HC Deb 10 April 1956 vol 551 cc47-67

(1) For the purposes of—

  1. (a) keeping under review the progress made (whether under this Act or otherwise) in abating the pollution of the air in England and Wales; and
  2. (b) obtaining the advice of persons having special knowledge, experience or responsibility in regard to prevention of pollution of the air,
the Minister of Housing and Local Government shall appoint a consultative council, to be called the Clean Air Council, of which he shall be the Chairman.

(2) The Minister of Housing and Local Government may by order make provision with respect to the constitution and procedure of the said council, and any such order may be varied by a subsequent order.

(3) For the like purposes in relation to Scotland as those mentioned in subsection (1) of this section the Secretary of State shall appoint a consultative council, to be called the Clean Air Council for Scotland, and subsection (2) of this section shall apply in relation to the said council, but as if the reference therein to the Minister of Housing and Local Government were a reference to the Secretary of State.

Brought up and read the First time.

Mr. Sandys

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

In Standing Committee my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary gave an assurance that statutory provision would be made for the appointment of a Clean Air Council. It is not quite clear from the Beaver Committee's Report whether it was the intention of that Committee that the Clean Air Council which was recommended should be a statutory council or not. We thought that it would be a good thing to hear the views of the Standing Committee before making up our minds what form the council should take, though I had already on Second Reading given the House an assurance that it was the Government's intention to set up a Clean Air Council. My hon. Friend in Committee made it clear that the kind of council which the Government had in mind was a consultative body, and it is that for which the new Clause provides.

This is admittedly somewhat different from the Clean Air Council which some both inside and outside the House have suggested. The Beaver Committee in paragraph 119 of its Report suggested that the proposed Clean Air Council should be given the duty of co-ordinating both the administrative and research work of the various Government Departments and other interested bodies concerned with the problem of clean air.

The House considered very carefully the recommendations of the Beaver Committee, and I think the House will agree with me that it would be impracticable and constitutionally undesirable for an outside body to co-ordinate the work of Government Departments. That is obviously the function of Ministers and of the Cabinet. The introduction into the Governmental machine of an extraneous, autonomous body with quasi-executive functions would not only create administrative confusion, but would seriously impair the principle of accountability of Ministers to Parliament, a principle to which this House so rightly attaches importance.

To a lesser extent the same objections apply to the suggestion made that the Clean Air Council should make an annual report to Parliament. It would be possible, though, I think, unusual, for an outside body to report to Parliament upon the progress of a policy the execution of which had been entrusted by Statute to the Government and to the local authorities. That does not, of course, mean that the Minister cannot and should not make a report to Parliament upon the progress of this policy. However, if we wish to retain the principle of the accountability of the Government for the progress of this policy, in my view it is better that any reports that are made should be made on the authority of the Government and not on the authority of an outside body which, in any case, is appointed by the Minister.

I think that that would only confuse the issue, more particularly if the Minister were himself to be a member of the council, as, in my view, it is most desirable he should be. If the Clean Air Council were to be given the duty to make reports to Parliament, then it would clearly follow that no member of the Government could be a member of the council, since no Minister could very well sign a collective report presented to Parliament with which he was not himself in complete agreement. I think it would be undesirable and invidious for a Minister to be a member of an advisory body—that is really what this will be—a consultative body making a report to Parliament, but himself having, perhaps, to sign a minority report expressing his views, even though he did so in conjunction with other members of the council.

It does not follow, however, that reports and accounts should not be made to Parliament by the Government upon the progress of this policy, and in my view it is most desirable that they should be. Obviously it would be in the light of the discussions which the Minister would have had with the Clean Air Council that any such report would be made.

4.15 p.m.

There is one other way of doing it, and that is to set up the Clean Air Council without any Ministerial participation, and to leave the Council, so to speak, as a freelance body to make its own independent reports. On this, I feel that the Clean Air Council, at any rate from the standpoint of its usefulness to the Government in pushing forward with this policy, would lose very much of its value if the Minister principally concerned could not be a member of it. For my part, when this Clean Air Council, to which I attach importance, is set up, I intend to make a great deal of use of it in trying to obtain the views of those who are principally concerned in the operation of the policy, and I should regard it as unfortunate if I were not able to be a full member and also the chairman of the council.

