|Brook, Dryden (Halifax).||Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)||Moody, A. S.|
|Broughton, Dr. A. D. D.||Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.)||Morgan, Dr. H. B. W.|
|Brown, Thomas (Ince)||Hall, John (Gateshead, W.)||Morley, R.|
|Butler, Herbert (Hackney, S.)||Hamilton, W. W.||Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)|
|Callaghan, L. J.||Hargreaves, A.||Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Lewisham, S)|
|Carmichael, J.||Hastings, S.||Mort, D. L.|
|Carr, Robert (Mitcham)||Hayman, F. H.||Moyle, A.|
|Castle, Mrs. B. A.||Herbison, Miss M.||Mulley, F. W.|
|Champion, A. J.||Hobson, C. R.||Murray, J. D.|
|Neal, Harold (Bolsover)|
|Clunie, J.||Holman, P.||Oldfield, W. H.|
|Cocks, F. S.||Houghton, Douglas||Oliver, G. H.|
|Coldrick, W.||Hubbard, T. F.||Orbach, M.|
|Cove, W. G.||Hudson, James (Ealing, N.)||Oswald, T.|
|Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)||Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)||Padley, W. E.|
|Crossman, R. H. S.||Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)||Paget, R. T.|
|Cullen, Mrs. A.||Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)||Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley)|
|Dalton, Rt. Hon. H.||Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill)||Pannell, Charles|
|Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.)||Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.||Pargiter, G. A.|
|Davies, Harold (Leek)||Janner, B.||Paton, J.|
|Davies, Stephen (Merthyr)||Jay, D. P. T.||Pearson, A.|
|Deer, G.||Jeger, Dr. Santo (St. Pancras, S.)||Popplewell, E.|
|Dodds, N. N.||Johnson, James (Rugby)||Porter, G.|
|Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C.||Jones, David (Hartlepool)||Price, Joseph T. (Westhoughton)|
|Edwards, John (Brighouse)||Jones, T. W. (Merioneth)||Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)|
|Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly)||Key. Rt. Hon. C. W.||Proctor, W. T.|
|Pryde, D, J.||Sparks, J. A.||Watkins, T. E.|
|Pursey, Cmdr. H.||Steele, T.||Weitzman, D.|
|Rankin, John||Stewart, Michael (Fulham, E.)||West, D. G.|
|Reeves, J.||Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)||White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.)|
|Reid, William (Camlachie)||Stross, Dr. Barnett||Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.|
|Robens, Rt. Hon. A.||Summerskill, Rt. Hon. Edith||Wigg, G. E. C.|
|Roberts, Albert (Normanton)||Swingler, S. T.||Williams, David (Neath)|
|Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.)||Taylor, John (West Lothian)||Williams, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Don V'll'y)|
|Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)||Thomas, David (Aberdare)||Williams, W. R. (Droylsden)|
|Schofield, S. (Barnsley)||Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.)||Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.)|
|Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.||Thurtle, Ernest||Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton)|
|Short, E. W.||Timmons, J.||Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside)|
|Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)||Tomney, F.||Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.|
|Slater, J.||Turner-Samuels, M.||Yates, Y. F.|
|Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)||Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn||Younger, Rt. Hon. K.|
|Snow, J. W.||Viant, S. P.|
|Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank||Wallace, H. W.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Holmes.|
|Aitken, W. T.||Fletcher, Walter (Bury)||MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.)|
|Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.)||Gage, C. H.||MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty)|
|Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J.||Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok)||Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley)|
|Arbuthnot, John||Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead)||Macpherson, Maj. Niall (Dumfries)|
|Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.)||George, Rt. Hon. Maj. G. Lloyd||Maitland, Comdr. J. F. W. (Horncastle)|
|Astor, Hon. J. J. (Plymouth, Sutton)||Glyn, Sir Ralph||Maitland, Patrick (Lanark)|
|Baker, P. A. D.||Godber, J. B.||Manningham-Buller, Sir R. E.|
|Baldwin, A. E.||Gough, C. F. H.||Markham, Major S. F.|
|Banks, Col. C.||Graham, Sir Fergus||Marlowe, A. A. H.|
|Barber, A. P. L.||Gridley, Sir Arnold||Marples, A. E.|
|Baxter, A. B.||Grimston, Robert (Westbury)||Marshall, Douglas (Bodmin)|
|Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)||Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.)||Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C.|
|Bell, R. M. (Bucks, S.)||Harrison, Lt.-Col. J. H. (Eye)||Mellor, Sir John|
|Bennett, F. M. (Reading, N.)||Harvey, Air Cdre, A. V. (Macclesfield)||Molson, A. H. E.|
|Bennett, Sir Peter (Edgbaston)||Hay, John||Monckton, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter|
|Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport)||Head, Rt. Hon. A. H.||Moore, Lt.-Col. Sir Thomas|
|Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth)||Heald, Sir Lionel||Morrison, John (Salisbury)|
|Bishop, F. P.||Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W.||Nabarro, G. D. N,|
|Black, C. W.||Higgs, J. M. C.||Nield, Basil (Chester)|
|Boyd-Carpenter, J. A.||Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton)||Noble, Cmdr. A. H. P.|
|Boyle, Sir Edward||Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe)||Nugent, G. R. H.|
|Braine, B. R.||Hinchingbrooke, Viscount||Nutting, Anthony|
|Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)||Hirst, Geoffrey||Oakshott, H, D.|
|Brooke, Henry (Hampstead)||Holland-Martin, C. J.||Odey, G. W.|
|Brooman-White, R. C.||Holt, A. F.||Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.|
|Browne, Jack (Govan)||Hopkinson, Henry||Orr, Capt. L. P. S.|
|Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T.||Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.||Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)|
|Bullard, D. G.||Horobin, I. M.||Orr-Ewing, Ian L. (Weston-super-Mare)|
|Bullock, Capt. M.||Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Florence||Partridge, E.|
|Butcher, H. W.||Howard, Greville (St. Ives)||Peake, Rt. Hon. O.|
|Butler, Rt. Hon. R. A. (Saffron Walden)||Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)||Perkins, W. R. D.|
|Cary, Sir R.||Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.)||Peto, Brig, C. H. M.|
|Channon, H.||Hulbert, Wing Cmdr. N. J.||Peyton, J. W. W.|
|Churchill, Rt. Hon. W. S.||Hurd, A, R.||Pickthorn, K. W. M.|
|Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead)||Hutchinson, Geoffrey (Ilford, N.)||Powell, J. Enoch|
|Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.)||Hutchison, LI.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.)||Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.)|
|Clyde, Rt. Hon. J. L.||Hutchison, James (Scotstoun)||Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L.|
|Cole, N. J.||Hyde, Lt.-Col. H. M.||Raikes, H. V.|
|Colegate, W. A.||Hylton-Foster, H. B. H.||Rayner, Brig. R.|
|Conant, Maj. R. J. E.||Jenkins, R. C. D. (Dulwich)||Redmayne, M.|
|Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)||Jennings, R.||Renton, D. L. M.|
|Cranborne, Viscount||Johnson, Eric (Blackley)||Roberts, Maj. Peter (Heeley)|
|Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.||Jones, A, (Hall Green)||Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.)|
|Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W.||Roper, Sir Harold|
|Crouch, R. F.||Kaberry, D.||Ropner, Col. L.|
|Crowder, John E. (Finchley)||Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge)||Russell, R. S.|
|Cuthbert, W. N.||Lambert, Hon. G.||Ryder, Capt. R. E. D.|
|Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.)||Lambton, Viscount||Salter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur|
|Davidson, Viscountess||Leather, E. H. C.||Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. (Rochdale)|
