Lords Sitting of 28 January 1941

Preamble
The House met, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

THE CHANNEL ISLANDS.
LORD PORTSEA LORD PORTSEA had the following Notice on the Paper: To ask His Majesty's Government as to the dropping of leaflets on the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey with information as to the general situation for the benefit of the islanders cut off from communication with the mainland, and to ask if broadcasts can be made to these same islanders and whether suggestions for such broadcasts can be accepted from islanders on this side of the Channel; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I brought this matter before your Lordships' House in the late autumn, since which time I have done all that could possibly be done. Yet, although I have been met with extreme courtesy by all the officials and friends to whom I have spoken, I can get no further. There is some obstacle in the way. What that obstacle is I cannot discover, unless indeed it is officialdom. "Here I stand; I can none other." I claim as a right the help, fair-dealing and protection of every free man subject to the Crown in this matter, which is of importance to thousands of Norman islanders who are now in His Majesty's service. What can I do? I grant you the task is too big for me; I am perfectly ready to admit that; but someone must bell the cat, and "Touch not the cat bot a glove" is a wise motto. My glove is clean; it is the sincerity of my motives and of my heart, and it is the intense and all-pervading loyalty and love of honesty and honour represented by the Norman islanders, particularly those who are now fighting in His Majesty's Services.
These islanders are the remnant of a great people, a people from whom many of your Lordships, like myself, derive and are proud so to derive. They represent our mother country, a people who have led us and still lead us in peace and in war. They trusted us and we deserted them. We deserted them in their hour of

237
need; we cast them off when this war was forced upon us as an old shoe is cast away, without a word, without a blow struck, without a shot fired for the first time in their history; indeed, without allowing them to fire a shot, for all arms and ammunition, all guns were taken away, and the people of the islands themselves and the fort were disarmed. The Government did this and now tell us they did it in the hope that the people would not be bombed or killed—a dangerous argument. It did not take the Government a thousand minutes to abandon what had been a Crown possession for a thousand years—the old and only Appanage of the Crown, the only such Appanage in the Empire. The Government have stripped the islands of men, as I have said—leaving, of course, only the older ones—have stripped the islands of guns, arms, munitions, dismantled the great fort that was built by Lord Palmer-ston at the cost of a million of money, pulled down the flag of St. George and the flag of St. Andrew and the Union Jack itself, and made an ignominious Cappor-etto. Will that Union Jack be ever again broken from the mast?
The Crown accepted the services of thousands of islanders, first of all in the Regular Forces, in the Navy, the Army, the Air Force and the Merchant Service; when war came the two Royal Militias and every man of fighting age in the islands volunteered and joined up and are now serving in His Majesty's Forces. It is for these men that I plead. When this had come to pass, and not till then, the Government abandoned the islands, deserted the people. The "justification" is that the people might have been bombed and killed by the invader! That is a very dangerous argument. It is one that might be extended to every part of the country. I do not abuse the German. He is a fine soldier and a disciplined man, but his views on conquests and our views are not quite alike. There are, perhaps, men in this House who remember Dînant in the last war. There are many of us who have read of Poland in this war. In the Great War in which many Norman islanders assisted—practically 17 per cent. of the population—I saw women and girls in the towns and villages from which the Germans had been expelled practically at the point of the bayonet. Their story was not a pleasant one. It was not one
238
to dwell upon. It was a story to turn the sluggard's blood to flame. The Government left our women, children and young girls in the islands after they had taken away their men and their guns. It is hard to say whether that was hypocrisy, cowardice or stark-staring poltroonery. Our women, children and young girls are for the most part still there.
My nearest relatives are still in the islands, as they thought it their duty to stay. I thought it my duty to stay on this side, though I am not quite so sure that I was right. Now we are proposing to listen—proposing to listen as yet only—to Italy's request when she makes it to save her women in Ethiopia from a nation five thousand years old, professing Christianity, to save them from these "Natives, to save them from men and women who have been bombed, gassed and brutally used by these women's husbands and by the women themselves. It is our duty to do so, but it will be a hard duty—our duty not as the "friend of every country but our own," but as Christian men and Englishmen. At the same time we have abandoned, and we are continuing to abandon, our own people and we will not let them have one word of information as regards their friends, their men on this side.
The crocodile is said to shed tears. All those who remember Alice—there is hardly one who does not—remembers that the carpenter as he ate the oysters held his handkerchief before his streaming eyes. There are worse things than death, my Lords, much worse. The islanders have defended their island for centuries against a foe at least as strong, at least as brave and as able as the German himself. At one time half of Jersey was in the possession of the French. The other half remained in the possession of the islanders. That continued for six whole years at the end of which time the islanders were able to put the French out of their land. I quote that so that your Lordships may see that they are a people who are not free except that they fought for their freedom. They are free men—there is no serf blood in the islands—and they value freedom as much as any other country in the world, as much as this country itself. To enable them to defend their land these islanders submitted to universal and obligatory service, and that service was unpaid—not a penny was

