Lords Sitting of 22 October 1941

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

AGRICULTURE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL.
Order of the Day for receiving the Report of Amendments, read.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE DUKE OF NORFOLK): My Lords, I beg to move that this Report be now received.
Moved, That the Report of Amendments be now received.—(The Duke of Norfolk.)
THE EARL OF CLANWILLIAM: My Lords, may I with your permission say a word of thanks to the noble Duke for the great courtesy and consideration which he has shown to many noble Lords on this side of the House in the course of the passage of this Bill? It has resulted in a very expeditious passage of the Bill, and I am quite sure I am only speaking for many noble Lords on this side, who have been specially interested in the Bill, when I say how very much obliged we are to the noble Duke for his great courtesy and consideration.
On Question, Motion agreed to: Amendments reported accordingly.

MAN-AND WOMAN-POWER.
LORD STRABOLGI LORD STRABOLGI rose to call attention to the need for more effective organization of man-and woman-power in industry; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move the Motion which stands in my name. I presume the Government and your Lordships' House will at any rate agree with the spirit of it. I shall have to make my few remarks rather wide in order to cover the held. I think your Lordships will agree, the man-power and woman-power question is as important to our war effort as any other matter which we could possibly discuss. It will not be pretended that we have yet fully mobilized either our man-power or our woman-power, and
366
indeed His Majesty's Government admit that. We on this side recognize that it is bound to be a slow process to mobilize a nation for totalitarian war, and we put this Motion down, not with a view to making criticisms, but rather in order to make some suggestions, and doubtless other noble Lords will also have helpful suggestions to make.
I will begin by quoting two important opinions from America. The first is encouraging. It is from Mr. Stacey May, the research chief of the Office of Production Management. On the 17th October Mr. May said:
" Britain is now devoting 50 per cent. of her industrial resources to production and Germany's proportion is about the same or even higher."
He was advocating a great increase in American production, and pointing out that so far the American industries have only been mobilized to the extent of 15 per cent., as compared with our 50 per cent., and apparently, according to this very authoritative source, the German mobilization is not very much greater than our own. The second opinion is from Mr. John D. Biggars, whom many of your Lordships met when he was over here and surveyed the whole field. Two days ago he warned the American people that in Britain we were facing a man-power shortage. Now my right honourable friend the Minister of Labour claims, no doubt quite justly, that so far he has provided all the man-power which the factories are ready to use, but Mr. Bevin now asks for a 30 per cent. addition to the output. Obviously that will call for a much greater labour force, and it is obvious that we shall be "tight", if I may use that expression, for workers as the new factories, some of which are only now being completed, become ready for production.
It will not be denied that the results of our efforts are disappointing. We have not only been rearming since Dunkirk, which is the motive of so many speeches one now hears. Rearmament did not begin with the British evacauation of Dunkirk. We were supposed to be increasing our armaments two years or more before war broke out, so that we are now in the fifth or sixth year of large-scale rearmament. Yet when the greatest opportunity of all offers itself to use our arms at the present time, apparently because of

367
lack of equipment—it is not lack of shipping, because we are sending great supplies to Russia over an immense sea voyage—we are unable to strike in the West. It is not shortage of shipping that hampers us. It is implied, indeed, quite plainly by recent spokesmen of the Government, that this is due to a shortage of equipment and we are unable, in this tremendous crisis in the history of the world, to make a serious diversion in the West or to create a second front because we are not ready and because we have not got the weapons yet. After five or six years of rearmament, after all the efforts of our workpeople and despite the energy of the able Ministers responsible, we are still very short of military equipment.
I could, I think—though not in such grand language—write the chapter which the Macaulay of the future will pen describing events in the four months since June 22, when our greatest enemy invaded Russia. I am not exaggerating when I say that there is a feeling of frustration and disappointment very widespread in the country. If, after Dunkirk, it was said in justice that that was our finest hour, and that we alone stood armed and ready to repel any assault and to continue the great fight for everything that makes civilization worth while, then I am afraid it will be said hereafter that what followed from June 22 last to the coming of the snows in Russia must be accounted the hour of our greatest humiliation. That is the background, I submit to your Lordships, against which we should examine this whole vast and complicated problem of man-power.
