Lords Sitting of 16 February 1926

Preamble
The House met at a quarter past four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

DISABLED EX-SERVICE MEN.
LORD O'HAGAN LORD O'HAGAN rose to move to resolve, That in the opinion of this House it is the duty of the Government in all Government contracts to make provision for the employment, to the fullest possible extent, of disabled ex-Service men, and to this end, to confine such contracts, save in exceptional circumstances, to employers enrolled on the King's National Roll.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I should like to explain that my object in putting down this Motion is to ensure as much publicity as possible at this moment with regard to the position of disabled ex-Service men. We are anxious that the full weight of public opinion on this matter should be directed to the assistance of the Government in the action that they are taking to secure more employment for the disabled ex-Service men at present out of work. We wish also to remind your Lordships' House and the country of the pledges given to these men at the termination of the War, when a clear intimation was given, both in and out of Parliament, of the determination of the country to see that these men should not be neglected as they had too often been hitherto. In fact, the purpose of my Motion is to strengthen the hands of the Government at the present time.
It would seem to be almost an amazing thing that in the year 1926 it should be considered necessary by those who have the interest of this part of the community at heart to put forward a Motion of this kind. At the same time the necessity is there, though I should not like to belittle in any way the very great amount of attention that has been given to the subject and the action that has been taken both by the Administration and by private bodies to cope with the results of the Great War in this regard. For
130
instance, I see in the report of what took place in another place last night that no less than 458,000 disability pensions have been paid in this country, and I think that this record, in conjunction with the efforts made with regard to employment, bears a very favourable comparison with what has been done in the past, either after the South African War or any other war in which this country has been engaged. Undoubtedly the public conscience has been aroused on this subject in a way that it has never been aroused before. It has been felt that we owe the disabled men a debt of honour, and it is for the country to see that that debt of honour is paid in the fullest possible measure. Some pessimists tell us of the decadence of our public life, but I suggest that the action of the country in this matter gives us reason for optimism and hope for the future. The figure of unemployment with regard to these disabled men, however, is still very serious. It is 31,291, after all these years of continuous effort to secure employment for these men.
It will be observed that in my Motion I make reference to the King's Roll and it would not be out of place if I briefly sketch the history of that Roll. During the War the work of securing employment for disabled men was dealt with by local employment committees, as part of their duties under the Ministry of Labour. In 1919 it was felt that still further efforts were necessary, and with that object in view the King's Roll scheme was inaugurated by Royal proclamation. A place on that Roll can be secured by any firm or employer of labour who guarantees to employ not less than 5 per cent. of disabled ex-Service men as part of their staff It was soon found, however, that in certain occupations this percentage was not one that could be secured and the scheme was somewhat modified as the result of practical experience. But, on the whole, firms who are to qualify for a place on the King's Roll employ 5 per cent. of disabled ex-Service men as the minimum. Experience of the working of this scheme in the hands of local employment committees led, in 1922, to a review of the position. It was found that the scheme was not working as satisfactorily as had been hoped, and as the outcome of the setting up of a Select Committee ox the House of Commons, King's Roll committes

131
were appointed in various localities throughout the country to the number of 521, while, in addition, a central body was formed, the King's Roll National Council, to deal with the more difficult problems affecting large firms and public bodies. In 1923 that Council, having gathered a great deal of experience as the result of its own actions and reports from local King's Roll committees, reported at length on this subject to the Ministry of Labour, with the result that the Ministry of Labour were able to improve the machinery, and the suggestions put forward were embodied in the administration.
It may be interesting to some of your Lordships who are not aware of it to hear how these local King's Roll committees worked. In the first place, they had before them all the disabled men in their various areas and these men were graded into three categories, according to their suitability for employment. The categories were (A) (B) and (C). Category (A) consisted, roughly speaking, of those who were in a fit condition, in spite of their disability, to engage in their pre-War occupation or something similar to it. They could, in fact, be considered available for the ordinary labour market. Categories (B) and (C) were based on a special disability register. In Class (B) were those who could be given ordinary light work. Those in Class (C), a small number of extremely disabled men, were men whom it was quite impossible to put back in their employment before the War or, indeed, in any employment except in special undertakings where their requirements would be catered for. To give your Lordships some idea of the proportion between the different categories I will mention the last figures I have been able to get. They are for October last when the total number of disabled ex-Service men out of employment was 33,000. Of these 19,000 were in Category (A); over 12,000, practically 13,000, in Category (B); and 924 in Category (C).