239
paid—from the age of 13 to the age of 65. Personally, I joined at 13. I bought my own uniform and my own horse. We were a very splendid force until the "War Office said that we were an anachronism, and induced us, to lower the age of 65 to 40, to put ourselves under Martial Law, and to pay ourselves, to take in each other's washing. Our people believe, with a very great man, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, that
"He is not worthy to live at all, that for fear or danger of death shunneth his country's service and his own honour—seeing that death is inevitable, but the fame of virtue is immortal."
Aye, and the shame remains, shame ineffaceable and ineradicable.
And now we torture, and torture deliberately, the fighting man on this side and his people at home. To those people whom we deserted, and apparently still desert, though we have the means at hand we will not send any word that their men are safe and well. The justification given me is that we might annoy the Germans—annoy the Germans! The Germans, in the meantime, have the wives, the daughters, the children and the sweethearts of the men who are here in thousands, who have volunteered and are ready to die for us. "No truce with Diabolus while Mansoul stands." I read a speech which I hope that your Lordships have also read, a speech which was delivered on Friday last by a man whom we all know and admire and for whom many of us—myself included, if I may venture to say so—have a sincere regard. I have adorned my opening remarks with words from his speech. Those words seem to justify me and to fit my plea. He said:
"With the spectacle across the Channel of what happens to countries and people who do not resist Hitler, there is not one of us who would not sacrifice all that is ours, rather than that such a catastrophe should overtake this home of freedom."
The Norman Islands were the home of freedom. It was a freedom not built in cowardice or by Danegelds; it was the liberty, the freedom, of a free people, free for a thousand years, free so far back as our history goes. In those words there spoke a man. He did not want to desert the Appanage of the Crown.
He did more; he quoted the words of President Roosevelt—and thank heaven
240
for that man, for we have every cause to do so. President Roosevelt said:
"There are four freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom from want, freedom from insecurity, and freedom from fear."
"That was gloriously said," said the orator. It is a consoling thought to people" like myself, when one talks of fear, that "The coward dies many times before his death." I would increase the number of times! And was there yét another freedom, said the orator, a fifth freedom, without which no country could truly claim to enjoy liberty. It was the freedom of every citizen, however unin-fluential, however unpopular, however wrongheaded, to appeal to the law and to the Courts to protect him from injury and insult even if the wrong were committed by the misuse of official power. My Lords, I offer that man my heartfelt thanks. The islanders will not forget him or his words, though his words may not have been deliberately addressed to them. His words appealed to me, and I appeal through them to your Lordships' House.
I appeal in the name of all the men of the Norman Islands, in the name of the fighting men of those islands who are on the mainland, that our people in the islands may be informed—and not merely once or twice, or grudgingly—by the B.B.C. or by leaflets or in some better way, through someone that the islanders know and can trust (which is very important) that their fighting men in this country are well and cheerful, that they never forget their people and their homes, and that they never forget, while duty calls them and while life lasts, to serve the King. Think of these thousands of islanders, men who were in no wise obliged to come—they were exempted by Royal word—but who volunteered and came to fight for that which they look on as their country, and for their King. They came in swarms. Think of their daily agony of mind, caused by officialdom—not one word from them to their people for seven long months. Word is coming to them from Jersey and Guernsey—ten words at a time. The latest message is dated July 10, six months ago. The people here cannot send or have sent one word to their wives, to their sweethearts and to their children. I ask your Lordships to help them.
We drop millions of leaflets on other peoples, people who do not want them,