Now may I address to the noble Lord the Leader of the House, who I understand is going to reply, one or two questions? The first is with regard to the enrolment of women. Some little time ago a quarter of a million women were asked for by the end of the year. If it is agreeable to the Government or, in other words, if it is in the public interest, can we be told how many of those women have been obtained and what is the prospect of obtaining them all? I am sure the noble Lord the Leader of the House will not ride off too readily on the plea of public interest. He and I remember the recruiting campaigns before conscription in the last war. Figures of recruits obtained were published then. We were told when the first million soldiers had
368
been obtained, and I do not know why we should not now publish figures of recruiting for war industry amongst women. In approaching the question of the employment of women, I admit that we have to be very careful. Others with far greater experience than myself have warned us that we must be very careful in handling women. Certainly it is the fact that the German Government failed in the attempts to conscript women in Germany wholesale. They met all kinds of difficulty and had to abandon the idea. Nevertheless, the signs seem to point to greater compulsion for women here, and the women themselves are beginning to ask for it.
I see it stated in the newspapers to-day that the Minister of Labour is calling up all women of forty years of age and under, I understand that there is no question of compelling them to go into the Armed Forces but that they can be compelled to enter the factories. This compulsion is being applied, I believe, with consideration, and I am sure all your Lordships will support Mr. Bevin's effort to do this thing in a way which will not upset parents and which will not rouse a lot of unnecessary opposition; but it is obvious that there is still a great reserve of women labour which has not yet been employed. I do not want to enlarge on the matter of employing women in the Armed Forces. The noble and gallant Air Marshal Viscount Trenchard was intending to raise that matter a little time ago and, if he will forgive me, I am going to suggest that before this war is over women will be employed more and more on combatant duties. They are already so employed with anti-aircraft batteries and searchlights and I believe they will be employed more and more. If I do not shock the noble and gallant Viscount by saying it, I believe that we shall find women flying in operational aircraft before long. I have said before in your Lordships' House, and I said so before the war, that I see no objection to that. After all, we must look at this matter broadly. If the Nazis succeeded in invading this country they would slaughter the women and worse, in any case, whether they were in combatant units or not.
I must also refer for a moment to criticisms about the misuse of skilled labour in the Forces. I do not want to

369
make a great deal of this point. You cannot always have all the round pegs in round holes. You must make allowance for unit commanders who want to keep men who are good soldiers and for men who prefer to be soldiers to doing their old work, engineering work or whatever it may have been. I should, however, like to quote one sentence from the Interim Report of the Beveridge Committee which was issued on July 30 last. After describing the problem and its difficulties and so on, the Committee conclude by saying:
" Until these plans are realized, and so long as men of military age are used on work within the capacity of others, whether with or against the will of the Service Departments, the Government will not escape criticism for waste of man-power."
It was stated in the Committee's Interim Report that we could expect the final Report dealing with the Navy and so on at the end of last month, but, as far as I am aware, it has not yet been published.
That sentence which I have quoted from the Interim Report is, I think, worthy of very serious attention. At the same time, if we look at this whole problem broadly, there are no grounds for pessimism on the man-power question. People quote the numbers of the population and count noses in Germany and Italy and the occupied countries, and thus make out that the Nazis have an enormous labour force which we cannot possibly equal and an enormous military force which we cannot possibly match. If, however, we look beyond the confines of Europe it will be seen that we can overtop the labour and military force at the disposal of the Nazis and do it easily. The population of India alone, at the recent census, was in round figures 388,000,000. Admittedly, many of those people, for physical and other reasons, are not suitable for heavy work or suitable as soldiers, but there are enough people in India, excellent mechanics, motor drivers and engineers, and enough fighting men in India, to double the figure of the available strength behind the Nazis. The same consideration applies to Africa. My noble friends the Earl of Listowel and Lord Faringdon have pointed out the immense human reserves we have in Africa. Our own Colonies, the Belgian and the Free French Colonies can produce enormous labour power and immense military power as well. My
370
noble friend Lord Croft knows that the soldiers from the Belgian Congo are first-rate military material. They did very good service in Abyssinia. There are 13,000,000 of them in the Belgian Congo alone, men of good physique who can be used for fighting or for other work. So, if we put into operation a plan to mobilize all our available labour resources we shall find that the situation will appear much more favourable.
