HC Deb 07 May 1963 vol 677 cc373-88

9.59 p.m.

The Minister of Health (Mr. J. Enoch Powell)

I beg to move, That the Civil Defence (Training in Nursing) Regulations 1963, a draft of which was laid before this House on 9th April, be approved. Perhaps I might be taken at the same time, Mr. Speaker, to be referring to the corresponding Scottish Regulations—though I am not, of course, moving them —because their purport and reasons are precisely the same.

Mr. Speaker

If the House wishes, the discussion can extend to the next ensuing Regulations.

Mr. Powell

The purpose of the Regulations is as simple as their form. It is to add to the existing civil defence functions of local authorities the new function of giving training in home nursing and first aid. I do not think that it needs much argument to show that this is an appropriate and a desirable function for the civil defence authorities. In almost any major emergency it could not but be of great advantage that as many people as possible should have a basic knowledge of home nursing and of first aid. One can easily concede circumstances in which life would be saved and suffering would be minimised if those immediately in contact with casualties were able to put this simple basic knowledge into effect. The inclusion of this function amongst the civil defence functions of local authorities will automatically attract to any expenditure upon it the normal 75 per cent. civil defence rate of grant.

The House will notice that Regulation 3 requires the authorities, in the exercise of their functions, to comply with directions, and, in the first instance, it is proposed to direct that the local authorities should take on the training of such of their own staffs as wish to receive it, for, clearly, this is an operation that will be more usefully conducted in deliberate phases. It is to secure that that this Regulation is included.

This is not a work that has been neglected hitherto. In fact, it is within the knowledge of all hon. Members that the voluntary aid societies have done an immense amount of work and prepara- tion in his respect. That is in no way diminished, and it will go on by this new function that is conferred upon local authorities. I am glad to say that the voluntary aid societies themselves have assured me that they will co-operate in the organisation of these courses and in the giving of this instruction.

I am very glad to commend these Regulations to the House because, whatever may be true of other kinds of civil defence preparation, here is a type of preparation which, in deepest peacetime and in any conceivable circumstances, could not but be beneficial. All effort expended in carrying out these Regulations, all expenditure incurred in doing so, cannot but be of general advantage, quite apart from any contemplated emergency or cavil defence requirement. I therefore hope that the House will give its approval to these draft Regulations.

10.4 p.m.

Mr. Emus Hughes (South Ayrshire)

I should have thought that we would have had an opportunity of discussing these Regulations separately, as this is a very big question. We have not had many opportunities in the last three years of discussing civil defence, and these proposals have been announced in a very sketchy speech.

For example, why are we being asked to undertake this work now? If the preparations for the defence of the civil population had been as they ought to have been, these Regulations would have been brought to the House a long time ago. Apparently, we have had a crisis in civil defence. The background against which these nursing Regulations must be placed is that we have had a possible emergency in which the whole of the American civil defence organisation was mobilised, and ours was not. Instead of having these very sketchy references to a possible emergency, we should a long time ago have had a full debate on the general background against which these Regulations are brought before The House.

Let us try to understand what the situation will be. We are told that It shall be the function of every council of a county or county borough to train persons in home nursing and first aid. But what sort of emergency will this be?

We are told that one hydrogen bomb, exploded over Scotland, would burn up and destroy everything within a radius of 150 miles of Glasgow, but here we are very casually informed that we must train persons in home nursing and first aid for this eventuality.

Have the Ministers realised the magnitude of the problem? Imagine Glasgow or Edinburgh, which will be in this area in which it is assumed that everything will be destroyed, having to conduct training in home nursing and first aid. Have Ministers thought of what hospitals people will go to? In the sort of emergency visualised, every hospital in the region of every big industrial centre will be wiped out. What kind of home nursing and first aid is contemplated?

I imagine the Ayrshire County Council, which is a very progressive body, putting this question to the Minister: what kind of home nursing will you organise in the event of an attempt being made to destroy the aerodrome at Prestwick? Is it home nursing against gas or against shock or is it a skeleton nursing service which tries to function in an impossible situation? Perhaps the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland will tell us.