241
who do not ask for them and who in many cases laugh at or are afraid of them. We drop toys on Corfu, one of the loveliest islands in the world—toys ! It belonged to us at one time, but, when we left, the people there did not realise the blessings of British rule, and they let us go without a word. They did not appreciate "their glory. We can drop leaflets, for every night practically planes pass or repass our islands. For some reason we do not do so; the only one I can think of is fear—it does not sit properly on this country—fear that the Germans may do us some harm. They have the islands in their hands, they have the populations in their hands, and we are afraid they may do us some harm. We are being punished by officialdom—I think it must be officialdom—by he refusal to let our people have the news of their own kin. Our reward for our service and for the services which we gave in the Great War—and which we are more than ready to give now—is the reward of a sinless Prometheus. I beg to move for Papers.
LORD NOEL-BUXTON: My Lords, may I interpose fox a moment to express the regret of my noble friend Lord Strabolgi that he is unable to be present to-day? He will be acquitted of any negligence, I am sure. I have just had a message from him that he is suffering from a chill.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: My Lords, the noble Lord opposite, who takes so passionate an interest in the fate of the Channel Islands, having raised this subject, it would not be right that no voice should be raised from any quarter of the House to express the interest which I am sure your Lordships feel in the fate of our fellow subjects in those islands; and since in earlier years I was myself brought into official relationship with the islands and twice visited them on behalf of His Majesty's Government, perhaps my voice might not unfittingly be raised to express what I am sure is the general sentiment. Although constitutionally the business of the Channel Islands is transacted in this country through the Privy Council, often in fact it is managed technically, if I may so express it, by the Home Office, and, unless I was wrongly informed, I believe I was the first Home Secretary who ever visited the Channel Islands in an official capacity. Earlier than that as Under-
242
Secretary I went there in order to help to resolve certain difficulties that had arisen between the Home Government and the Governments of the islands.
Anyone who has visited them will not only be aware of the great interest of their institutions and the charm of the localities, but also will be grateful for the friendly hospitality extended by the island authorities, and, above all, will come away with a deep sense of the pride of the Channel islanders in their free institutions and their intense loyalty to the Crown. The surrender of the islands to Germany in an earlier stage of this war came as a great shock to the public opinion of this country. No one who is not acquainted with all the military considerations can express any useful opinion as to the necessity for that action. We must believe that it was strategically necessary, or it would not have been done. When I heard the noble Lord express his deep pain at the hauling down of the Union Jack, I sympathised with him fully, but I felt no small surprise when he asked the question: Will the Union Jack ever be broken again over the islands? I feel sure that your Lordships must all have felt the same sensation when you heard those words. Surely without any shadow of doubt the Union Jack will be again hauled to the top of the flagstaff when the day comes for peace to be declared.
LORD PORTSEA: Perhaps I phrased it badly. Will the islanders themselves, deserted as they have been, be willing to break that flag at their mast? Will not they be content with their own flag of St. George?
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: I am afraid the noble Lord's intervention has made the situation worse than it was before. He has not only suggested that the British Crown might be disloyal to the islanders, but also that the islanders might be disloyal to the Crown. Of that, I feel certain, there is not the smallest danger.
LORD PORTSEA: Hear, hear.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: I am glad to hear the noble Lord's corroboration of that, and his inquiry, I am sure, was intended to be rhetorical rather than a political declaration or suggestion. Yes, surely, when the war is over the islands