|Davies, Rt. Hn. Clement (Montgomery)||Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.||Scott, R. Donald|
|Deedes, W. F.||Legh, P. R. (Petersfield)||Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.|
|Digby, S. Wingfield||Lindsay, Martin||Shepherd, William|
|Dodds-Parker, A. D.||Linstead, H. N.||Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)|
|Donaldson, Comdr. C. E. McA.||Llewellyn, D. T.||Smiles, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter|
|Donner P W.||Lloyd, Maj. Guy (Renfrew, E.)||Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington)|
|Doughty, C. J. A.||Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. C.||Snadden, W. McN|
|Douglas-Hamilton, Lord Malcolm||Longden, Gilbert (Herts, S.W.)||Soames, Capt. C.|
|Drayson, G. B.||Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)||Spearman, A. C. M-|
|Drewe, C.||Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh||Speir, R. M.|
|Dugdale, Maj. Rt. Hn Sir T. (Richmond)||McCallum, Major D.||Spens, Sir Patrick (Kensington, S.)|
|Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.||Macdonald, Sir Peter ([...] of Wight)||Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard|
|Fell, A.||Mackeson, Brig. H. R.||Stevens, G. P.|
|Finlay, G. B.||McKibbin, A. J.||Steward, W. A. (Woolwich, W.)|
|Fisher, Nigel||McKie, J. H. (Galloway)||Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)|
|Stoddart-Scott, Col. M.||Touche, G. C.||White, Baker (Canterbury)|
|Storey, S.||Turner, H. F. L.||Williams, Charles (Torquay)|
|Studholme, H. G.||Turton, R. H.||Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)|
|Summers, G. S.||Vane, W. M. F.||Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)|
|Sutcliffe, H.||Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.||Wills, G.|
|Taylor, William (Bradford, N.)||Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. P. L. (Hereford)||Walker-Smith, D. C.||Wood, Hon. R.|
|Thompson, Kenneth Pugh (Walton)||Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)||York, C.|
|Thompson, Lt.-Cdr. R. (Croydon, W.)||Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)|
|Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C. N.||Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Tilney, John||Wellwood, W.||Mr. Vosper and Mr. Heath.|
Question put, and agreed to.
|Division No. 22.]||AYES||[10.50 p.m|
|Acland, Sir Richard||Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)||Peart, T. F.|
|Adams, Richard||Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly)||Plummer, Sir Leslie|
|Allen, Scholefield (Crewe)||Griffiths, William (Exchange)||Popplewell, E.|
|Anderson, Alexander (Motherwell)||Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.)||Porter, G.|
|Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven)||Hall, John (Gateshead, W.)||Price, Joseph T (Westhoughton)|
|Awbery, S. S.||Hastings, S.||Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)|
|Bacon, Miss Alice||Hayman, F. H.||Proctor, W. T.|
|Balfour, A.||Herbison, Miss M.||Pursey, Cmdr. H.|
|Bartley, P.||Hobson, C. R.||Rhodes, H.|
|Bing, G. H. C.||Holman, P.||Robens, Rt. Hon. A.|
|Blackburn, F.||Holmes, Horace (Hemsworth)||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)|
|Blenkinsop, A.||Houghton, Douglas||Royle, C.|
|Blyton, W. R.||Hudson, James (Ealing, N.)||Shackleton, E. A. A.|
|Boardman, H.||Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)||Short. E. W.|
|Bowden, H. W.||Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)||Shurmer, P. L. E.|
|Bowles, F. G.||Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)||Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)|
|Brockway, A. F.||Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.||Slater, J.|
|Brook, Dryden (Halifax)||Janner, B.||Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)|
|Broughton, Dr. A. D. D.||Jay, D. P. T.||Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank|
|Brown, Thomas (Ince)||Johnson, James (Rugby)||Sparks, J. A.|
|Callaghan, L. J.||Jones, David (Hartlepool)||Steele, T.|
|Carmichael, J.||Jones, T. W. (Merioneth)||Stewart, Michael (Fulham, E.)|