We have been told that in Scotland it is necessary to have underground shelters for certain civil services. Will the nursing be organised from these underground shelters? All these questions seem not to have occurred to the Minister. At any rate, we have had an inadequate reply to them. The local authorities will inevitably ask exactly what is meant by these Regulations. Will there be water supplies? Will the nursing services function if there are no water supplies and no sanitation? My questions are pertinent and should be answered in the debate.

Will the Minister try to visualise the effect in the county council buildings at Ayr after a hydrogen bomb has exploded over Prestwick? That is the reality with which we are faced. What will the nurses do? How will they be mobilised? Will they look for people among the smouldering ruins? Will they wish to send them to hospitals which do not exist or to hospitals in which the water supplies and sanitation have been cut off?

This is a pathetic series of regulations by a Ministry which has not envisaged the possibility of a hydrogen bomb falling, but which proposes to make a small effort to train people who in these days are sensible enough to know that, home nursing and first aid cannot be organised against the possibility which I have envisaged.

When we have a debate on a spy trial, the House is crowded. But when we consider what will happen to the civil population in the event of war, we find almost a conspiracy of silence in an attempt to have the whole matter relegated to the background of our consciousness.

Will the hon. Lady give us more detailed information about the position in which the nursing services will be placed in such an eventuality? There is no point in training nurses simply to attend to a few broken legs or a few scratches or other small casualties. We are asking local authorities to elaborate plans about which the Government have no conception. How will the nurses operate when half the population will be on the move in a mass evacuation?

The Minister says that the Government will bear 70 per cent. of the cost and that the local authority will pay 30 per cent. But even 30 per cent. of the cost of adequate preparations to meet a catastrophe and calamity of this kind would make local authorities bankrupt. Let us have a little reality and let some guidance be given to local authorities, who are intelligent enough to know the problems which they face.

10.16 p.m.

Mr. Cyril Bence (Dunb artonshire, East)

I do not wish to delay the House for long. I agree with some of the comments which my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) has made on the frightful chaos which will exist after a hydrogen bomb has fallen on the Clyde area or in the London connurbation, but I disagree with his view about giving grants to local authorities to train people in home nursing and to do voluntary home nursing in the ordinary course of events and not when a hydrogen bomb has fallen. I believe that such training is very desirable.

In three burghs in my constituency we have an excellent organisation known as the Women's Voluntary Service. I am proud of the fact that my wife is an organiser of the W.V.S. They do excellent work in the Burgh of Clydebank. It is very desirable to have more women, especially those who have brought up their families, doing voluntary work of this nature in local authorities. I believe that the majority of the work of a voluntary nature in both England and Scotland in respect of rescue work and Red Cross has been done by women. One can easily see, from the splendid displays that are put on at weekends, how women are playing their part in the ranks of those interested in civil defence.

It is a wonderful thing that women should learn nursing, first aid and how generally to help people in their own homes. In this connection, the W.V.S. meals-on-wheels scheme in Clydebank serves about 140 meals a week and in the winter their nursing training came in useful and they were able to help elderly people in their homes. The Regulations are concerned with home nursing. I applaud people being trained, not necessarily with war in mind, but with a view to helping the population generally.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

This is a civil defence matter. It has nothing to do with the W.V.S.

Mr. Bence

The W.V.S. has a section which forms part of the general civil defence scheme, just as the Red Cross plays an important part. Nobody wants war—that is, unless he is a madman—and I have nothing but admiration for people who, without necessarily having war in mind, are trained in nursing so that they can cope with the ordinary accidents that occur in our daily lives, fires in homes caused by oil heaters, and so on.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

The Regulations are concerned with civil defence and I hope that my hon. Friend will realise that they have nothing to do with ordinary accidents in the home.

Mr. Bence

I recall that not long ago a fire broke out in a home in Clydebank in which four children lost their lives. The W.V.S. are quickly able to help in road, rail and other accidents and I am saying that the more people who are able to cope under these circumstances the better. They can use their skills within the civil defence set-up and I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) will realise that "civil defence" has a wider connotation than that of trained nursing staff sitting round waiting for a war to begin. The civil population need looking after when there are ordinary, everyday accidents and, should war break out, their nursing knowledge will be all the more valuable.