243
will return to their allegiance, and the British Crown will restore its authority. They are the most ancient of all its possessions. The Channel Island connection and the words spoken in this House when the Royal Assent is given to Acts of Parliament in Norman French are the two connections still surviving of the old Duchy of Normandy with the British sovereignty, and we may feel certain that, after these hard trials are over, the islands will be restored to their old constitutional position. Meanwhile, undoubtedly His Majesty's Government ought to do all that is possible to comfort and encourage the islanders in their hard trial. What is being done in that respect I do not know. The noble Lord has indicted the Government for neglect and we must await the reply that will be given by their spokesman. Certainly we would wish to do nothing which would be likely to increase the difficulties of the islanders under German occupation and to worsen their hard fate. If it be possible to disseminate news among them and certainly to establish proper connections between the families that are separated through the German occupation, it would be the desire of your Lordships that that should be done, and we will await with great interest the statement of the Government as to the measures that have been or can be taken.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (LORD MOYNE): My Lords, we all realise, I am sure, not only from the debate today but from what fell from the noble Lord six months ago, that the cause of the Channel Islands is very near to his heart, and for that reason, moved by the sincerity and obvious feeling of what he has said, we may perhaps forgive some of what, I think, was an unmerited castiga-tion of the Government for what he called poltroonery and cowardice. The noble Viscount has fully dealt—much better than I could—with the loyalty of the islanders, and has refuted the suggestion that their defence was abandoned from any reason of indifference to their interests or safety. It did not need the noble Lord's eloquence to stir our sympathy for the tragic lot of those—mostly women and children—who have been left in the Channel Islands. We certainly value our
244
fellow citizenship, and we have every confidence that when this time of tribulation has passed they will again become loyal subjects and renew their ancient allegiance.
The noble Lord who moved talked of the British Government having deserted the Islands and having left them to be bombed and machine-gunned. He talked of the dismantling of the forts which date back to the time of Napoleon III, and he suggested that the fact that a hundred years ago these islands defended themselves for six years against foes as strong and at least as able as our foes to-day, was a conclusive argument against surrender under present conditions. I am not briefed on defence problems. They are not touched upon in the noble Lord's question, but it must be obvious that air and submarine warfare has revolutionised the position and the prospects of defending the islands. It is evident that the problem of local air superiority would have meant an impossible task for the Royal Air Force. The nearest point of the islands is fourteen or fifteen miles from the coast of France, and four or five times as far from Great Britain. Is it not certain that, in direct view of the French coast and under ground observation from the aerodromes which fell into the hands of Germany at the surrender of France, the possibility of effective local air superiority to defend the Channel Islands would have been very different from what it was when the Germans tried their offensive over here? The noble Lord made it a reproach that the Government came to such a quick decision to abandon the islands. There would have been strong ground for reproach if they had hesitated. It would have been a wicked loss of life to subject these islands to a hopeless defence if the Government were convinced, as no doubt they were, that such a defence would have been hopeless, and would only have inflicted terrible losses on the civilian population.
I am sure we all realise the cruel fate that the islanders are now suffering, and certainly the Government are most anxious to do everything in their power to alleviate the anxieties of those who are still in the islands about their relations who are serving in the British Forces. The noble Lord did not mention that a very considerable

245
step has been taken since he last raised the matter. I understood him to say that news was coming in from individuals in the Channel Islands to their relations serving over here, but it is also the case that messages are being sent to the Channel Islands. He said it was impossible to send from here. I took down his exact terms—that the Government would not send word that the people over here were safe and well to their relations in the Channel Islands. I can only read the announcement which was made in November in another place:
"The Foreign Relations Department of the Red Cross and Order of St. John has succeeded in arranging a special message scheme for the Channel Islands. Persons desiring to communicate with their relatives or friends in the islands can do so by taking ten-word messages to certain Citizens' Advice Bureaux, the addresses of which may be obtained at the nearest Post Office. The cost is 6d. per message, including reply. Messages must be written in English or French, and must deal with family matters only. They will go by air mail to Geneva, there to be dealt with by the International Red Cross Committee, but replies should not be expected for some weeks."
That is a very considerable alleviation of the anxieties of the Channel Islanders about their relations serving in the British Forces, and I can assure the noble Lord that any further steps that can be taken will be most sympathetically examined by the Government.
He suggests in his Motion the particular measures of dropping leaflets and making broadcasts. In his speech he said it was very cruel that broadcasts were not allowed telling the islanders that their fighting men are well. He told us there were thousands of these fighting men, and I do not see how you could broadcast a general message of that kind. You could only read out a long catalogue giving details about several thousands of separate individuals, and that, clearly, is better dealt with by individual messages.
LORD PORTSEA: I meant a general message from the troops in England to say that they are well.
LORD MOYNE: I cannot believe that any general message could alleviate individual anxieties about relatives, but I can assure the noble Lord that the general question of giving encouraging information to the Channel Islands is a matter on which the Government feel very sympathetic, and his proposals have been, and no doubt will continue to be, very carefully examined.
246
I am sure the noble Lord will see that it would defeat his purpose if the Government were to give notice to the Nazis that they were going either to drop leaflets or to make broadcasts.
LORD PORTSEA: Why?
LORD MOYNE: Because the Nazis would, no doubt, take steps to defeat our purpose. If we gave notice that there were to be broadcasts to the Channel Islands, it would be a great encouragement to them to confiscate the wireless sets in the islands. So it is obvious that to give notice in advance of any further steps that might be possible would really defeat the end the noble Lord has in view, and would only enable the Nazis to forestall and impede any remedial measures which might be found possible. I can only say, in conclusion, that we full sympathise with the position of the Channel Islanders and, as far as possible, through the Red Cross or otherwise, and in any way that may be discussed between the noble Lord and the Departments concerned, the Government are anxious to do everything in their power to alleviate the position.
LORD PORTSEA: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his reply. I have, I imagine, no right to answer him, and so beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

