EDUCATION (EMERGENCY) (SCOTLAND) BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 3 October 1939)

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA AND BURMA (THE MARQUESS OF ZETLAND)
My Lords, the reasons for this Bill are the same, of course, as those which have been given by my noble friend for the similar Bill affecting England. The necessity for a separate Bill for Scotland is due to differences, with which your Lordships are all familiar, between English and Scottish law. I need not, therefore, travel over the ground which has been already covered by my noble friend when explaining the necessity for the English Bill, and I need, perhaps, make reference only to one or two points which are peculiar to the Scottish Bill, to the Second Reading of which I am about to ask your Lordships to agree.
In the case of Scotland it was provided by the Act of 1918 that in due course the school-leaving age should be raised from fourteen to fifteen, and under the provisions of that Act the change was to be brought about by an Order. The time for the issue of that Order had not come when a further Act was passed in 1936 which, so far as this matter is concerned, took the place of the Order and laid down September 1, 1939, as the date on which this change should be made. Clause 1, therefore, of the Bill now before your Lordships provides that that date shall be erased, and that in its place the date shall be described as "the appointed day," which is to be appointed by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. In paragraph (b) of subsection (1) in Clause 1, your Lordships may find the language a little bit difficult to follow, as is often the case with Parliamentary enactments. The paragraph reads as follows: Subsection (2) of Section one shall have effect as if for the reference therein to the first day of September, nineteen hundred and twenty-five there were substituted a reference to the date of which the appointed day is the fourteenth anniversary. 1216 That simply refers to the provision in the original Act to the effect that if a boy between the ages of fourteen and fifteen had already left school—he might possibly have left school for six months—he should not be recalled to school after having been away for that period under the provisions of the Act. Subsection (2) of Clause 1 merely protects the local education authorities who may have already spent money in anticipation of the change which was expected to come about on September 1, 1939. If this provision were not here inserted any expenditure, if this Bill becomes law, would of course have become illegal, and the purpose of the subsection therefore is to protect the local education authorities under that head.
Clause 2 deals with the question of the issue of by-laws largely for controlling the employment in various occupations of children between the ages of fourteen and fifteen, and the effect of it is to render inoperative by-laws which have already been passed in anticipation of the change coming about on September 1. That is to say, by-laws affecting children between the ages of fourteen and fifteen on the assumption that the original arrangement had been brought into operation will have no effect, but by-laws affecting children under the age of fourteen which have already been made will of course continue to have effect, and the local authorities are given power to pass such new by-laws as may be found desirable. That is an explanation of the clauses of this rather complicated Bill, and, as your Lordships will see, the effect of it is precisely the same as that of the similar Bill to which your Lordships have already given a Second Reading in the case of England. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

§ LORD ADDISON
My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess who has particularly referred to these by-laws affecting children between the ages of fourteen and fifteen, or the noble Earl opposite (Earl De La Wan), whether in view of the unfortunate necessity of taking this course, which we all recognise and regret, the Government are able or propose to do anything with respect to these children at this age, so as to provide them with some 1217 form of co-ordinated or organised occupation in clubs or in schools or in any other form? We all remember that there was a very unfortunate development during the last war, and it would be good service if steps could be taken to prevent as far as possible that recurring. It was, I remember, particularly children of this age who were affected.

§ EARL DE LA WARR
My Lords, the noble Marquess has asked me to reply to the noble Lord. I think perhaps it would be most appropriate if I referred the noble Lord to the debate that is shortly to follow to-day. I shall be making a statement then on what I agree with the noble Lord is a most important subject, in reply to a Motion put down by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Winchester.