I worked in a large motor plant for many years. There, hon. Members may be interested to know, I took a course in first aid, under a voluntary scheme. I am talking of the days before the last war, although I did not go in for that training with the coming war in mind. What I learned was extremely useful in peacetime a Id when war broke out my knowledge was equally useful. I welcome the Red Cross, the W.V.S. and local authorities creating in our midst—and this goes for factories, too—an increasing group of highly trained nursing staff. For this reason, I welcome the Regulations.

10.19 p.m.

Mr. W. B. van Straubenzee (Wokingham)

I am glad that the hon. Member for Dunbar[...]onshire, East (Mr. Bence) made those helpful comments. I can assure hon. Members that I intend to be even more brief than he was. The hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) hinged his remarks on the phrase "civil defence," which, I agree, is the basis of these Regulations. He complained, as he has before, that we have not had an opportunity to discuss the principle behind these Regulations, With respect, the hon. Gentleman is wrong.

If the hon. Member had been in the House on St. David's day he would have been able to take part in a useful discussion on the broad principles behind these Regulations and he would have heard a most useful contribution, as always, from the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. Fletcher) who usually leads in this matter for the party opposite and no doubt will be speaking later tonight. He is on record as believing that civil defence was effective even in this modem age, but I will not refer further to that point because I shall be out of order. The hon. Member, however, must not complain if he chooses not to be present when these matters are discussed.

The logical sequence of what the hon. Member for South Ayrshire says is that one should take no precaution in the face of atomic war. We are not discussing tonight whether these weapons are right or wrong; but, whatever our view, we should agree surely that in the foreseeable future we shall live in a dangerous world, and whether or not we hold the weapons or believe that we should hold them there is, regrettably, always the possibility of their being delivered on us, whatever our policies may be.

It is, therefore, always incumbent on a Government of any party to take such reasonable precautions as they can and train people as fully as they can in case any such ghastly emergency arises. In part, this is why these Regulations are before us. I should like to emphasise all that the hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East has said on this point. It surely must be right to encourage training, of all things, in home nursing and first-aid particularly among young people.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Is the hon. Member not aware that the local authorities have full power under present legislation to do everything that my hon. Friend the Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mr. Bence) has mentioned?

Mr. van Straubenzee

That is not so, with respect, and that is why the Regulations are before us. Plainly, if local authorities have full powers already, in the civil defence terms which we are now discussing, the Regulations would not be necessary. The hon. Member overlooks the fact that the very Women's Voluntary Service which we were discussing earlier bore at one time the title, "Women's Voluntary Service for Civil Defence". This is how it started. Now all of us, on both sides of the House, gladly and warmly pay tribute to the work of these voluntary workers far outside the limits and scope of civil defence. I remember as a traveller to the Far East being wholly dependent on two splendid ladies who darned for us all the way from this country to India. That had nothing to do with civil defence but we were very grateful to them. It should not go out from the House that we have any reservations on the wisdom of this training encouraged by local authorities both in England and Scotland. We wish to give that work a push forward tonight.

10.23 p.m.

Mr. E. Fernyhough (Jarrow)

The hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee) is quite wrong. There is no county council or county borough in England or Scotland which does not provide evening classes which people can attend to obtain knowledge and training in first aid and various similar matters. Practically every local authority which is responsible for education runs classes of this kind, and there would be no need for these Regulations if it was merely a question of having people trained. I do not for a moment question the wisdom of training people in first aid. Obviously, when there has been a visitation by Nature of tempest, fire, or flood, their help can prevent suffering and may save life, but the matter with which these Regulations are concerned is a much more formidable affair.

I have just finished reading about the destruction of Dresden. I wonder to what extent the facilities that will be provided by these Regulations helped there. But what happened then was infinitesimal compared with what would happen in a nuclear war. Looking at the matter closely, it seems clear that if the Government believe that there will ever be an occasion when we need civil defence they should be doing far more than is provided by these Regulations.