It is these considerations which have led me to propose the constitution of the Clean Air Council on the lines set out in the new Clause, and I believe that, constituted in this way, the Clean Air Council will provide a most valuable and important means of securing effective consultation between the Government and those organisations outside on whose co-operation the success of this policy depends.

Dr. Summerskill

We welcome this new Clause, as the Minister knows, because this matter was discussed exhaustively on Second Reading, and then and in Committee my hon. Friends and I stressed the importance of the Clean Air Council. I regard the provisions for the establishment of the Council as among the most important of this Measure, because I am very anxious that the interest in clean air should not lapse, and, indeed, that it should be stimulated. Excellent as it is, I regard the Measure as only the first step, and I hope that there will be other steps forward when further investigation of the whole problem has been made. For this reason we feel that the Beaver Committee's recommendation about the Clean Air Council was of the utmost importance.

However, I am very disappointed by what the Minister has said precisely for this reason—the fear that the interest may lapse. He has, I think, given an academic explanation of why the Minister cannot participate with the Council in making a report. We in this House, and especially hon. Members representing industrial constituencies, are anxious to be kept alerted to what the Clean Air Council does. The right hon. Gentleman must, as an old Parliamentarian, know as well as I do that there is a tendency for people to lose interest. Advisory committees are set up, and at first people are enthusiastic about them. The Minister, no doubt, intends that there should be on the Council representation of all the interested organisations including, no doubt, private industry, the local authority authorities, and so on, but then the representatives themselves may, perhaps, become a little tired because the efforts they make are not noticed by other people who matter. The Minister may say that this cannot happen because he is to be the chairman of the Council. However, the Minister is a very busy man, and his successors will be very busy people. No doubt, the Minister will not always take the chair; he will be chairman only in name.

Having been a Minister myself, I speak with some sympathy when I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman wants us to have to press him every year to make a report to the House, to give a broad survey of what the Clean Air Council is doing. That is what he is inviting us to do. He said he could not make a report because his position would be invidious and because he would, perhaps, have to identify himself with a majority report which he did not support, that he might have a minority point of view and so would find himself in an embarrassing position.

Many of us are keenly alive to the importance of clean air. We shall agitate for it, just as people in the last century agitated for clean water and just as we, including myself, agitated to the House for clean milk until I had the great honour of piloting a clean milk Measure, the Milk (Special Designations) Act, 1949, through the House. I am on the warpath. My constituency of Warrington, I am sorry to say, is one of the dirtiest in the whole country. I shall find myself in the position of pressing the Minister every year to come to the House, perhaps on a Supply Day, and give us a broad survey. Would it not be much easier for him to say today that the Council shall make a report?

Mr. Sandys

The right hon. Lady said earlier that it would not be possible for the Minister to make a report and now she is saying that she would have to press the Minister to make such a report.

Dr. Summerskill

In the House.

Mr. Sandys

Yes, but the point I was making earlier was that I did not think it was suitable for the Council as such to make a report. I believe in this policy, and I want the maximum publicity directed upon it. Therefore, I think that it is not only suitable but desirable that the Government of the day should make a report to Parliament once a year on this subject. I am quite prepared to give an undertaking, from the standpoint of this Government, that such a report would be made every year to Parliament, without any agitation or pressure by the right hon. Lady.

Dr. Summerskill

That is a most generous undertaking, but has the right hon. Gentleman consulted the Whips? We are only too ready to accept the undertaking, but certain predecessors of the right hon. Gentleman went even further in relation to other Bills and their undertakings were accepted, but subsequently they found it difficult to fulfil them.