The various classes of these disabled men and the work that is done by these King's Roll committees throughout the country and by the National Council are taken carefully into account. It has been felt by the National Council that in this matter it was only right that the lead should be taken by local administrative bodies and with that object they have
132
all been pressed, where it was possible and where their personnel was not too small, to include in their employees some of these disabled ex-Service men. I find that of those local authorities who by reason of their numbers could reasonably be expected to come on to the King's Roll there are at the present time 1,395, but no fewer than 710 are not on the Roll. I hope this Motion will have the effect that is desired of arousing public interest up and down the country with state of things which should be and could be remedied. As the result of pressure on these local bodies, a number of them have undertaken to restrict their contracts for public works to firms on the King's Roll or to give a preference to firms on the Roll. Of these there are some 544, and this is, of course, a most valuable qualification to have secured with regard to these public bodies.
Among the local authorities who are not on the Roll there are in England and Wales some seven county councils. I do not know whether it is advisable for me to mention them by name this afternoon, but if it is desired I will not hesitate to do so. In England, I understand, there are two county councils not on the Roll, Northumberland and the Isle of Wight, and in Wales there are five, Cardiganshire, Camarthenshire, Flintshire, Glamorganshire and Merionethshire. So far as Scotland is concerned, it is not fair to give either the figures or the names because the administration of county council work is so different in most cases from what it is in England that it is almost impossible to give comparable figures. I am glad to say that so far as the councils of the county boroughs and the London Metropolitan Borough Councils are concerned there are none which are not on the King's Roll. With regard to town councils there are thirteen in England who are not on the Roll, one in Wales and twenty-four in Scotland. I should like it to be clear to your Lordships that in quoting these figures I am not including all the town councils, but only those of whom it is reasonable to expect, in view of the numbers of men whom they employ, that they would be on the King's Roll.
The King's Roll National Council have taken a great deal of trouble to extend the King's Roll in many directions, and one of the first matters that engaged their attention was the question of the firms

133
that are called public utility companies—those who supply gas, water and so on. I find—again with the same proviso as to reasonableness of expectation of their being on the Roll in view of the numbers employed—that there are 280 on the Roll and 351 not on the Roll. The National Council are at present engaged in endeavouring to secure—again with the same proviso—that Royal Warrant holders shall come on to the Roll. At present there are still 135 Royal Warrant holders who, so far as the knowledge of the National Council goes, could reasonably be expected to come on but who are not on the Roll. Speaking as a member of the King's Roll National Council, I am sure that we should greatly welcome any support from individual members either in this House or in another place in putting pressure on any of these, firms with a view to their taking their place on the King's Roll. The names are available and could be given to those who would volunteer in this direction.
The general effect is this. The last figures available show that in January of this year there were approximately 28,000 firms on the King's Roll, employing some 370,000 disabled ex-Service men. I think that we may fairly say that the organisation as it at present exists has thus more than justified its existence and that, what has been done has been well done. I have no doubt—in fact, I heard only to-day—that in some localities there seems to be a mistaken impression that it is necessary only to employ ex-Service men in order to come on the King's Roll. That, of course, is not the case. It is the employment of disabled ex-Service men that is necessary. It is very regrettable that this impression should have got abroad in certain localities and we can only trust that with the increase of the activity of the local administrative bodies, the King's Roll committees, it will be removed.
I think that I am not going too far in claiming that the existing organisation has done a great deal of good. I have not, of course, intended in the course of my remarks to make any allusion to other bodies which also have been doing their best to find work for these disabled men. It must also, I think, be perfectly clear to everyone that in considering the figures that I have given the House we must allow for a certain number of men
134
who are not on the register anywhere, men who are disabled and who desire work but who yet are not recorded under the scheme of the Ministry of Labour. Accordingly, the figure of 31,291 that I have given refers to the men of whom we actually know, and it is quite reasonable to think that there may be a few thousand in addition, which I think strengthens the case, that I am endeavouring to put before your Lordships.
Your Lordships will be aware that this matter is being discussed in the House of Commons to-day. It is to be hoped that, as a result of this Motion, the blot that at present exists on the fair record of this country with regard to disabled men will be removed entirely. This is a work of very great difficulty, especially at present, in view of the state of the labour market. One has to appeal to employers on patriotic grounds, on the grounds of gratitude towards these men who have been disabled in the service of their country, and one has to appeal to them at a time when in many instances it is extremely difficult for them to respond favourably. But at the same time, in view of the way in which this matter has been dealt with by many employers and Urns, as well as public bodies, all faced with the difficulties with which we are only too familiar, we are encouraged to hope that if public opinion and public feeling can be aroused on this subject now a great deal can be done to remove these men from the labour market altogether, either by giving them employment or, in the case of those most severely disabled, by ensuring them places in special undertakings. With these remarks I venture to move the Motion which stands in my name. I hope that other noble Lords in the House will contribute to this discussion with a view to securing that the information that has been given and the special effort that is about to be launched shall receive the widest possible publicity. I beg to move.