Now may I ask these further questions of the noble Leader of the House? Some months ago we adopted a policy of concentrating industry; of closing down unnecessary and redundant factories in nonessential industries and concentrating upon the key factories. I understand that a great deal of progress has been made in carrying out this policy, especially in the textile districts in Lancashire, and it would be very interesting if we could be told how many men and women have been released for war work by this concentration and how many have been absorbed in war industry or other industry essential to the national effort. Some figures have appeared in the newspapers, but I think that if we could have an authoritative statement by the Leader of the House on this matter it would be very interesting. I should further like to ask how much factory space has been made available by this concentration, how much of it has already been utilized, and what further reserves of men and women as workers are expected to be made available from future concentration of industry. Again, I would ask how much more factory space is expected to be made available in the near future. If the noble Leader of the House could answer those points I think it would be useful.
May I make one or two further suggestions, which are by no means exhaustive in connexion with this problem? I put them forward with all modesty and diffidence, but I hope they will seem worthy of consideration by the House. This question of man-power is intertwined and interlinked with the manning of the Forces. Why do not the Government, and particularly the War Office, make more use of the Home Guard? Let them release more equipment and up-to-date equipment, have a comb-out if you like, and perhaps retire many of those old veterans who, with great spirit, came forward at the beginning but who are,

371
possibly, not physically fit for the duties of a soldier in the field. That is one suggestion. If you were to make the Home Guard a real army, as you could, it would help the whole man-power problem.
Secondly, I would like to bring forward a suggestion which has already been made in another place, in a very admirable speech, by Miss Megan Lloyd George. I hope that she got the idea from her august father. That suggestion is the creation of a dual-purpose Army. I mention this suggestion with fear and trembling, standing as I am in the presence of many distinguished soldiers in your Lordships' House. At first sight it may seem very terrible to the military mind, but let us examine it a little more. I believe the Germans do it to begin with, and on land the Germans are not bad soldiers and their military organization is not to be despised. In quiet times you could release your skilled men for periods of work in the factories, in the mines or on the land, and they would be at call when you wanted to use them again as soldiers. A number of men were released by the military authorities for harvesting and they did splendid work so far as my observation went. I was very much impressed by the work done by soldiers in the West of England and I think the farmers were tremendously helped. I do not know that the Army suffered. The men are now back with their units and I gather that they liked the experience.
The Pioneers have done, and are doing, very good work in clearing away the debris in London and other Cities. That was, I believe, against the initial desires of the War Office, but in practice the scheme has worked out quite well. It is said: "Oh yes, but if you send a man back to his old factory he forgets what he has learnt in the Army." Now, I have been referring only to men who have had full Army training in suggesting that they should be made available to the war industries, including agriculture and mining. Let us remember for a moment what happened in the last war when we were having casualties in France. A man was wounded, he went home, went to hospital, went to a convalescent home, was given leave, then went to a depot. It might well be that six months elapsed before he returned to his unit. Is it to be suggested that he was not fit to take his place again
372
in the line; that he had forgotten his soldiering? I do not suggest that these men of whom I am speaking should go from the Army into industry for long periods at a time. A month at a time might be a suitable period and, where you could do so, it would be appropriate to send them to districts in which their own homes were situated. Certainly during the winter it is not so easy to carry out military training. There is, I believe, a danger during the coming winter of our troops becoming stale and bored, if I may use that word, through lack of activity, and it would do many men good, especially the skilled workers, among whom I include the land workers, to return for a time to their civilian occupations.