Here is a most important undertaking incorporated in the Water Act, 1945: The Minister shall appoint a committee, to be called the Central Advisory Water Committee, for the purpose of— (a) advising him or any other Minister concerned upon matters connected with the conservation and use of water resources.… The right hon. Gentleman will agree that the conservation and use of water resources are of tremendous importance to the location of industry and indeed to our whole economy. What happened? Although this requirement was incorporated in the Water Act, the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor as Minister of Housing and Local Government saw fit, for economic reasons, to suspend the operation of this most important Committee. It is true that the Committee has not been disbanded and I believe that in recent months, under the present Minister, it has been recalled. This is an illustration, Sir Charles.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

I hope that it will not go on very much longer.

Dr. Summerskill

I am very conscious of the fact that you have your eye upon me, Sir Charles, but I think that it is fair to illustrate the point. The Minister is asking us to have confidence in him. He has comported himself in the last few weeks in such a way that we on this side of the House are beginning to have confidence in him, but some of his predecessors have gazed at us from the Front Bench opposite with the same look as the Minister has given us this afternoon in asking us to support him. Yet the right hon. Gentleman must see that we have been betrayed in the matter of the Water Act. The responsible Minister set up a committee and incorporated that requirement in the Act, but later the Committee was disbanded. Therefore, when the right hon. Gentleman says, "Do not ask for a report, you can trust me," we feel a little apprehensive.

The Minister's proposal is a second best. If the right hon. Gentleman is still in his present position next year we shall ask him to make a report, and those of us who are interested will have to see that in successive years a report is made. I, therefore, accept the Clean Air Council with this reservation. We raised this matter in Committee. The Parliamentary Secretary did not reject the idea of a report. He said that it would be looked at, and I am rather sorry that in Committee neither the Minister nor the Parliamentary Secretary had been advised that it was inadvisable to accept the suggestion of an annual report. However, we may be able to raise this matter again next year when we shall be able to consider what the Minister has to say about the work of the Committee. Perhaps, after further consideration, even he may change his mind.

Mr. Sandys

The report from the Minister which I had in mind would be a report on the whole progress of this policy and not just a report on the work of the Council, because there would be much done outside the Council. The Council will be a very useful instrument and an adjunct to the whole policy, but very much will be done which will not be within the duties of the Council. I envisage that the report will contain an account of progress in various local authority areas and perhaps an account of progress in research, though undoubtedly it will include a report on the work of the Council. Therefore, I think that I am offering something wider and more comprehensive than what is asked for by the right hon. Lady.

Dr. Summerskill

I accept the right hon. Gentleman's undertaking. Only next year will prove whether it is possible for him to give a broad survey and at the same time detailed information about what has been done, because it is clear to me that the House is very interested in this matter. I should like to thank the right hon. Gentleman for incorporating the Clean Air Council provision in the Bill. Let us hope that it will be of tremendous value to the country.

Mr. Gerald Nabarro (Kidderminster)

I welcome the proposal to establish a Clean Air Council, which was discussed exhaustively in Committee. I am sorry that my right hon. Friend will not write into the Bill that he proposes to give a comprehensive report on the progress of clean air policy. I intervene only to draw my right hon. Friend's attention to one fact which may have escaped his attention. I notice that, advisedly, he used the word "research." It would be quite impossible, and I quote the words of the new Clause, to keep "under review the progress made" in clean air policy unless very detailed information were given about the progress of research work year by year.

The point came up again and again in Committee that we could not go as far as we would wish in our statutory provisions because of the state of our scientific knowledge of the abatement of noxious fumes, and I give the well-known example of noxious fumes from the exhaust pipes of motor vehicles. I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to an exact analogy, and I am sure that on Second Reading of the new Clause it will be in order to quote from a Measure which is now before another place.

Clause 2 (7) of that Measure, the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Bill (Lords) contains these words: The Research Council"— in this context it is a council for scientific and industrial research— shall in each year send to the Committee of the Privy Council referred to in subsection (2) of the foregoing section a report of their proceedings during the preceding year, and the Lord President of the Council shall cause a copy of that report to be laid before each House of Parliament. 4.30 p.m.