TIMBER SUPPLIES.
LORD PHILLIMORE LORD PHILLIMORE rose to draw the attention of His Majesty's Government to the heavy imports of wood and timber and to the apparently insufficient use of homegrown timber; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am afraid there are very few of us who are so young in years that we cannot remember that the import of timber during the last war was one of the most serious menaces with which we had to deal. Timber of course constitutes a bulky cargo, and is relatively per cubic foot of cargo space of a low value. There is, therefore, every kind of advantage in cutting down our imports of timber to the smallest possible extent. In addition during this war there is another new and an unpleasant factor which makes timber imports in terms of cargo space and sailors' lives even more important and more dangerous. Instead

247
of the comparatively short run from Norway or Sweden our timber, as the Controller pointed out the other day in the newspapers, very largely has to come from Canada, where, indeed, it has to be hauled the whole length of the Canadian Pacific line, and in some cases from Vancouver to the Eastern coast, while after that the same timber has to cross the Atlantic. I venture to think, therefore, that that is a matter which is well worthy of your Lordships' attention.
We are, of course, to a large extent dependent for our supplies of timber on imported produce, and both because the landowner in England has had very small encouragement to develop his forests and because such forests as were fit to use in the last war were very largely denuded, the difficulty of filling the gap from homegrown timber is admittedly considerable. My object, however, is to show that not all has been done that could have been done. I think that so far I am on common ground. And now I would like to call your Lordships' attention to what are the key figures in this respect. Unfortunately, as far as I am concerned I am confined to figures expressed in pounds, shillings and pence, because the weight and cubic footage are not available to me, but I am hoping that the noble Lord who replies to me will be able to produce those figures. As far as pounds, shillings and pence are concerned in 1938, before the war, we imported £39,000,000 worth of timber against £34,000,000 worth in 1940. As we were still importing £34,000,000 worth in 1939 we imported almost the same figure as in 1940. That means that the only economy in pounds, shillings and pence that we have made amounts to nothing more than £5,100,727. I submit that these imports remain at far too high a figure. I do not believe that we can afford cargo space for timber on this scale, and I do not think we ought to afford it. On this side we know that, although many camps are going up and that they use a considerable amount of timber, private building is at an end. Private building was easily the sphere in which the great bulk of timber, and especially imported timber, was used.
I made an attempt to analyse the 1938 figures to show the relative importance of the various classes of imports, and I think the result will have some little in-
248
terest for your Lordships. Of hard wood we imported £6,500,000 worth, of pit props £4,500,000 worth, and of sleepers £1,900,000 worth—a total approximately of £12,000,000 worth. This, roughly speaking, can be produced from the timber in this country. I believe that already the railways have been induced to use oak and elm for sleepers, and I believe that our pit-prop position is very far from being unsatisfactory—in other words, that we have been able to find the pit props required. There remain the hard woods with which England is comparatively densely furnished, and which, except for a few woods like teak, ought not in my view to be imported at all during the war. That £12,000,000 worth, which I contend could quite comfortably, roughly speaking, be produced from our home efforts, amounts to two-fifths of the total imports. The remaining three-fifths consisted of sawn soft woods which, admittedly, we are ill-equipped to provide, but still even theresome small contribution can be made to the totals required. But if you cut out the two-fifths to which I have already referred you would reduce our imports at one stroke from £35,000,000 to £23,000,000—a very considerable saving whether it is translated into pounds, shil-lings and pence or whether it is counted on a cubic-foot basis.
Now it will not be much use drawing attention to these figures unless I had some small contribution to make by way of suggestion as an improvement in the handling of this timber. I submit that it is up to the Timber Control to see that they are making full use of our homegrown supply. They have the power to do this and nobody else has. They are apparently fairly pleased with themselves, for in The Times of December 24, 1940, there appeared an article headed "Woodlands and the War. British substitutes for overseas timber. How felled English trees save shipping supplies." Any reader of that article, which I cannot help thinking was a communicated article, must have thought that all was being done to substitute home-grown timber for imported timber, but the figures to which I have already drawn your attention tell a different tale. As far as my own observations are concerned I do not find—and certain other noble Lords would certainly support me in this—that any fairly comprehensive attempt