As we have had such successful results from sending soldiers to help in harvesting I should like to know if any soldiers are going to be made available for the potato harvest. A noble friend has also mentioned drainage work. It is very desirable that they should be used for this also. Certainly there is not any surplus of labour on the land at the present time. I believe that those of your Lordships who are farmers or landowners will confirm that fact. There is, I understand, a good deal of uneasiness in agricultural' districts just now at the prospect which threatens of a call-up of more agricultural labourers in the coming winter. I understand that the War Office want another 10,000 men from the land. I quite sympathize with the War Office because the young agricultural labourer makes a fine soldier. Farmers and others concerned with agriculture are very much alarmed at the prospect. This dual-purpose Army would get over some of the difficulties in agriculture, and, certainly, work in the fields cannot harm the soldier. It keeps his muscles taut and so on. In putting forward this suggestion I admit that it means a revolution in military organization. But this is a revolutionary war, and I do ask that this proposal for a dual-purpose Army should be most seriously considered by His Majesty's Government.
I have already mentioned the case of women in the Forces. May I refer to another great use we could find for women, especially those exempted from National Service? That is in the Home Guard. Many women who could not leave their homes could help in the Home Guard in

373
the same way as women help in the regular Army. Already in a number of units in the country women are being employed unofficially in the Home Guard. The noble Lord, Lord Croft, knows that perfectly well. It is winked at. Why not recognize it officially and encourage women who cannot do other national work to enrol in the Home Guard?
The next suggestion that I have to make is that the principle of concentration or pooling should now be applied to the war industries; in other words, factories, ordnance works and the like in large areas should be grouped together so that the skilled managements, the skilled workers, the machines and the raw materials can be pooled or made interchangeable. In this connexion there should be an overriding authority over the production side of the Admiralty, and over the Ministry of Aircraft Production and the Ministry of Supply. I understand that in theory the Minister of Labour, as Chairman of the Production Committee, has this overriding authority, but I suggest that it should be the whole-time work of a separate Minister.
Modern totalitarian war, it will be admitted, is a test of a nation's efficiency, and so far our effort has been patchy. In some things our organization and efficiency are superb. I will only mention—not exhaustively—the Navy, the Mercantile Marine, the minesweepers, the Royal Air Force and the prowess of the fighting soldier. No criticisms can be made of the organization and efficiency of those bodies, but our higher direction appears to fall short of our requirements. The Minister of Labour says that he has a plan for the utilization of man-and woman-power. I am sure that he has a departmental plan, and I am sure that it is well conceived; but it puzzles a great many of us how there can be a real manpower plan unless it is linked to a broad strategical plan, and we wish that we could be certain that that exists. Brilliant improvisation combined with an ad hoc strategy are hardly sufficient in the state of affairs in which we find ourselves. I beg to move.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (LORD MOYNE): My Lords, the noble Lord who has just spoken very wisely began by pointing out that the unfolding of the full resources of our manpower must be a slow process. I think it
374
is also obvious that it must be a process of continual change, which has by no means yet reached its final stage. The noble Lord also referred to very interesting comparisons between our mobilization for fighting and productive purposes and that of other countries, and he said—and I agree with him—that the problem of dealing with the obvious shortage which may be expected in view of our relatively smaller population is at the root of our whole war organization. I understood him to connect this failure to mobilize our man-power effectively with what he called the greatest humiliation of this country, in the war—that is, that we have not created a second front in the West.