Moved to resolve, That in the opinion of this House it is the duty of the Government in all Government contracts to make provision for the employment, to the fullest possible extent, of disabled ex-Service men, and to this end, to confine such contracts, save in exceptional circumstances, to employers enrolled on the King's National Roll.—(Lord O'Hagan.)
VISCOUNT BURNHAM: My Lords, the case for this Resolution has been made so fully and so clearly by my noble friend that it is not necessary to say many more words in its support. I would, however, in one respect go a little further than the noble Lord. He has said that the manner in which we have tried to provide for the necessities of disabled ex-Service men has been good, and he has appealed to your Lordships to help in removing any vestige of discredit that may still fall to this country. I venture to think that, as it has been done almost entirely by voluntary effort and good will, much more has been done in this country than in any other. In fact, I think that our record is a very good one, and one only wishes to complete it. When so much has been done it seems a pity not to wipe the slate clean.
I rise principally to ask my noble friend who is going to reply for the Government whether he can give a specific answer as to two points that arise in connection with this debate. In 1921, as my noble friend has said, the Government decided upon a rule that, "save in very exceptional circumstances, all firms contracting for Government contracts to whom the conditions for membership of the King's National Roll are applicable, must be on the King's Roll." I have reason to believe that this rule has not been applied to those great firms of contractors who have been engaged in making the new trunk roads throughout the country. I am sure your Lordships will see that there was some difficulty in doing it in their case, because the great part of the labour involved had to be of a high order of physical strength, and it was not possible to employ disabled ex-Service men except on the ancillary parts of the undertakings. Still, one would be glad to know how far the Government have failed to apply that rule and in what way it is believed it is possible to strengthen it.
Your Lordships also know that another provision was adopted by the Government for making arrangements whereby financial assistance has been rendered to approved undertakings which are not run for private profit and which provide for ex Service men so severely disabled that they cannot be expected to obtain work under normal industrial conditions. I am aware that the Ministry of Labour has made, or recommended to
136
Parliament, grants in respect of those institutions, but I hardly think enough has been done. The time is coming when a great many of these men who suffered so much in the service of the country will find that by the inevitable processes of disease they are less and less able to do the work for which they were supposed originally to be fitted. Consequently there will be, I do not say an increasing number of disabled men of the 75 to 100 per cent. incapacity, but it may be a gradually reduced number of these men for whom this special provision ought to be made. So far as I know no statement has been made to Parliament showing what has been done in this regard.
So far as the efforts of municipal bodies and what we call public utility corporations have gone, I think that considering all things they have not only been considerable but highly successful. Although there are a certain number of local bodies who have not complied with the conditions that would enable them to be put on the King's Roll, the greater part of the larger authorities throughout the country have been enthusiastically in its favour. In the case of many municipal corporations they, like the Bristol Corporation, have inaugurated special campaigns. Others have instituted what seems to me to be an admirable method of advertisement by putting up barometer placards on the walls of the town showing exactly what is the position with regard to the King's Roll and the employment of disabled ex-Service men.
It is to be remembered, too, that all these efforts of private benevolence in the discharge of a national duty have been undertaken at a time when, as your Lordships all know, we have been suffering from the worst conditions with regard to our industrial life. It has always been urged upon the manufacturers of the country that they should do everything to encourage economies in production—the maximum of efficiency combined with the maximum of economy. That is the phrase constantly dinned into their ears. They are told that they ought to do their best to reduce expenses in order that we may maintain our share of overseas markets and the export trade. No one, however, can contend that the employment of injured men is really economic. It may be, of course, and we all think it

137
is, part of the obligation which we are paying to those who stood for our honour and safety, but it is obvious that to employ a man who is only half capable is far from being economic, and contrary to the words which the President of the Board of Trade is always using in his addresses to manufacturers throughout the country. I do not think you can get away from it.
It is a perfectly fair thing that favour should be shown to some extent to those who take upon themselves what is an overhead charge in some cases amounting to a considerable total and necessarily raising the cost of production in their works and factories, The Government undertook to make special provision for the worst cases by helping to set up these special and limited industries for their employment. I shall be glad to hear from my noble friend how far it has been successful, and to what extent it has prevailed. In giving no Government contracts to firms other than those on the King's Roll there is, of course, a certain preference shown, which, although not in the nature of a subsidy, is supposed to confer some advantage, upon those with whom the contracts are made.
It seems to me that it is now time, so long after the War when we have not only all the figures of desolation before us but also the reports made by the Ministry of Pensions on the classes of disability and the manner in which they are dealt with, that we should get rid of this question of the unemployment of disabled ex-Service men so far as it is possible. What has already been done in those municipal areas where the local King's Roll committees have been most active, and the local authorities have been most sympathetic, can be done everywhere. There is a feeling, however, which I heard at the Conference at the Ministry of Labour only yesterday, that the employment exchanges ought not to be burdened with men drawing disablement pensions of a high percentage. It is said that that is a matter to be dealt with by the pensions, but, of course, so far as the pensions are supplemented by the earnings, which I know in many cases are fully warranted and in some cases partially justified, so much the better. We ought to make up our minds that we have got to clean the whole record of the nation in this respect, and I trust that the discussion this evening will go some way to effect that purpose.
LORD TEMPLEMORE: My Lords, I should like briefly to support the Motion which has been brought forward by my noble friend. The subject has been so exhaustively dealt with by my two noble friends who have just spoken that there appears very little to be said, and I have only one point to make and one question to ask. I wonder very much whether, in dealing with the employment of these men, sufficient use is made of those excellent institutions the Regimental Old Comrades' Associations. These Old Comrades' Associations were fairly numerous before the War. I happened to look through the monthly Army List this morning. I do not think there is now a single regiment without its Regimental Old Comrades' Association. These associations are generally? combined with the Regimental Employment Associations, but that is not so in every case. For instance, the Employment Society in the Brigade of Guards is entirely different from the Regimental Old Comrades' Associations, and I think the same thing is true as regards the Rifleman's Aid Society. I wonder whether the War Office or the Ministry of Labour, or whatever Department it is that deals with this matter, could make arrangements to put large firms and local authorities into touch with the Old Comrades' Associations in their districts. It would not be very difficult to do. It would not require a great deal more clerical labour and it would have what is a great advantage in these days—it would not, I think, cost the taxpayer any money. Perhaps something of this kind is done already. I should very much like to know whether that is so, and, if not, possibly the noble Viscount who is going to reply could tell us whether he thinks that anything on these lines could be arranged.
During the debate on the Address a fortnight ago the noble Earl, Lord Beauchamp, whom I am glad to see in his place, paid a very moving and welcome tribute to the conduct of the. British Army on the Rhine, who have just left garrison at Cologne. That conduct was not surprising to me, nor to anybody, I think, who knows the British soldier to-day. It was a very well-deserved tribute, but things that are well-deserved are not always said or done. As an ex-Service man I should like publicly, as I have already done

139
privately, to thank the noble Earl for what he said, and I should like to make this comment on it. The example and tradition of these men of whom we are talking to-day made possible that good conduct and discipline at Cologne, of which we are all so proud. In these days we often hear people say: "Let us forget the War." By all means let us forget the greater part of the War—its horrors, the misery it caused, and all the most unpleasant part of it—which, after all, was the greatest part of it. But there are some things which we do not want to forget, and those are the deeds that were done by these men, and the men themselves.
I think a great debt of gratitude is due to my noble friend for bringing forward this Motion to-day. It is a most excellent thing that the question should be ventilated from time to time in this House. It shows these men that they are not forgotten. It used to be said in former days that nothing discouraged recruiting so much as the sight of the men, and the shabby way in which the men were treated, who had been broken in this country's wars. Thank Heaven we cannot say the same to-day. This country has done a tremendous deal—not too much, but more than any other country has done for its ex-soldiers. I think this Resolution and Resolutions like this will have another indirect effect on a matter which I personally have very much at heart: it will encourage the best kind of young men, whom we want in the Forces, to come forward and join both our Regular and Territorial Armies.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD): My Lords, the Government have in one respect a difficult task to-day, because they have nothing whatever to answer or to object to in what has been said. On the contrary, they are both warmly in favour of the Resolution and in agreement with everything that has been said in support of it. The admirable speech in which the Resolution was introduced has, from my point of view, only one defect, and that is, that there is really nothing whatever left for me to say. It has not been suggested in the debate by anybody that the Resolution advocates a new policy, or a change in the policy that has been pursued. The
140
policy which it advocates is the policy which was accepted as long ago as 1921, and which has been acted upon with increasing effort ever since. My noble friend who introduced the Motion said with great truth that the country owed a debt of honour to all the ex-Service men who fought for us in the War. That is a debt of honour that this Government most emphatically accepts and believes in, and of all the classes of these men who fought for us there is none that is entitled to a more punctual payment of that debt than the disabled soldiers who are the subject of our discussion to-night. So far as we are concerned there is nothing that we can do which we shall fail to do in order to promote the employment of disabled soldiers.
The noble Lord said very truly, and the other two noble Lords who followed him repeated it, that a great deal has been done. It is quite true, a great deal has been done. I am told that there are about 370,000 of the disabled men actually in employment, but it is also true that there are 31,000 or 32,000 who are out of employment. It is very satisfactory that 370,000 should be employed, but it certainly does not absolve us in any way from our duty to the 32,000 who are not employed. I will not again repeat the list of authorities, Royal Warrant holders, public utility companies and other firms who have entitled themselves to a place on the King's Roll by reason of their employment of disabled men. The figures have been already given, and there is no point in repeating them.
This Resolution goes a little further than merely to urge that all these classes of employers should qualify themselves for entry on the King's Roll. It recommends—and rightly recommends—that the Government, speaking generally and apart from any very special circumstances, should only give contracts to those who are on the King's Roll. That is a Resolution which the Government very heartily recommends and endorses. As to that, it is very desirable that the example which was set in 1921 by the Government should be followed by all the great employers who are in a public position—the local authorities and authorities like the Port of London Authority and others. Whether they have or have not done it at present, they should bind themselves to accept the

141
principle that they also will give their contracts only to those, who are on the King's Roll. I thought that, my noble friend Lord Burnham was amply justified in the defence he put forward for this form of industrial preference. It is plain that, not only in general periods of our history but particularly now when industrial conditions are difficult and when everybody is being exhorted to be economical, it is desirable that for a great public object like this we should encourage, by a preference of this nature those who are willing to do their patriotic duly to the men who fought and suffered for us.
My noble friend Lord Burnham asked me two questions and I am not sure that I can give him a very full answer. I am extremely grateful to him none the less for asking those questions, because suggestions of the kind may be useful in filling up the gaps still left in the scheme. I am afraid I cannot give him much more of a reply than he gave himself as to the extent to which contractors for road-making and other works of that kind have been exempted from the obligation of the rule of 1921. The answer he gave is the obvious one, that for a great part of that work disabled men are not suitable. It is work of a very exacting physical character and it cannot be done by those who are not quite as strong as their fellows. But I will make it my business to enquire most carefully as to whether more, could be done with reference to what he called subsidiary work and work of that kind. With regard to the other question my noble friend asked me as to the extent to which the scheme for assistance to those undertakings—I think he referred to such things as the Lord Roberts' Workshops and undertakings of that type—had been successful. I am informed that a great deal has been done, and that the number of men employed runs well into thousands. I could not give my noble friend the exact figure. I was not aware that this exact point was going to be raised, and I do not know; but I will enquire whether more can be done iii that connection because it is in such possibilities that part of the value of these questions consists.
Then the noble Lord, Lord Templemore, asked me whether sufficient use had been
142
made of the Old Comrades' Associations, and, again, I am afraid I can only give him the same kind of answer. I feel sure that some use has been made of those Associations, but I will enquire whether more might not be done in that direction and as to whether some more satisfactory use of them could be made. I have really nothing more to say to your Lordships. The Government heartily support this Motion. They recognise most fully the debt which they owe to these men. They believe that they are bound to come to their assistance in every way they can, and they believe most fully that the way of finding work for them is by far the most satisfactory way of coming to their assistance. Therefore, everything they can do to carry out the object of this Motion will be done, and I can only add that I trust your Lordships will unanimously agree to it.
LORD O'HAGAN: My Lords, as the mover of the Motion I should like to say how much I appreciate the way in which the Government have received it and how encouraging it is to those engaged in this work to find support from the Government of the day. I was particularly glad to hear that the noble Viscount will make further inquiries into the matter mentioned by my noble friend Lord Burnham, regarding the special undertakings of Lord Roberts' Workshops and kindred institutions dealing with the more-severely disabled men. I am glad to think that the Government do not feel themselves absolved from discharging what I have termed the debt of honour to those men. In view of the splendid amount of work that has already been done under the agis of the Government of the day, I am sorry that on this occasion we have not had any contribution or expression of opinion from the Benches opposite. I had hoped very much that on a matter of this kind there would have been in this House such an expression of opinion as would have indicated the unanimity with which, as I thought, this Motion would have been accepted. I wish to thank the noble Viscount, Lord Cecil of Chelwood, for the way in which he has received this Motion, and I leave it with confidence in the hands of your Lordships.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at five minutes after five o'clock.