That is a Government Bill. It seems to me analogous that there should be a comprehensive report made to both Houses of Parliament on the progress of clean air policy. Therefore, I welcome the introduction of this new Clause to provide for a Clean Air Council, which was originally recommended by the Beaver Committee, though not exactly in this form. It was also the subject of a proposed new Clause moved during the Committee stage of the Bill in which the right hon. Lady, hon. Gentlemen opposite and myself were associated. Now we have this proposed new Clause which, although it largely meets the case, still omits what I regard as a vital feature for a periodical review of clean air policy, namely, that it should be a statutory responsibility on the Minister to lay before both Houses of Parliament his progress report year by year in a generally accepted form, such as the words of the Measure I have quoted.

Mr. Moyle

I welcome this new Clause and fully appreciate the reasons advanced by the Minister against making the Clean Air Council a statutory body. Much of the support for the Council being made a statutory body by this Bill arises from the fact that there are several Government Departments, referred to by the Beaver Committee in paragraph 119 of its Report, which are responsible in some measure for the problem of clean air.

Therefore, my first question to the Minister is a practical one. Assuming for the moment that the Minister makes himself responsible under this proposed new Clause for issuing a report to the House each year as Minister, he will also be chairman of the advisory committee, which is to be a purely consultative and advisory body. Can I take it that in those circumstances the Minister would be wholly responsible to the House of Commons for the entire policy of clean air? Or would it remain, as it is at present, the responsibility of the several Ministers whom I need not indicate?

As my right hon. Friend the Member for Warrington (Dr. Summerskill) said so ably, the Clean Air Council will be of immense value to this country since, for the first time, it will provide a consultative body responsible for carrying out various functions of the clean air policy. It will be a focal point for all those interested in fighting air pollution, not only the local authorities. I am thinking especially of our citizens, some of whom suffer exceedingly. Indeed, I wonder how some of them face air pollution day after day. It will give these people an opportunity to voice their strong feelings about the subject and should help us to develop more speedily than would be possible in any other way a national consciousness of the importance of securing an effective clean air policy.

Now I come to a point to which I referred several times in Committee and also on Second Reading. One thing which the Clean Air Council will do is to bring home to our citizens the tremendous problem involved in seeking a solution of the problems of pollution. At the moment citizens suffering from air pollution do not know whether the problem is capable of solution. However, when the Clean Air Council is established local authorities will be able to submit their problems to it, and this can also be done by interested citizens and by bodies such as the Smoke Abatement Society. For the first time, therefore, we shall have an organisation which will help us to understand the problem and which will help to find a remedy for the more vexatious forms of air pollution. I have in mind particularly the chemical industries, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Widnes (Mr. MacColl) referred, and in respect of which my own constituency is a victim.

I regard it as vital, therefore, that the Clean Air Council shall have as its first duty as an advisory body the education of the public mind as to the value of solving this problem. I have been much encouraged by reading the recent history of the great fight waged by the United States against air pollution. It is one of the most interesting documents I have read for some time. Great progress has been made, and I hope that, as a result of passing this Bill, we shall have a similar experience in this country.

Finally, I hope sincerely that the Clean Air Council will not only stimulate interest and educate the public as to the problem involved in this matter, but that it will stimulate research, supported by the Government of the day. I hope that the Council will be the means of discovering methods of combating successfully those forms of air pollution which have up to the present outwitted the experts.

Squadron Leader A. E. Cooper (Ilford, South)

I hope that my right hon. Friend will not close his mind to the possibility of presenting a report to Parliament every year, and that in another place it will be possible to write into the Bill a subsection giving statutory effect to the desire of the Minister to present an annual report to both Houses of Parliament.

Dr. Stross

The Minister has promised that he will present an annual report. That is what he said.

Squadron Leader Cooper

Yes, that is what my right hon. Friend said, but Ministers change. It may be the intention of my right hon. Friend to make a report to Parliament, but other Ministers may come along. Also, as the right hon. Lady the Member for Warrington (Dr. Summer-skill) rightly said, interest in this subject might gradually die. If the Council receives little or no publicity for all its work, it may be found difficult to induce people to serve on the council.