I was very much surprised to hear the noble Lord take that view, because I should have thought that the warning of Lord Gort's Despatches and the lesson of Dunkirk would have gone home to everyone who studies the military problem. Surely it would be madness for us to improvise an expedition of that kind. The noble Lord ended his speech with some wise words as to the results of hasty improvisation. Is it not evident to the noble Lord, who has experience of the problem of sea warfare and sea transport, that it is not possible to land a well-equipped Army without a vast shipping effort? It all depends, of course, on the size of the ships, but I was re-reading the other day the story of the Gallipoli campaign, and for that tiny effort well over forty ships had to be concentrated in the eastern end of the Mediterranean. How could such a flotilla have been brought together in the short period which the noble Lord mentioned, and, if it had been brought together, what chance would there have been of landing its cargoes of human beings and equipment across the narrow seas?
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, the noble Lord has been good enough to ask me a question. I purposely did not refer to Lord Gort's Dispatches, but they strengthen my argument. Lord Gort's small Army drew off five of the ten German Panzer divisions. The Germans to-day have twenty, and two in Libya. Lord Gort's Army drew off half the then number of their Panzer divisions before it was driven back.
LORD MOYNE: The noble Lord talks of Lord Gort's "small Army." Do you remember that it took six months to land

375
it, and it required the whole unfolding of our resources at the time? How could you possibly hope to give even as good a chance as was possessed by Lord Gort to an improvised Force landed under present conditions? Moreover, would it not be folly to denude this country of the Army which we need in case of invasion? We have sent a great and growing Force to the Near East, and I cannot imagine anything which would suit Hitler's game better than that we should adopt the Chinese method of committing suicide on the doorstep of one's enemy. The whole conditions of war and of the landing of troops have changed since Gallipoli; it is no longer possible to land brave men with any chance of success, equipped merely with rifles and bandoliers, to face all the artillery and tanks which are available in France to resist them.
Now let me come to the problem of man-power. The trends of our population can be seen perfectly well from Whitaker's Almanack. I must not give any figures; I will refer only to those general trends, particulars of which are available to us all. We have all been very much concerned in recent years by the decrease in the number of children of school age and under. One would imagine that, in time of war, that would mean that there would be a larger proportion of our total population available for war purposes; but at the other end of the scale we have to write off from this plus factor a minus factor for the greatly increased number of old people, and therefore the net increase in the man-and woman-power of working age in this country as compared with 1918 is about five millions, in round figures. The enemy, of course, possesses a far larger number of German population, apart from the huge populations who have been driven into industrial slavery and who are labouring for his war effort.
The key to victory must be the best use of our man-power, and we have learnt from those Gort Dispatches that numbers are really less important than equipment. A few men nowadays have a greater destructive power than many times their number twenty-five years ago. This has set a continually changing problem to the Ministry of Labour, which has to allocate our resources. The development of mechanical warfare has upset the propor-
376
tion between the Fighting Services and the industries upon which they depend. There has been a huge increase in the need for tanks, far greater than anybody contemplated at the beginning of the war, when apparently we were not even in possession of a standardised pattern for this great new development. Besides that, to keep pace with the tanks, you have to have mechanical transport on a scale never dreamt of under previous conditions.
And there has been a transformation in air fighting. In the last war the peak figure of the Royal Air Force was 291,000. I must not give the exact figure, but it is several times that number that we are aiming at to-day, and as the R.A.F. grows the industry which enables them to remain in the air has to grow in even greater proportion. And it is not merely the number of planes, it is the complication of their equipment. In 1918 I believe £5,000 would cover most of the patterns of fighters built of wood and fabric. The most costly plane in the last war was the Handley-Page night bomber, which cost what was then considered the fantastic figure of £12,500. That is about the cost of our fighters, I believe, to-day, and I have been given a cutting from a newspaper which says that the cost of the B17E, which is being turned out on a large scale in America, is £70,000. It is no longer a matter of wood and fabric but thirty tons of costly metals and equipment.