Nine out of ten local authorities spend more money on public lavatories than on civil defence. If the Government are thinking in terms of the consequences of a nuclear war, these Regulations are pathetic and ridiculous. An American general has just said that if the circumstances which the Regulations envisage were to come about, 750 million people would die. Does the right hon. Gentleman think that, if that sort of catastrophe overtook the West, Regulations of this kind would have any effect? In my view the Government do not believe that there is any defence against this sort of thing. They have told us that it is the great deterrent—

Mr. Speaker

Deterrent or not; expenditure on public lavatories or not—the question is whether we should make it a function of local authority, under the relevant Statute, to provide this kind of training in nursing and first aid.

Mr. Fernyhough

I agree, Mr. Speaker. I do not contest your Ruling for a second. All that I am seeking to point out is that these Regulations do not go far enough. They should be far wider in scope if they are to do the job which the Government require of them.

We should not be talking of the Regulations if it were not for the terrible thing that is hanging over our lives. These Regulations ought to meet the situation to which I am referring. If it were not for the fear and danger which exists the right hon. Gentleman would not be introducing them. I am merely pointing out that if that fear were to materialise it would bring about a situation very much more difficult to cope with than anything which these Regulations visualise. They do not go half far enough.

If the Government believe that a catastrophe of this nature might overtake us, and that the deterrent will not deter, instead of bringing in pettifogging regulations of this kind they ought to embark on a great scheme of civil defence, including the building of shelters and all the other things that will be required. If they did that they would be making some sense.

10.28 p.m.

Mr. Eric Fletcher (Islington, East)

I welcome the introduction of these Regulations. As other hon. Members have said, nobody can foresee with any precision what the circumstances would be if a catastrophe of the kind envisaged were ever to occur in this country. It is relevant to observe that the catastrophe might be such as to make all the civil precautions in the world of no avail to save one human life. It is for that reason that we all profoundly hope that the wisdom of statesmen in all countries will avoid any such catastrophe.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that it must be right for the Government, with the support of this House, to take al/ such reasonable measures as can be taken, because there might, of course, be a catastrophe less than a total catastrophe. We might, perhaps, be involved in a war which is not a nuclear war, and circumstances might arise even in a nuclear war in which the fact that a large number of people had had the forethought to take some training in home nursing and first aid or other civil defence measures would be of benefit both to themselves and others. It is for those reasons that I welcome these Regulations.

I would merely add two things. I was a little surprised—I think my hon. Friend was, too—to find that in fact such Regulations were necessary, because I also should have thought that local authorities already, under their general powers, if not their educational powers, had the necessary authority to conduct trailing courses of this kind.

I should like to ask the Minister to amplify something of what he said with regard to paragraph 3. Is the House to understand that the Minister is going to give directions from time to time to local authorities as to how they are to exercise their functions under these Regulations? If so, will he please be good enough to say whether he will always publish those directions so that they are known to Members of this House and to the public? Secondly, will he say whether we are right in thinking that because of paragraph 3 local authorities can only discharge the functions in the manner which the Minister directs? Of are they free, in addition to observing the directions from the Minister, of their own volition to carry out any additional training schemes, or to extend the purposes of their training over and beyond the Regulations contained in the Minister's directions?

Finally, I would say I am sure that the introduction of Regulations of this kind must do a great deal to encourage and hearten and support the large number of voluntary organisations throughout the country which are already devoting so much of their time and energy to civil defence work.

10.32 p.m.

Mr. Powell

With the leave of the House, I should like to reply. I felt that the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes), and to some extent the lion. Member for Jarrow (Mr. Fernyhough), were very effectively answered by the hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mr. Bence) and my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Srraubenzee). The simple answer is that short of the absolute extinction of all human life it is hardly possible to conceive circumstances in which knowledge of home nursing and first aid would not be beneficial in relieving pain and, perhaps, in saving life, and that remains true whatever other civil defence preparations are made. We are tonight discussing only this particular civil defence preparation. It is valid whatever other medical preparations are made. It is valid whatever be the nature of the attack and whatever be the extent of the casualties, for this simple but valuable information will be applicable to the main forms of human injury and the methods of coping with them as well as may be in primitive or different conditions. So that is the answer to all the queries of the hon. Member for South Ayrshire.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

The right hon. Gentleman comes here with Regulations presumably involving Government expenditure. Has he any estimate of the expenditure which is likely to he incurred?

Mr. Powell

I think that this will emerge as this develops stage by stage and I was going to deal with that in answering the point made by the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. Fletcher). Both he and the hon. Member for Jarrow asked whether this was not duplicating the existing power of local authorities. It is true that under their further education powers local authorities have the power to run courses of this kind, but that is not what we are doing here. We are here making this a function of local authorities to carry out this training which will indeed be their duty in accordance with the directions under Regulation No. 3. Moreover, we are here providing for them in the fulfilment of that duty a higher grant than would accrue under the further education provisions.

The hon. Member for Islington, East asked about the directions to which Regulation No. 3 refers. Regulation No. 2 leaves this function quite at large, and it is therefore necessary, if it is to be exercised by stages, that, short of the most elaborate prescription, one should be able to move from stage to stage on the basis of directions. These will be given the same publicity as any other circular to local authorities—they will be in the form of a circular—and will be public documents in the same way.

The exercise of the functions will have to be in conformity with the directions which will be given from time to time under these Regulations, but, as with the first directions, so I am sure with any subsequent ones, their content would be worked out in full consultation and agreement with the local authorities. The object of Regulation No. 3 is to enable this work to develop in an orderly and rational way and is one which has the support and agreement of the local authorities themselves.

10.37 p.m.

Mr. Archie Manuel (Central Ayrshire)

I think that we still want some questions answered by the Minister responsible for the implementation of these Regulations in Scotland. Certain local authority expense comes into this question, and many of our Scottish local authorities are already weighted down with a great deal of expenditure. I am thinking particularly of those areas with a high level of unemployment where rent rebate schemes and other methods of assisting people are in operation.

I am not against people being trained in home nursing and first aid, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow (Mr. Fernyhough) said, people particularly interested in this form of training can obtain it through further education classes. We are particularly fortunate in Scotland in that many first-aid classes are run by railway employees. Some of these men devote most of their spare time to training people connected with the railways, and also those outside them, in first aid. They attend many functions and render their services free of charge to many organisations.

We are keen to provide training in home nursing and first aid, but I think we should recognise that Regulation No. 3 is taking a step which has not hitherto been taken in that it provides that local authorities must comply with directions given by the Secretary of State. They will have to set up classes and devote certain buildings to this purpose.

The Minister of Health made clear that this would be a direction to local authorities. I am quite willing to allow him to direct English local authorities however he likes, but I hope that it is not his influence which is to be extended over the Border.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

My hon. Friend and I have been members of a local authority which has faced these problems for many years. Is it not likely that, when the Ayrshire County Council gets this direction, its first question will be, "What is it to cost?"

Mr. Manuel

That is the very point that I am on. Perhaps I am embroidering it a little, but my hon. Friend must surely realise that that is the point of what I am saying. If this is to mean a further increase in rate-borne burdens, it will be very unfair. If it is to be a direction to the local authorities, there should be a 100 per cent. grant. I have no doubt about that at all. The Minister will say that it is to be 75 per cent. or something like that. When he speaks of a bigger share of the cost than usual being borne by the central Government, what does he mean? Twenty-five per cent. would still be a considerable sum to be borne by the local authorities.

If this is to be a direction, every town and village will have to institute classes in nursing and first aid. Public halls, school buildings and the like will have to be used two or three nights a week, heating will often be needed, and the expense will be by no means small.

As I have said, there is a fair amount of this training going on now. Some of my personal friends devote all their spare time, unpaid, to first aid. In Scotland, the classes run by railway employees come under the auspices of the St. Andrew's Ambulance Association. When I worked for a time in London, I found that the railway classes here and in England generally were run by the St. John's organisation. I have attended both. It would be fairly easy to recruit railwaymen who could undertake these classes very competently.

I want an assurance from the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland that she agrees with me that, if a direction is to go to the local authorities to do this job, there ought to be a 100 per cent, grant towards any on-cost occasioned thereby.

10.45 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lady Tweedsmuir)

The hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Manuel) asked whether the grants should not be 100 per cent. instead of 75 per cent. particularly in areas of unemployment. The normal rate for civil defence measures arid for the training of the Civil Defence Corps is 75 per cent. I quite agree with him in welcoming the great deal of valuable work done by such bodies as tie St. Andrew's Ambulance Association. I was lucky enough to have a full course with the British Red Cross Society and I assure him that these courses are very much wider in their content than the present limited training proposed in these Regulations.

Therefore, if the local authorities pay the expenses in the first place and the Government reimburse 75 per cent. of the expenditure, it is estimated that in Scotland the total expenditure by the Government will be about £3,000 annually.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

How much?

Lady Tweedsmuh

About £3,000 annually. That is just the point for the hon. Member. It will be reckoned by those good.it arithmetic that the local authorities will contribute only about £1,000.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Does the hon. Lady imagine a situation following an air raid in which tremendous damage is caused to the whole country with the paltry sum cf £3,000 to be given by the Government?

Lady Tweedsmuir

As was made clear by my right hon. Friend, this is a preliminary scheme. There is no immediate intention of using the power of direction in Scotland conferred on the Secretary of State by Regulation No. 3. However after the experimental stage is over, and experience has shown us which are the best ways in which training courses can be administered, it might very welt be the time to issue general directions to local authorities, as is provided for in Regulation No. 3.

I am very glad that on the whole these Regulations have been welcomed by the House, particularly those applying to Scotland, because what we are trying to do is to make as many people as possible self-reliant.

Mr. Fernyhough

Has the hon. Lady any guide as to the numbers it is envisaged will be trained at the cost of £3,000?

Lady Tweedsmuir

No, not initially, because we are not making the local authorities comply with this direction. I must remind the hon. Gentleman in any case that I am referring only to Scotland. We cannot say bow many people there will be trained, but the Scottish local authority associations have declared themselves generally in favour of this Measure.

10.49 p.m.

Mr. William Ross (Kilmarnock)

Various words and phrases have been used to describe these Regulations and our attitude towards them. "Welcome them" is the wrong phrase. I think that the House will approve them but we do not welcome them, because they are a reminder of the constant danger that hangs over not just Britain but the world. We may deplore the necessity of presenting them yet approve them.

If the right hon. Gentleman had come to us with any pretence that with this Measure we could adequately deal with the dangers that would follow the dropping of an H-bomb, the House just would not have believed him. If he had said that, there would have been a lot more reliance on what was said by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes).

I have no doubt that this is a justified token first phase. No one will object to it. I do not think we can ignore the fact that even if the worst came to the worst life would probably still persist somewhere and that help might well be needed.

My hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow (Mr. Fernyhough) talked about the Dresden raid. Sitting beside him is a man who represents the most bombed part of Scotland—Clydebank. In the war, when I was in the Highland Light Infantry, we did our route marches and exercises round there and the people gave us food and help. Then we went to the same place to act as emergency first aid teams. I am certain that there were people on those nights who wished that they had had the training and the ability to play a part in the relief of suffering.

In the circumstances we should be completely wrong not to pass the Regulations, but at the same time we should in no way relax our efforts to ensure that it will never be necessary to use them in the circumstances envisaged by my hon. Friend. Nevertheless, they will be useful in respect of civil calamities which might follow in the ordinary course of events.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That the Civil Defence (Training in Nursing) Regulations, 1963, a draft of which was laid before this House on 9th April, be approved.

Civil Defence (Training in Nursing) (Scotland) Regulations, 1963 [draft laid before the House, 9th April], approved.—[Lady Tweedsmuir.]