The right hon. Lady referred to the Water Act of 1945. Obviously she has the same brief as I have. The interesting point is that British industry itself, notably through the Federation of British Industries, is anxious that such a Clause shall be written into the Bill.

The Minister must adduce stronger arguments this afternoon or in another place before the House and the country as a whole can accept that it is impossible to write into the Bill the subsection for which some of us ask.

Mr. D. Jones

I think the Minister supplied the very reason why he ought to look at the matter again. It is probable that in the course of time interest in the subject of clean air will fade and it may be necessary to have a body to continue interest in making our air as clean as possible.

We are all conscious that there are processes which it is difficult to combat at present, but who can say that tomorrow or the day after something will not be produced which will enable the difficulties of those processes to be overcome? Also, how can we be sure that that will be done unless this advisory body is entitled to present its own report to Parliament, particularly if it finds itself in disagreement with the Minister? No matter how anxious the Minister may be to make maximum progress in the matter of clean air, I fear there will always be a suspicion that behind the rate of progress is not the Minister's enthusiasm but the dead hand of the Treasury.

When the Minister said he thought it was wrong that any outside body should determine policy for the Government, he supplied the reason why he should again look at the problem. It seems to me from what the right hon. Gentleman said that we have to decide between having him as chairman of the Council and having an independent report by the Council to Parliament. I have the greatest possible admiration for the right hon. Gentleman after having seen the Order Paper for the Report stage, but I should prefer the Council to have freedom to submit an independent report to Parliament, particularly if it finds itself in disagreement with the Minister. I should prefer that even if the Minister still carries out his intention to submit a report on the progress made.

I have a feeling that after a year or 18 months there will be two attitudes and two reports to be made. One report will be about the rate of progress that we have been able to make, and the other will be about the rate of progress that could have been made had all the resources been available. If that situation arises, Parliament ought to be advised of it at least annually by an independent report from the Council showing what could have been accomplished if the resources had been available.

I know that industry is doing, and has done, a good deal, but if we are to maintain interest in the project, and it certainly is very desirable that we should in several parts of the country, we must be assured by someone that all the scientific resources available and all the necessary finance are being provided in order to make the progress as rapid as possible.

I should have thought that this would have been desirable even in the interests of the Government. It relates to our ability to measure the enthusiasm of the right hon. Gentleman in submitting his first report to Parliament at the end of a year if he retains his present post. There is, of course, no certainty that his will be the signature to the first report. Nevertheless, if the Council were able independently to say at the time the Minister's report was issued that the progress made in the operation of the Measure was as much as could be expected having regard to the resources available, I believe that would satisfy the people.

4.45 p.m.

I had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would have given us some idea of the kind of person he would be inviting to join the Council. Does he propose to man it mainly from the industrial side? To what extent does he propose to appoint persons who are particularly interested in scientific and industrial research? Does he intend to provide representation for the associations of local authorities? I should have thought that Members of Parliament, judging by the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), are able to make themselves sufficiently vocal on this and other matters without having a seat on the Council; but local authorities should certainly be represented.

The right hon. Gentleman said in Committee that he wanted to obtain the enthusiasm of everybody to operate the Measure. One way to maintain and improve the enthusiasm might be to have representation of the national associations of local authorities so that there might be a channel between local authorities and the Minister through the Council. I know that the right hon. Gentleman has to consider the matter again, and I am not asking for specific organisations to be mentioned, but I should have thought that he could have told us how many people there are to be on the Council and from what part of the community they are to be drawn so that we might judge how effective the Council will be.

I regard as of great importance the ability of the Council to submit an independent report to Parliament annually, or more frequently if it finds itself in disagreement with the Minister about the rate of progress, for it is extremely important that Parliament should know about it. I am sorry to have to tell the right hon. Gentleman that if I have to choose between an independent report by the Council and his chairmanship of the Council, I much prefer the independent report.