The plant for building all these wonderful appliances necessarily takes a long time to provide, and I think it is really very remarkable that we have got so far as we have. We are far ahead of America, as the noble Lord has reminded us in his speech. The noble Lord has asked us how we are increasing the number of people in the Services and in the industries upon which they depend. The process of drawing people away from civil employment is of course very slow. The schedule of reserved occupations has so far proved a very successful instrument for transferring men with the least possible dislocation of civil industry, but we shall now need a more exact instrument than this, and it has been mentioned in speeches by the Minister of Labour that we are to have individual reservations instead of reservation by occupation. I can give an example of why we have to have

377
something more delicate in the way of a test than reservation by occupation. Take the case of an industry which is reserved at certain ages, say forestry. It is not enough to reserve foresters in general. Many of the functions of that industry are concerned more with the future, with planting trees, than with providing timber for our present needs, and therefore we shall now, in view of the greater pressure on our man-power, have to go into each individual case and see whether men are really occupied to the best purpose. It will mean a gradual dereservation by age groups and a consequent disappearance of occupational reservation.
The noble Lord referred to the advantage of drawing in larger numbers on women, and this process is, of course, being used to the full. A large number of women arc being put into the Forces and a far larger number into the munitions industry, because although our Armed Forces, men and women together, including full-time A.R.P. workers, will next year be about the same as they were at the end of the last war, our figures for those employed in munition production will be just about double. Registration has shown that an unexpectedly high proportion of women are already fully occupied. Taking the class from twenty to twenty-five, go per cent. of single women and widows are in full-time paid employment. The number of married women in that age group in full-time employment is rather smaller, although 97 per cent. of them are employed full-time, but not paid, if you bring in their household occupations.
LORD ADDISON: May I interrupt? This is extraordinarily interesting. The noble Lord says 97 per cent. of married women are in full-time employment. Does employment in those cases include employment at home?
LORD MOYNE: Yes. That was a distinction I tried to draw between household work and other work—40 per cent. among the married women arc in full-time employment and 57 per cent. have full-time household responsibilities. The withdrawal of women from industry through the registration for employment order has been steadily going on, but by itself it is not enough. A further contraction in less essential industry will be necessary by such methods as cutting out production of more elaborately designed articles. The
378
noble Lord asked whether we have got the figures that we want. It is a continually growing number that we want, and the Government are going to get the figures, though the exact method of applying these various systems has not yet reached its final form. We have, of course, to get rid of some of our prejudices in using the help of women. We have got to remember that all men are not fit nor are all women frail, and in the Services young women arc in many cases fitter for active outdoor duties than many men. To make the best use of woman-power in the Services means a constant review of establishments. The War Office is applying itself to the fullest substitution by women and civilians for work now being carried out by soldiers, but this particular problem is for the moment less important than to get the women.
At the present time one of the biggest problems to be tackled is to get another 140,000 women for the A.T.S. The individual registration of women must obviously be followed up by individual placing to see that a woman's capacity is used to the full. An intelligent girl may be a much better motor driver or antiaircraft instrument operator than a heavy-fisted or slow-witted man, and a quick-witted shorthand typist will make a much less good cook than a woman who has been trained in that art. Therefore, the capacity of each individual is the only possible test for her most suitable employment. The working-in of women into a man's service, of course, presents considerable difficulties. Pledges have been continually given that the A.T.S. would be a woman's Service, under women, and it is accordingly administered in all such matters as accommodation, working hours, and well-being under its own women officers. As suitable trades and employments for women in the A.T.S. and other Services are extended, it is inevitable that they should come under operational control and instruction by men, because women are not yet trained instructors in the use of such technical equipment as kine-theodolites or predictors, or such highly skilled technical work as signalling.