249
has yet even been initiated to obtain every possible cubic foot of timber that can be supplied by our own woods and forests.
I have admitted that those woods and forests were largely denuded in the last war, but again, in the last war, whoever was in control naturally went for the big blocks and cleared them. Now Great Britain is a country of shaws and hedges and groves and belts and coppices; that is to say, there are in Great Britain small parcels of woodland, which could be worked by the State, even with State extravagance and the number of staff that seems to be associated with any State venture and which the State could survey and arrange for the felling and transport of the timber thereon. One noble Lord wrote to me this morning pointing out that it apparently took four surveyors all their time to decide which of these woods they would buy, and how they could be dealt with, and that sometimes all four of these surveyors arrived at the same time. I think it was the same noble Lord who has also written to me stating that land girls are being paid extravagant sums per week to bark timber—a job which could better be done by the estate staff—and that the estate staff were considerably offended because these wholly ignorant girls were receiving nearly double the money that they were getting under the Agricultural Wages Board.
These smaller woodlands are well worth attention. Let any noble Lord travel down, say, to Somerset and observe on the way the quantity of elm that there is in the hedges in Wiltshire—and elm can be used for many purposes, including sleepers. Or let him go through Hampshire and see the quantity of good oak standing there, or to the Chilterns where he will find beeches which, except in one or two larger blocks, are practically unused. Let him even go to Scotland and there he will find considerable areas of large conifers—I saw them myself the other day—which are not touched by the axe. The Control may reply, and I am sure would reply, that these smaller woodlands to which I am drawing attention would be expensive to work. But at the very beginning of things, before the war was even started, the landowners and the trade were called together by the Forestry Commission,
250
which was then in charge of home-grown timber, to arrange a schedule of maximum prices. That was duly done, and as a fact prevents the landowner from making anything but the most moderate profit, so that it cannot be said I am here to urge Parliament to put money into the pockets of the landowners. The price schedule as far as landowners are concerned is the most moderate that you could imagine.
During the course of this discussion it was proposed and finally very grudgingly agreed that local advisory committees should be set up in each timber region to assist the official—I have forgotten what he is called—who runs a region, and in particular to furnish him with information as to the smaller parcels of wood which members of the committee could give through their own local knowledge and the local knowledge of their friends and colleagues. They could give information as to the location of this wood, classify and describe it, and put the Forestry Commission machinery in touch with it. That would have saved an immense amount of touring about by State officials, and it would have been effective, because it would have been preceded by a statement on the part of the State officials as to exactly what kind of timber they were looking for. Landowners would have brought in their agents to help them, and if the Timber Control had thought fit they would have brought in their workmen to cut down the trees which were finally selected. As it is, large gangs have to be formed—mostly, I believe, of imported labour—to deal with the large blocks of timber which have been selected, and the day-to-day work of the estate woodmen is thought of no account, whereas, as a matter of fact, the cheapest way of getting anything done is to get it done by local labour which does not have to find billets and is regulated by the wages board and does not demand any extravagant price.
These small parcels must, if we are going to cut down imports, be brought into the light of day, and I would in this connection refer your Lordships to what I think you will all admit is the great success of the agricultural executive committees in getting the ploughing-up policy put into operation. Your Lordships all know that this work has been done almost

251
entirely for nothing by bodies of farmers who have been got together in each rural district, each rural district working with another voluntary and honorary body which deals with the whole county. In that way a survey has been made of every farm in England. That survey has been completed, and completed as a matter of fact in a very short time, and will be of the greatest possible assistance to the nation. If that work were a success, if it were done so cheaply, if it were done so effectively and with so much technical skill and knowledge, why was not the same principle applied to the hunting out of timber where the production campaign is just as necessary as in the case of growing crops? That is my suggestion of one way in which to meet the situation, but I shall continue to protest if imported supplies of timber are not greatly reduced. I beg to move for Papers.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF SUPPLY (LORD PORTAL): My Lords, in rising to reply to the Motion standing in the noble Lord's name I would like to point out at the outset that the Ministry of Supply are directing all their efforts and energies to reducing imports of wood and timber and increasing by all methods possible the use of home-grown timber. The noble Lord stated at the beginning of his speech that he was not able to see certain figures which would give him the knowledge he required. I think that, with your Lordships' permission, the best thing I can do is to give you a survey of what is going on in regard to imported and homegrown timber and at the same time answer the question put by the noble Lord. In the first year of the war our imports were reduced by more than half of what we were importing in our pre-war programme. Of course in making comparisons we have to bear in mind that owing to freightage and other things—but mostly owing to freightage—the price of timber has gone up very largely. Anyhow, in the first year we reduced imports by more than half. In the present year we propose to reduce them by at least 33 per cent. on the first year, and we hope that we shall be able to achieve even more. Your Lordships will understand why I do not give actual figures and why I am using percentages.
252
The production of home-grown timber during the first year of the war was increased by approximately four and a half times, while in this year we hope to increase it by seven times on our pre-war figures. That sounds extraordinarily good, but I am not here to say that we at the Ministry of Supply are pleased or satisfied with what has been done, because at a crisis like this you should never be satisfied with the efforts made, but should always take the view that there is a great deal more to be done than is being done. That I hope is our view at the Ministry of Supply. As I say, we hope to increase production by seven times, but although that sounds an enormous figure, it is only fair to state that at the beginning of the war production was not very large. It is a great advance, but I do not want your Lordships to be misled into thinking that an increase of seven times is a very enormous figure. The most important thing, as the noble Lord pointed out, is the release of shipping space now used for timber so that we may leave more space for essential war commodities which have to be imported into this country. We have reduced it, as I have said, by 50 per cent. in the first year and by another certain 33 per cent. this year, which should help to release our shipping.
The expansion of home-grown production depends primarily on the supply of labour and machinery, but just as important as those factors is a good organisation behind them. It must also be remembered that this home-grown trade was not being carried on in a large way before the war started. At the Ministry of Supply we have received every assistance from the Forestry Commissioners in this work, and about three months ago the Minister of Supply appointed Sir James Calder as Director of Home-Grown Timber and instructed him to co-ordinate and press forward with the work. Sir James Calder, as many of your Lordships will be aware, was associated with timber in the last war and has great knowledge of the subject. He himself directs the organisation of homegrown production either by the trade or by the Production Department of the Ministry of Supply. He is now operating Scotland as an independent unit, with Sir Samuel Steel responsible to him for the organisation of the trade and of the De-

253
partment in Scotland. Until a short time ago Scotland was combined with England and had to be dealt with from England, but so much time was spent in that way that it was thought better to run Scotland as a separate entity under the co-ordination of Sir James Caldcr. Divisional officers are responsible in the various districts or areas for issuing selling licences and organising departmental production in their divisions, while assistant area officers co-operate with the divisional officers in seeing that timber merchants obtain adequate supplies of timber to work their mills to capacity, and also in seeing, through the issue of licences, that home-grown timber is utilised to the fullest possible extent. The distribution of home-grown timber is directed by the Timber Control in the same way as in the case of imported timber.
The noble Lord raised the question of what he called small parcels of timber. During the last two or three months we have pointed out that it is as well to take the difficult jobs with the easy ones. If you take away all the large growths of timber in one place and leave the more difficult task, it does not make for progress in next year's timber programme. We have therefore laid it down that there should be 50 per cent. of each of these categories. The noble Lord also raised the question of advisory committees. I was very interested in this, and will go into it at once. I would only point out now that, as I am sure the noble Lord will agree, the war agricultural committees are not in quite the same category; for, although I agree that more use should be made of the landlords' own woodmen in cutting down timber for small parcels, yet when the war agricultural committees get land ploughed up it must be remembered that they have the ploughmen on the spot, whereas if large quantities of timber have to be cut down it will be necessary to import or transfer labour for the purpose.
I think your Lordships will be interested to learn that there is now an Assistant Controller who is responsible for extending the substitution of home-grown for imported timber and for drawing up specifications which can be fitted to home production. One of our difficulties is that of getting the various Departments to
254
use in their specifications hard wood from England rather than imported wood. That is the particular task of the Assistant Controller. In order to spread the difficulties of production, we are insisting that the cutting of easy stands of timber shall be accompanied by the cutting of roadside timber and remote stands. I am sure that the noble Lord will agree with that. We have recently—and I consider this an important point—initiated a national stock of home-grown timber, which has for its main purpose to get the trade to continue felling timber and not to work to actual orders received. As this country was not organised for timber production before the war, we had a number of energetic but small men who, perhaps, had not sufficient working capital to carry on; but if, as has now been done, a national stock of home-grown timber is instituted, that difficulty should be overcome.
On the question of labour, home labour has been increased three times in numbers. This includes three R.E. Companies and two Pioneer Companies. In addition, your Lordships will be glad to hear that Empire labour is also assisting, including a civilian unit of Newfoundlanders and Dominion Companies from Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The advance party has just arrived from Canada. Many of these units require hutments to be built, and these are now progressing satisfactorily. We are working closely with the Ministry of Labour on these questions. As regards machinery, timber merchants have been encouraged to put in new machinery where practicable. Portable mills have been put down in increasing numbers, both large and small, while new mills are being established as they come forward. Active steps are being taken to help timber merchants to secure machinery, and latterly bulk orders have been placed by the Department on behalf of the trade. In securing machinery, we have had certain difficulties, due to the present supply system, in regard to obtaining sufficient transport and haulage equipment, but we are now overcoming them. There is, as your Lordships know, competition for the necessary transport and haulage, but I think we are well on our way to solving the problem there.
With regard to the position of soft woods in this country—larch, fir and

255
spruce—they are being extensively used for pitprops, and the expansion of home production of mining timber should supply almost all our requirements, apart from some imported pit props which we have in stock. I hope that our pit props this year will all be supplied from home-grown timber. Moreover, the total requirements for telegraph and transmission poles will be met from home-grown conifers. Soft woods are also in heavy demand for constructional purposes, such as hutting, and are progressively replacing imported timber for boxes, crates and packing cases. This use of home-grown timber will be further developed by the more extensive use of drying kilns. Some members of your Lordships' House will understand these technical methods better than I do, but the drying kiln for maturing wood is of great assistance in getting the wood dried quickly and used quickly instead of a long time being necessary for maturing.
Hard woods present a more difficult problem, although they are replacing imported hard woods increasingly. There are many specifications, I am glad to say, which are now being changed in favour of home-grown wood. As the noble Lord said, the railway companies have recently agreed to make use of home-grown oak for sleepers, wagon bottoms and wagon sheetings, while it is also being used for some types of packing cases and ammunition boxes. Home-grown beeches are now being used for the manufacture of rifles. To secure the maximum use of home-grown hard woods, it is necessary that large stocks should be held in a seasoned condition. That is another reason why the initiation of a national stock will be helpful.
Before I sit down, I expect that your Lordships would like me to touch on two points which may be of interest. One is the question of reafforestation. In 1930, 28,000 acres were replanted by the Forestry Commission, and I believe that the same figure is envisaged for the ensuing year. That is a matter in which I am sure some people will be interested. Then there is a question about which I, as Parliamentary Secretary, hear a great deal, the question of amenity. I think that the best thing I can do is to tell you how we are trying to deal with this matter. On October 2, 1939, a memorandum on the subject was issued
256
by the Forestry Commissioners to the landowners' associations and federations for general distribution, and the following paragraph deals with this subject:
"The fellings which would be necessary in the course of a three-year programme would undoubtedly have a severe effect on the amenities of individual estates and of the countryside at large. Sacrifices will doubtless be necessary but it is hoped that everybody will make an attempt to mitigate at least the grosser evils which accompany extensive clear fellings."
The divisional officers who issue licences to fell standing trees are allowed to use their discretion in the matter of amenity trees and past experience has proved that this has worked satisfactorily. Up to date several cases have been referred to the Department, and it has been possible in all instances to satisfy both vendors and purchasers. From time to time lists of stands of timber having amenity value are supplied to the Department by the Town and Country Planning Branch of the Ministry of Health. A further safeguard should also be the Forestry Commissioners who are now serving with our organisation.
I have tried to supply your Lordships' House with as much information as possible. We quite appreciate the importance of making use of home-grown timber, and I would welcome any constructive suggestion from the noble Lord in whose name this Motion stands or any other member of your Lordships' House. On behalf of the Ministry I should like to say in conclusion that great help could still be given us to try to save our shipping of imported hard timbers if people would help us by adjusting their specifications to some of the hard woods of which we have got goodly quantities in this country. I would add also that while I would associate myself with anybody who would work either with me or under me, I assure your Lordships that I have never myself written anything in The Times in praise of the work that the Timber Control is doing, because I believe that if you do that you become smug, and if you become smug in these days of warfare, you are not helping the industry which you are trying to direct.
LORD PHILLIMORE: My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord for the reply that he has given. Your Lordships will agree with me that it was of very considerable interest and, I may say, of

257
some comfort. At any rate it shows that under the noble Lord's energetic direction much more is going to be done than has been done hitherto to avoid the use of excessive cargo space for imported timber. I would only conclude by urging upon him to see that his Department makes use of local help and does not fight it the whole time. I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

CARDIFF CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]

  DERWENT VALLEY WATER BILL. [H.L.]
  Presented, and read 1a.
  CAMBORNE WATER BILL. [H.L.]
  EAST SURREY GAS BILL. [H.L.]
  MID-SOUTHERN UTILITY BILL.[H.L.]
  PORTSMOUTH WATER BILL. [H.L.]
  Presented, read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.
  House adjourned.