Mr. R. E. Winterbottom

There has been a tremendous change in the Minister's attitude since the Bill was first brought to the House. When we embarked upon the Committee stage we were begging for bread and he gave us a stone. Now, seemingly, when we are coming to the end of the feast he is putting many sweets in front of us. The Minister hopes that we shall accept this proposal without too critical an examination. While welcoming the Minister's proposals about the Clean Air Council up to a point, there should be no interference with the Council's accountability to Parliament because the chairman of the Council will be the Minister.

When the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) introduced a Private Member's Bill, the Minister consulted at great length with interested bodies, and particularly with local authorities. It is within my knowledge that during those consultations suggestions were made to him by people who had practical experience. Those suggestions have not been accepted and woven into the Bill. I do not want the Clean Air Council to become a kind of smokescreen behind which the Minister makes a report to his own liking and which may contain views at variance with those of members of the Council.

It is essential, if the Council is to be effective, that it include people who are interested and who have the knowledge and have undertaken the scientific research involved. It must be remembered that they will have a great deal more knowledge of the subject than will the chairman of the Council. They will, therefore, have a totally different point of view about what is happening in the country than will the Minister. We should provide that we have the uncompromising opinions of the members of the Council, including those members appointed to it because of their knowledge of the problems of various localities.

Another point with which I want to deal was touched upon by the hon. Member for Kidderminster. During the Committee stage we debated at great length the topic of research into noxious fumes, especially sulphuric oxides. We especially pleaded that the Clean Air Council should have co-ordinating powers so that it could co-ordinate the activities of bodies conducting research into problems of oxides and noxious fumes. Indeed, we thought that the Minister's opinion upon that subject was the same as ours. As the Bill is now drafted, certain powers are given to local authorities to contribute towards the cost of investigation and research into the pollution of the air.

We know that scientific and technical institutes and the fuel technology sections of some universities are conducting research into the problem of sulphuric pollution; yet we do not see any power given to the Clean Air Council to deal with the problem of sulphuric oxides, even though sulphuric pollution is one of the worst forms of air pollution. Will the Minister give us an assurance that he will specially direct the attention of the Clean Air Council to its duties in co-ordinating research into the problem of sulphuric oxides? Will he at the same time look again at the problem of Parliamentary accountability to make it possible for the Council to give an annual report to the House, irrespective of the opinions of the Minister?

Mr. Ede (South Shields)

I accept the constitutional doctrine that was laid down by the Minister in moving the new Clause. Advisory bodies are very awkward for Ministers, because Ministers are not bound to accept their advice. They become even more awkward when Ministers are by Statute chairmen of advisory councils. For instance, the Home Secretary is chairman of the Police Council where he hears a multitude of views, but woe betide him if he makes himself responsible for taking only one of those views when a police matter might come before the House.

The Minister is bound by Statute to present an annual report to the House. He might undertake that there would always be a chapter in the report dealing with this problem. In that way he might meet us. As he pointed out, it is necessary to have not merely the views of the Clean Air Council before the House, but also an account of everything which has been happening in the country. It certainly would not be a report worthy of the Ministry if it did not include any recommendations made by the Council with an account of the attitude of the Minister towards them in his capacity, not as chairman of the Advisory Council, but as the Minister.

I should have preferred some arrangement like that. If in another place the right hon. Gentleman can have a few words inserted in the Clause making it his duty to include in his annual report an account of progress made in this matter, everybody will be satisfied. I am not much fortified by talk that this matter might be dealt with on a Supply Day. There are twenty-eight Supply Days, and the battle to get a place for any subject is pretty grim. Far more people are disappointed than are gratified at the end of the battle. If clean air were debated on a Supply Day one year and it were suggested that it should be debated on a Supply Day the next year, plenty of people would say, "You had your turn last year, it is my turn this year to debate clean ice cream"—or some other matter which they regarded as important. If the right hon. Gentleman could indicate that the matter will certainly be reported upon every year in the annual report of his Ministry, that would go a long way towards ensuring that there will be some publicity for what has been undertaken. That would be a safer undertaking for a Minister to give when one considers the transitory nature of Ministers. One need only look at the back of this Bill to see how it exemplifies the line in the hymn: Change and decay in all around I see. Of the four Ministers whose names appear on the back of the Bill, one has left the Government; one has been promoted from this Department to another, and the hon. Gentleman who gave us such great hopes that he would be helpful during the Committee stage of the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill was early promoted from that job into this.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir Rhys Hopkin Morris)

The right hon. Gentleman is getting rather far from the new Clause.

Mr. Ede

I was just pointing out how difficult it is to accept a Ministerial answer unless one bears in mind that these gentlemen are here today and gone tomorrow—and the sooner this lot are gone the better for all of us.

Mr. Blenkinsop

On this matter of the composition of the Clean Air Council, it would be of help if we could have an indication from the Minister of his ideas on the subject; and that he will keep in mind the desirability of having as members people with practical experience of this work, such as sanitary inspectors and others fully qualified to do the work.

Mr. Sandys

If I may have the permission of the House to do so, perhaps it would be a good thing were I now to reply to the points raised during this debate. First, I would say a word about the composition of the Clean Air Council. I will be frank and say that I have not yet thought out exactly what is the best composition for this Council. But it is clear that to be effective the Council must be really representative of those who have a technical contribution to make on this subject, and, also, those who have experience and responsibility for the execution of the clean air policy.

In other words, we must have people who can give good technical advice, and we must also have people who have experience and are familiar with the problems of local authorities. That gives a broad indication of the wide scope which I have in mind for the composition of the Council. On the other hand, one must see that it does not get so large that it becomes unwieldy. It is a matter of balancing those two considerations.

One hon. Member asked whether it was the intention of the Government to entrust the responsibility for all aspects of the clear air problem entirely to one Minister. We have considered the position and we agree with the recommendation of the Beaver Report in paragraph 119, where the Committee state: We are not suggesting any change in present departmental organisation or responsibilities. It is easy to make out a case for concentrating in one Department the entire responsibility for all aspects of a particular problem, but in so doing one finds that one has divided the responsibility for some other problem. In any large field of public policy it is quite inevitable that there should be more than one Government Department with a share in the responsibility. I consider that an inescapable situation.

However, that does not mean that the work in these various fields cannot be effectively and efficiently co-ordinated. It does not mean that the clean air policy cannot be pursued as Government policy, which is certainly the intention of the Government. I will say a word in a moment about the annual report which, of course, bears on this point.

The hon. Member for The Hartlepools (Mr. D. Jones) said that had he the choice between the Minister being a member or the chairman of the Council, and having an independent report, he would prefer an independent report. The hon. Member for Brightside (Mr. R. E. Winter-bottom) said that he would prefer to see a Council independent of the Government. It depends entirely on the purpose of the Council. If its purpose is to be a sort of watchdog to see whether the Government are doing their job, it would be better to have an independent body. If it is intended that the Council should report independently to Parliament, as one hon. Member said, be accountable to Parliament, that is quite a different conception from the one which I believe the Beaver Committee had in mind; and, certainly, it is different from what I have in mind, and what is envisaged in the new Clause.

I feel that there are better ways of watching the progress and efficiency of the Government than to ask that the Government set up a committee to watch themselves which, in effect, would be the case in those circumstances. If we have a body whose job is to keep a watch on the Government and report to Parliament about how they are getting on, I do not think that the best way to create the close and co-operative relationship which I have in mind and to which I look forward when we have formed this Clean Air Council.

Mr. R. E. Winterbottom

The Council would have no mandate to keep a watch on the Government. We rely on the public to do that and they will give their answer at the next General Election. I do not see that in this Clause there is any mandate for the Council to watch the Government.

Mr. Sandys

That was the point I was making. The hon. Member said he preferred an independent Council, reporting independently.

Mr. Winterbottom

On this matter.

Mr. Sandys

I feel that great advantage could be obtained from close consultation and frank discussion between the Government and those who have experience and knowledge of these problems. I have already indicated that I believe we shall benefit a great deal from the creation of this Council, and I am glad that, in general, the proposed constitution is agreeable to hon. Members. The detailed arrangements for setting up the Council will have to be made by Order and the House will have a further opportunity of commenting on what is proposed.

My hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) quoted as a parallel the new Bill being considered in another place and entitled the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Bill. I do not consider it to be much of a parallel, because the problem is entirely different. I think it appropriate that an advisory committee of technicians should sit independently of the Government and should make its technical report to the Government.

It is quite a different matter when we are concerned with a problem which is not purely technical—and I do not consider that clean air is primarily a technical problem, although it has important technical aspects. It is very largely a problem of administration and of carrying with us the entire country in enthusiastic support of this policy, as has been said by hon. Members on both sides of the House.

If the purpose of the Clean Air Council were to report exclusively upon research, like the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, I would agree with my hon. Friend that it would be more appropriate for it to consist of scientists, who would make their scientific report, which could be presented to Parliament by the Minister. But this is a council which has to deal with a different kind of problem and, therefore, I believe that its constitution requires to be more in the nature of the one proposed in the Amendment.

Dr. Summerskill

This is a very important matter. As the Minister has said, he has been questioned about it by hon. Members on both sides of the House. Can he state which representatives of this Council would not have technical knowledge? In my opinion, this would be a highly technical council. During the Bill's seven weeks in Committee upstairs we have observed how technical this matter is, and how my hon. Friends, who have investigated all the different techniques connected with the problem, have made important contributions to our debates. When we discuss a later Amendment the Minister will see how the technicians have gone wrong because they have not had the best advice. I should think that this Council would be highly technical and, indeed, parallel to the one mentioned by the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro).

Mr. Sandys

It all depends upon what is meant by "technical." As has been suggested by one hon. Member, I should think that it would be useful to have, as members, representatives of local authority associations. Those representatives would not necessarily be sanitary inspectors or technical men; they might be secretaries or other leading members of the associations, who would gather together both technical and administrative experience. In addition to that, I should expect that other members would be pure technicians. It all depends what one means by "technical". I should not have thought that this Council would be technical in the sense in which the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research is technical. I imagine that that Department would be largely composed of scientists, although I have not studied that question.

Mr. Nabarro

I do not want to argue whether or not the form of the annual report of this Council would be exactly similar to the one from which I quoted, which I claim to be an analogous case, but will my right hon. Friend tell the House in what form we can have some sort of report, once a year, of what the Council is up to? That is what concerns us all.

Mr. Sandys

If my hon. Friend had not interrupted me, I should probably already have given him the information for which he is asking. I am coming to the question of the annual report, because I believe that to be the crux of the matter. The House is quite right to insist upon being given a progress report at regular intervals, so that it can form its own opinion of the progress which is being made, and can decide whether any action or criticism is necessary, or any changes in the law are required.

My sincere belief is that the purpose which hon. Members have in mind would be better served by a report from Ministers accountable to the House than from a body which is not directly accountable to the House, and in respect of which a Minister can say, "That is their view; it is not mine," thereby leaving the House in a difficult situation, because it has nothing upon which it can get a grip. In some ways, it is rather like dealing with nationalised industries. We have all had difficulties at certain times about the form of the annual reports of such industries.

I have said quite clearly, in reply to the right hon. Lady—and this was not an interjection, off the cuff—that it has always been my intention that an annual report should be presented to Parliament upon the progress of this policy. The right hon. Gentleman suggested that it might form a section—it would be an important section—of the annual report, covering various fields for which I am responsible, which, in any case, I have a statutory obligation to make to Parliament. On the other hand, at any rate in the earlier years, it might be thought more suitable to present it in the form of a White Paper, which could deal separately with the matter I. should be glad if the exact form in which the report is made could be left open, and if the House would accept my assurance that it is my firm intention that there should be an annual report.

If importance is attached to the fact that Ministers come and go—although I think that assurances given by one Minister, especially upon non-controversial issues of this kind, are honoured and implemented by their successors—I will consider whether an Amendment can be introduced in another place to make it clear that, in one form or another, an annual report should be made to Parliament by the Government.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.