The noble Lord asked whether more use could be made of women in the Home Guard. He said it was being done unofficially, and asked whether it could not be recognized officially. I believe the

379
War Office are in need of no pressing on this matter. They value the liaison which is growing up between the Women's Voluntary Services and the Home Guard, and I am sure they will gladly do anything to forward what the noble Lord has in view. The noble Lord also wished to see a development of the Home Guard itself, and perhaps a differentiation between those who were more mobile and those who could not give quite such full service. Everything possible is being done to equip the Home Guard, and it is generally realized that they are already an extremely valuable auxiliary in our home defence problem. The noble Lord suggested that we should have a dual-purpose Army. I am afraid it could not be applied to the full extent that the noble Lord seemed to have in mind, but a great deal in that direction has been done. Troops have helped in fire-watching, in emergency clearances after bombing, where the Royal Engineers have very exceptional qualifications from their training, 65,000 soldiers were helping in this year's harvest, and a large number are also lent for the urgent purposes of aerodrome construction.
The noble Lord asked about the concentration of industry. It is already being clone in the case of essential civil work. The three production Departments are encouraging co-operation between firms engaged in the production of similar products, and they are organizing the pooling of demands and resources. Up to date 108,000 men and women have been released for more urgent war purposes by this concentration of civil industry, but I am afraid I cannot distinguish between men and women. In the same way it is not possible to give the exact number of workers who have been transferred from the closed mills. The number of 108,000 is due to concentration, but from the actual closed mills we have not been able to get the exact figures, because some of the workers leave when the arrangements are not quite complete, and some are lost to the industry. For instance, in the cotton industry, about 10,000 older women have disappeared from employment because they have been unable to transfer to other districts or other factories owing to domestic reasons.
The noble Lord was anxious to know—he told me so beforehand—what amount
380
of factory space was available owing to this concentration of industry. The figure given me is 38,700,000 square feet. Thirty-seven million square feet have been acquired for factory and storage purposes, but not all that space from the concentration of factory effort in smaller areas. It is impossible to distinguish how much is due to each cause. In the near future it is hoped to add to factory space another 6,500,000 square feet from further concentrations. The figure for personnel is of course constantly increasing, but the schemes now under consideration cover some 36,000 factory workers, apart from 12,ooo who are expected to be transferred from the woollen factories and who come within the twenty to twenty-five years age group which has up to now been registered.
It is impossible without studying the papers to conceive the perplexity of these man-power problems. Calling up must not be in advance of equipping, and obviously the very great supplies of war material which was planned for our own use but has now been diverted to Russia must introduce new and disturbing complications. Only yesterday evening, in preparation for to-day's debate, I read a summary of the needs and difficulties in this connexion of about fifteen different Government Departments. They are all more or less affected, and after reading their problems I am left with a greater admiration than ever for the way the Minister of Labour has been able to reconcile this jig-saw puzzle of so many vital claims with the huge expansion in our war effort.
VISCOUNT WOLMER: My Lords, I would like to thank my noble friend for the exceedingly interesting and valuable statement he has made, but I have risen only for one purpose, and that is to say that I hope the Government will not pay too much attention to the advice of our amateur strategists either in the columns of the newspapers or on the soap boxes outside factories or street corners. I do not think that this agitation for the creation of a second front for an attack in the West in the least represents the real feeling of the country. Of course, everybody wishes to give all possible help to Russia, but how can those who are outside possibly know what the facts are? We know that the Government are desperately anxious to give every assistance to Russia

381
that they can. We know that they have the highest military, naval and air advice; we know that they have been in consultation with our Russian Allies both here and in Russia, and therefore all sensible people throughout the country have complete confidence that the Government will take every possible step they can. I hope, therefore, they will not attach too much importance to advice of this nature which has been to a certain extent very gratuitously offered to the Government. I would remind my noble friend that it is always the same people who tender this type of advice—the people who first advised the Government to go into Crete and then attacked them for having gone there, who first urged them to go into Norway and then attacked them for having gone there, and indeed did the same in regard to Holland and Belgium. The amateur strategist who cannot pretend to know the ABC of the facts presents really nothing but a pitiable figure in the tragedy that we are witnessing at the present moment.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, apparently the Papers which we expected are not ready. I understand the Beveridge Report is not complete and that Mr. Bevin is also waiting for certain very important statistics which also are not ready. I do not therefore propose to press the demand for Papers. I am sure these will be published, when available, for your Lordships' use. I agree with one part only of the speech of the noble Viscount who last spoke, and that is I thank the noble Lord opposite for the very interesting and valuable facts which he gave to your Lordships. What struck me most, if he will allow me to say so, was the statement he made that double the numbers will be working on munitions next year—that is in the third year of the war—that were working on munitions at the end of the last war.