|Champion, A. J.||Key, Rt. Hon. C. W.||Strachey, Rt. Hon. J.|
|Chetwynd, G. R.||King, Dr. H. M.||Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)|
|Clunie, J,||Lindgren, G. S.||Stross, Dr. Barnett|
|Cocks, F. S.||Longden, Fred (Small Heath)||Swingler, S. T.|
|Coldrick, W.||MacColl, J. E.||Taylor, John (West Lothian)|
|Dalton, Rt. Hon. H.||McGhee, H. G.||Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin)|
|Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.)||McGovern, J.||Timmons, J.|
|Davies, Harold (Leek)||McInnes, J.||Tomney F.|
|Deer, G.||McKay, John (Wallsend)||Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn|
|Delargy, H. J.||MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles)||Wallace H. W.|
|Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C.||Mann, Mrs. Jean||Watkins, T. E.|
|Edwards, John (Brighouse)||Manuel, A. C.||Weitzman, D.|
|Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly)||Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A.||West, D. G.|
|Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)||Mitchison, G. R.||Wheatley, Rt. Hon. John|
|Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W)||Moody, A. S.||White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.)|
|Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)||Morgan, Dr. H. B. W.||Whiteley, Rt Hon. W.|
|Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury)||Morley, R.||Wigg, G. E. C.|
|Ewart, R.||Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)||Wilcock, Group Capt C. A. B.|
|Fernyhough, E.||Mulley, F. W.||Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery)|
|Fienburgh, W.||Murray, J. D.||Williams, W. R. (Droylsden)|
|Follick M.||Neal, Harold (Bolsover)||Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.)|
|Foot, M. M.||Oswald, T.||Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside)|
|Forman, J. C.||Padley, W. E.||Woodburn, Rt. Hon, A.|
|Fraser Thomas (Hamilton)||Paget, R. T.||Yates, V. F.|
|Gibson, C. W.||Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley)||Younger, Rt. Hon. K.|
|Granville, James||Pannell, Charles|
|Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale)||Pargiter, G. A.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Grey, C. F.||Pearson, A.||Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Hannan|
|Aitken, W. T.||Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.)||Glyn, Sir Ralph|
|Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.)||Clyde, Rt. Hon. J. L.||Godber, J. B.|
|Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J.||Cole, N. J.||Gough, C. F. H.|
|Arbuthnot, John||Colegate, W. A.||Gower, H. R.|
|Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.)||Conant, Maj. R. J. E.||Graham, Sir Fergus|
|Astor, Hon. J. J. (Plymouth, Sutton)||Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)||Gridley, Sir Arnold|
|Baldwin, A. E.||Cranborne, Viscount||Grimston, Robert (Westbury)|
|Banks, Col. C.||Crockshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.||Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.)|
|Barber, A. P. L.||Crouch, R. F.||Harrison, Lt.-Col. J. H. (Eye)|
|Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)||Cuthbert, W. N.||Harvey, Air Cdre. A. V. (Macelesfield)|
|Bell, R. M. (Bucks, S.)||Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.)||Head, Rt. Hon. A. H.|
|Bennett. Sir Peter (Edgbaston)||Davidson, Viscountess||Heald, Sir Lionel|
|Bennett, William (Woodside)||Deedes, W. F.||Heath, Edward|
|Bishop, F. P.||Digby, S. Wingfield||Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W.|
|Black, C. W.||Dodds-Parker, A. D.||Higgs, J. M. C.|
|Bowen, E. R.||Donaldson, Comdr. C. E. McA||Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton)|
|Boyd-Carpenter, J. A.||Drayson, G. B.||Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe)|
|Boyle, Sir Edward||Dugdale, Maj. Rt. Hn. Sir T. (Richmond)||Hinchingbrooke, Viscount|
|Braine, B. R.||Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.||Hirst, Geoffrey|
|Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)||Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.||Holland-Martin, C.|
|Brooke, Henry (Hampstead)||Fell, A.||Holt, A. F.|
|Brooman-White, R. C.||Fisher, Nigel||Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.|
|Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T.||Fletcher, Walter (Bury)||Horobin, I. M.|
|Bullard. D. G.||Fletcher-Cooke, C.||Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Florence|
|Bullock, Capt. M.||Gage, C. H.||Howard, Greville (St. Ives)|
|Butcher, H. W.||Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok)||Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)|
|Butler, Rt. Hon. R. A. (Saffron Walden)||Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead)||Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.)|
|Cary, Sir R.||Garner-Evans, E. H.||Hurd, A. R.|
|Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead)||George, Rt. Hon. Mai. G. Lloyd||Hutchinson, Geoffrey (Ilford, N.)|
|Hutchison, Lt.-Com Clark (E'b'rgh W.)||Molson, A. H. E.||Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard|
|Hutchison, James (Scotstoun)||Morrison, John (Salisbury)||Stevens, G. P.|
|Hylton-Foster, H. B. H.||Nabarro, G. D. N.||Steward, W. A. (Woolwich, W.)|
|Jenkins, R. C. D. (Dulwich)||Nield, Basil (Chester)||Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)|
|Jennings, R.||Noble, Cmdr. A. H. P.||Stoddart-Scott, Col M.|
|Johnson, Eric (Blackley)||Nugent, G. R. H.||Storey, S.|
|Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W.||Nutting, Anthony||Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.)|
|Kaberry, D.||Oakshott, H. D.||Studholme, H. G.|
|Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge)||Odey, G. W.||Sutcliffe, H.|
|Lambton, Viscount||Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.||Taylor, William (Bradford, N.)|
|Leather, E. H. C.||Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon. N.)||Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. P. L. (Hereford)|
|Legge-Bourke, Maj, E. A. H.||Orr-Ewing, Ian L. (Weston-super-Mare)||Thompson, Kenneth Pugh (Walton)|
|Legh, P. R, (Petersfield)||Partridge, E.||Thompson, Lt.-Cdr. R. (Croydon, W.)|
|Lindsay, Martin||Perkins, W. R. D.||Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C. N.|
|Linstead, H. N.||Peto, Brig. C. H. M.||Tilney, John|
|Lloyd, Maj. Guy (Renfrew, E.)||Peyton, J. W. W.||Touche, G. C.|
|Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. G.||Pickthorn, K. W. M.||Turner, H. F. L.|
|Longden, Gilbert (Herts, S.W.)||Powell, J. Enoch||Turton, R. H.|
|Lucts, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)||Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.)||Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.|
|Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh||Raikes, H. V.||Vosper, D. F.|
|McCallum, Major D.||Rayner, Brig. R.||Walker-Smith, D. C.|
|Macdonald, Sir Peter (I. of Wight)||Redmayne, M.||Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)|
|McKibbin, A. J.||Renton, D. L. M.||Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)|
|McKie, J. H. (Galloway)||Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.)||Wellwood, W.|
|MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.)||Roper, Sir Harold||White, Baker (Canterbury)|
|MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty)||Russell, R. S.||Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)|
|Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley)||Ryder, Capt. R. E. D.||Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)|
|Maitland, Patrick (Lanark)||Salter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur||Wills, G.|
|Manningham-Buller, Sir R. E.||Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. (Rochdale)||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Markham, Major S. F.||Scott, R. Donald||Wood, Hon. R.|
|Marlowe, A. A. H.||Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.||York, C.|
|Marples, A. E.||Shephero, William|
|Maude, Angus||Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C.||Smiles, Lt.-Col. Sir Waller||Brigadier Mackeson and Mr. Drewe|
|Mellor, Sir John||Speir, R. M.|