LORD MOYNE: That is not an exact figure, but it is not far out.
LORD STRABOLGI: I hope that it will be made known very widely in the country and to our Allies, who will be glad to know it. We understand that it is a difficult and a lengthy process to make the complicated apparatus which is required at the present time. The noble Lord will forgive me when I say that I
382
have never heard a more complete example of defeatism than his citing of the Chinese custom, as he described it, of committing suicide on one's neighbour's doorstep. I have heard some very pessimistic accounts of our fortunes in this war, but nothing like that. I am sure the noble Lord did not wish to cast any reflection upon the Chinese, who are putting up a magnificent fight against their much more fully equipped advervaries, the Japanese.
LORD MOYNE: I certainly did not refer to any possible war operation. I was referring to the suggestion that we should land men without equipment on the French beaches. I think that would be equivalent to the old habit, which perhaps is no longer existent in modern China, of getting back on your enemy and haunting him with your spirit by committing suicide on his doorstep.
LORD STRABOLGI: I am much obliged for the explanation. I was sure that that was what the noble Lord meant. That is, of course, the whole point—we have not the equipment to make this diversion. That is why my noble friend was good enough to ask me to put this Motion down to-day. Now as to amateur strategists, this war, like the last war, is too serious a business to be left to the professional soldiers. The statesman has to take part, and he has to make the ultimate decisions. It is easy to talk about amateur strategy. But for the amateur strategists, like Mr. Lloyd George in the last war, where should we have been in 1917–18? My noble friend below me was an amateur strategist in his time, and the country benefited. To those amateur strategists a great debt of gratitude is owed. I saw a photograph the other day of all the members of the present Cabinet, and I was glad to see that the Leader of this House graced it while other members of your Lordships' House lent great distinction to the group of politicians photographed in the grounds of Downing Street. The Leader of the House is an amateur strategist; he has to help to take decisions.
VISCOUNT WOLMER: At any rate he knows the facts.
LORD STRABOLGI: Let us see what the facts are, and this is my last sentence. The Germans are understood to have twenty-five divisions only of second-and third-line troops, the Landsturm and that

383
type of soldier, in the whole of the West, and they are getting Italians to replace their garrisons in Belgium. The information the Americans give, which is probably right, is that they have less than 100 tanks, and they are only tanks of use for police purposes, in the whole of the West.
LORD MOYNE: Would the noble Lord apply his mind to the air condition? The Germans are said to have more fighters opposite our coast than they have on the Russian front.
LORD STRABOLGI: I will resist the temptation to go further into this discussion. It is a big subject, and I should be delighted to discuss it with the noble Lord, but I am not sure that it is a subject we ought to discuss in public. I think the air position is this, that we can put up a protective umbrella wherever we want to do so by using, among other elements, our new long-range fighters. But I must resist the temptation to discuss this matter further. It is a very serious one, but I must not trespass on your Lordships' rules, and I can only repeat my thanks to the noble Lord for the most interesting facts he has given us.
VISCOUNT TREINCHARD: My Lords, before the Motion is withdrawn I should like to deal with ore matter referred to by the noble Lord. He asked where we should have been in the last war without amateur strategists. I should have said that we should have won the war a year earlier.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

URBAN DISTRICT OF OAKHAM ORDER.
VISCOUNT CLIFDEN: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend the Duke of Devonshire, I beg to move that this Order be approved.
Moved, That the Order made by the Secretary for the Home Department under the Sunday Entertainments Act, 1932, and laid before the House on Wednesday last be approved.—(Viscount Clifden.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned.