RAW MATERIALS.

HL Deb 10 September 1942 vol 124 cc319-42

LORD WINSTER rose to call attention to the necessity for practising economy in raw materials to the fullest possible extent; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, in rising to move my Motion, I must confess to a certain feeling of relief at having at last found a subject upon which I am permitted to speak in public. For some time now I have been feeling very like the dormouse in Alice in Wonderland. Whenever I have wished to speak, the noble Viscount the Leader of the House has risen and in a loud voice cried "Suppress him," and I have been put into the teapot. Not, of course, that I wish to suggest that there is any affinity between the noble Viscount and the Mad Hatter. But at the same time he will understand with what relief I find myself allowed to speak in public. I believe that this Motion is the first of its kind which has dealt solely with the question of raw materials. Although of course the subject has been introduced in other debates, yet this, I believe, is the first time the debate has dealt solely with the subject, and in what I have to say I should like to acknowledge how much I owe to the pages of the Economist, which is indeed a mine of information upon this subject of raw materials, information which has the great merit of being strictly impartial and presented from no political point of view.

When I first went into the matter I began to feel that perhaps my Motion was superfluous because I found that on the 29th July, 1941, Mr. Bevin said that there was "not a manufacturer or a member of a Regional Board who will deny that the problem of raw materials has been largely solved." I do not know if the noble Lord opposite will endorse that view. I think he would be a very happy man if he were able to feel that the problem of raw materials had been largely solved. The fact is that we have to face a growing shortage of labour and of raw materials for essential purposes. Consideration of the matter is governed by the fact that the best and the most economical use of raw materials is only possible if the Fighting Forces look ahead, plan what they will want and stick to their plans. Then orders can be given well in advance, they can be given on a large scale, and they can be given with continuity; all of which will make for economy in the use of the material.

I should like at once to ask if any hold-ups exist in production now, due to the absence of any raw materials. Broadly speaking, the United Nations enjoy often an overwhelming superiority in supplies, and the measures which have been taken to increase the supplies of scarce materials seem to have been very successful. I believe that transport to a certain extent hinders the massing of materials at manufacturing centres. But superiority in supplies of raw materials is not enough: the test is how you use them. To get more war equipment out of existing supplies we must use them more economically, and also improve our distribution methods. I know that coal does hot come within the province of the noble Lord, Lord Portal, but I must refer to it in a sentence or two, because all that we say or do about raw materials will be of little or no avail without coal. Coal is the one material of which we have boundless supplies at home, and which presents no difficulty about shipping, though it may present certain difficulties with regard to transport. I think that the story of coal is a very sad story indeed—the one commodity of which we have more than we need, if we could only get it. But it cannot be said that so far the industry has been pulling its weight in the desperate tug-of-war in which we are engaged. I believe it is the only industry which has not increased its production during the war. Much of what is amiss is due to lack of foresight. The needs of our rising production programme were overlooked, pits were closed and men were absorbed in the Forces. However that may be, we are not at present raising enough for our domestic requirements, and there has been an inadequate response to the call for higher production. I have seen it said of the coal-owners that the heads of no other industry have abandoned so little of their peace-time practice as have the coal-owners. However, we are faced with a serious shortage. All we can do is to wish well to the new Minister of Fuel and Power in the task which is laid upon him, and hope that the new scheme which he is to operate will produce the results that are wanted.

I would like to say one word about the position in Germany. Statesmen on both sides of the Atlantic in their speeches imply that because of the superiority of Allied supplies of raw materials the Axis can therefore be out-produced. I do not think that that follows at all. Germany is very much more skilful in using her raw materials to good advantage than we are, and especially in eking out her scarce resources. To take only one instance, the United Nations have at their disposal ten tons of copper for every one ton that the Axis disposes of; and yet already America is faced with a shortage in copper. I notice that in Germany there is a decline in production of the heaviest armaments, and they are now concentrating on locomotives, on U-boats, and on lighter weapons suitable for use against this country or in the Middle East, but at the same time the salvage campaign for scrap in Germany increases in intensity. The results probably go into stock and not into immediate production, which shows that great reserves still are being accumulated in case it becomes necessary to switch again to heavy armament production. I also notice that the three boards which have hitherto existed in Germany, the boards for iron and steel, for miscellaneous articles and for technical products, have now all been combined into one board for technical products. The whole intention evidently is to make German industry even more flexible yet for meeting the requirements of any change of plan which the war may dictate.

Then, to turn for a moment to the duties and the organization of the Ministry of Production, it seems to me that the Minister enjoys wider powers than were conceded to the noble Lord, Lord Beaverbrook, when he held that office for seven days. There are three keys to production—raw materials, labour, and machine tools. Mr. Lyttelton has told us that he controls raw materials. He is charged with the import programme, with the development of raw material resources of the United Kingdom and the Colonies, and with the work of the Empire Clearing House. The Minister of Production, as I understand it, has power to allocate all raw materials reaching this country, whether by production or by purchase. Some Minister ought to have had these powers three years ago. It has taken a Press and Parliamentary campaign extending over three years to secure what was surely an obvious necessity. The Raw Materials Department has not been transferred to the Minister because of the difficulty in drawing a hard-and-fast line between raw materials and semi-manufactured products. On that account the organization of raw materials has not been taken from the Minister of Supply, who continues to adminster the raw materials Controls and the work concerning the turning of raw materials into semi-manufactured articles.

But the Minister of Production is responsible for planning and programme. He is responsible for what goes into the Raw Materials Department of the Ministry of Supply and for the allocation of what comes out, as well as being responsible for control of imports of raw materials. I notice also that the powers of the Minister in this respect apply fully to the Admiralty where shipbuilding is concerned. The Minister can allocate or take away from the Admiralty as he sees fit, the Admiralty of course having the right of appeal to the War Cabinet. The details of this work of allocation is done by the noble Lord, Lord Portal, as Chairman of the Materials Committee, on which he uses the experience gained in eighteen months at the Ministry of Supply on the War Materials Control.

In connexion with the powers and organization of the work of the Minister of Production, the question of America at once comes into one's mind. I understand that there is a combined Production and Resources Board and a common pool from which each nation can draw, so that, in effect, there is no such thing as a British requirement or an American requirement—there is only an Allied requirement. This organization works to one schedule of allocations and priorities. I feel it is most vital that whatever we are doing in connexion with raw materials should dovetail in with what the United States are doing. I believe at one time there was a proposal to send someone of Ministerial rank to the United States to supervise all that has to be done. I do not know whether the noble Lord will be able to tell us what has matured in that respect, and also what form the bodies to coordinate the joint resources of the two countries have assumed. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Beaverbrook, when he was in America, laid the keel of such an organization well and truly. I cannot refrain from saying that, to me, it is a remarkable illustration of what a galaxy of war-winners we have in this Govern- ment, and of how confident we feel of winning the war, that we feel able to do without Lord Beaverbrook's services to that end. I can only remark that the end is not yet.

I should like to ask the noble Lord if he can tell us something on the subject of Controls. I have noticed much criticism of people being engaged in the administration of Controls who are also interested in the industries affected by them. I should like to know how that is working, and if it is found in actual practice that no harm is done by these gentlemen acting in this dual capacity. I take it that all allocations are operated through the Controls, and that the Controls allocate in accordance with the direction of the Minister of Production. In regard to allocations they have replaced priority. "Priority" is a very blessed word, and we arrived at a state of affairs where we had priorities, first priorities, and absolute priorities, and then perhaps another form of priority which probably meant you got what you wanted. It always seems to me that under this system of priority you could get your priority, but you might not get your allocation of raw materials and what priority calls for. I should like to ask how that works now, and how we work with the United States as regards allocation.

Consideration of this question of economy in raw materials is of course governed by the losses of sources of supply which have been incurred in the process of losing Far Eastern possessions of the British Empire and of our Allies. We have lost 60 per cent. of the world's tin, 90 per cent. of the world's rubber, and very large proportions of wolfram, lead, bauxite, and other materials. I must point out that the existing situation in the Indian Ocean certainly endangers our remaining supplies from the East. The loss of these resources must of course have stimulated a great search for new sources of supply, and in that connexion the Colonies assume a new and most vital interest. Central Africa is one of the very few areas left from which we can replace losses of raw materials such as tin, bauxite, hematite, and vegetable oils.

What steps, generally, are being taken to expand production in the Colonial Empire? Is labour available for such expansion? May I ask what staff the noble Viscount, Lord Swinton, took out with him to Africa from this particular point of view? It is necessary to expand Colonial production on an enormous scale. What is being done to intensify rubber production in Ceylon and East and West Africa? Is the system of cash bonuses for rubber production in Ceylon having good results? What is being done to revive abandoned or neglected plantations such as exist in the British Cameroons? What is being done as to the sources of wild rubber in Tanganyika? There are minerals in the Gold Coast, Nigeria, Northern Rhodesia, Cyprus, British Guiana, Ceylon—what is being done to investigate the possibilities and stimulate increased production there? Then, again, these questions all apply to Allied Governments who have Colonial possessions. Are our resources and efforts being pooled with theirs? I recollect that there was an Anglo-French agreement concluded in 1939 which provided for the pooling of all material resources. Could we be told how that is working?

Could we be told also something about what is being done in regard to substitution of materials? There are great possibilities of economies being effected in the alteration of existing specifications to more economical materials. I have heard of one instance where, by substitution, the cost of a very widely-used article was reduced from £2 to 2s. This question of substitution has become one of vital importance in view of the absorption of the normal supply of raw materials. It is urgent to do everything possible to find or manufacture substitutes for the materials lost to us. Substitution also may be a means of making great economies in shipping space. Apart from the question of substitution, can it be said that the profit motive is no longer allowed in any way to govern the use or choice of raw materials in any direction? Again, how far has it been found possible to relax peace-time safety factors in construction and engineering? In peace-time those safety factors were usually calculated upon a very ample and generous scale, and it seems to me that by reducing those safety factors, but still keeping well within the limit of actual safety, great economies of raw materials might be effected. Similarly, economies might be effected by relaxing unduly high peace-time tests and standards of inspection. Probably also economies can be effected by the greater concentration of industries.

Any discussion of economies in the use of raw materials must of course bring us to the question of shipping. Shipping is already a bottle-neck, although I think it would be only right to pay a tribute to the work of the Minister of War Transport in this respect, work which I know, from my own sources of information, has met with very great success indeed, and has effected very considerable improvement. But how far is production held up at the moment by shortage of raw materials due to lack of shipping? How far do military requirements for shipping impede the imports of raw materials? It is no good sending Armies overseas if we by sending them prevent ourselves from importing the raw materials with which to make their weapons and to equip them. Are we able at the present moment to import sufficient raw materials to employ all the labour which is being absorbed into our factories, and if we are not are any further reductions of foodstuffs or of some necessities possible? Are we really yet down to civilian brass tacks? It is certain that we must give labour those raw materials even if we have to sacrifice yet more of our comforts. Again, can we import more raw materials by speeding up the turn-round of ships? I have seen it stated that the import of raw materials is actually on the down grade, not only because of the loss of sources of supply but because of dwindling shipping space.

If I may mention in particular one or two of the raw materials with which we are concerned. I will do so, and say a word or two about the position in regard to each of them. First on my list would be aluminium and magnesium. Those are metals which have only comparatively recently been raised to the metallic peerage. They are rather newcomers, but, as so often happens, they are already proving more important and valuable than some of the older ones. But the demand both for aluminium and magnesium is expanding, and so important are these metals to the production of ammunitions that their comparative availability to the Allies and to the Axis may very greatly affect the course of the war. Germany is very well off in regard to raw materials for the manufacture of aluminium, and so is the United States. The Axis and the Allies are equally well supplied with raw materials for the manufacture of aluminium and of magnesium. It is not the supply of raw materials in this case, but it seems to be the manufacturing capacity which is the crux. I understand we have gained a lead now over the Axis; that the Axis did hold the lead in the output of both these metals up to about 1941, but that since then we have gained the lead. In that respect the position in regard to both aluminium and magnesium is satisfactory, though I am afraid that in regard to aluminium our Ally Russia has, unfortunately, lost most of her output, which will no doubt have to be made good by the United States and ourselves. It seems to me there is reason to hope that both in regard to aluminium and magnesium the Axis will continue to lose its lead, and that the lead will be enjoyed by the Allies.

Manganese is essential to steel and iron production. There again the position should be satisfactory provided events do not go badly in the Indian Ocean, but as such a very great proportion of the remaining supplies of manganese ore come to us from India, the threat to our communications in the Indian Ocean does, of course, loom very large indeed. Mercury at one time gave us cause for alarm, but now the position in that respect seems to be all right. So it is probably in regard to tin, although we have suffered very serious losses of our supplies there, and, what is almost more serious than the loss of supplies of tin, we have in the Far East lost such very great smelting capacity also, which is possibly even of more importance that the loss of the tin itself, as the Allied refining capacity does not appear to equal the supplies of ore which are available. But it does not appear that a serious shortage need be contemplated, because stocks are good and we do recover tin from waste products. The restriction of the use of tinplate and the substitution of other materials for tin are of very great importance, and possibly the noble Lord may be able to tell us something of what is being done in that respect. It would also be very interesting to know what is the position about Cornish tin. What is being done to develop and expand that production, and also the production of Nigerian tin? In view of our present situation, it is interesting to reflect that before the war Nigerian output was restricted to 6,000 tons per annum. Now we have to try to expand.

I would like to ask something, too, about copper which is probably one of the most important of the munitions metals. I believe that a bomber contains no less than two miles of copper wire, and a battleship is said to contain 2,000,000 lbs. of copper. If those facts are so they illustrate the enormous importance of copper as a munitions metal. Here it is good news to know that the Axis is very short, and that she has to depend upon eking out stocks by scrap recovery and substitution, with all of which she is very clever indeed. It is also noticeable that the only large source of supply is in Russia, in the Urals and beyond, and that the best developed mines in Russia are in the Southern Caucasus, which enables one to understand certain military movements in process at this moment. Japan can draw no supplies from her conquests, but she has very large stocks and no shortage need be anticipated for her. A remarkable thing is that although the United Nations control such an overwhelming amount of the world's supply of copper, such is the vast production programme of America that she already is faced with a shortage, but of course is making characteristic efforts to expand her production and at the same time to economize in consumption. One thing which is satisfactory in regard to copper is that the Non-ferrous Metal Control has been able to keep the price down to £68 per ton as compared with the figure of £138 which we were paying for copper in the last war. The position with regard to substitutes is very difficult because substitute materials are in shorter supply than copper, and it is evident we must meet the possibility of shortage by still further reducing civilian consumption and by making an intensified drive for scrap.

I want also to ask the noble Lord if he can take into consideration the position in regard to paper. I realize the shipping position regarding paper, but I still believe that many economies are possible in the use of paper and that many ways still exist in which the consumption of paper might be reduced. At the same time things are certainly very difficult indeed for book publishers and newspaper publishers. I think it is re- markable that the newspapers have been able to face up to the situation and deal with the position so as to give us such good papers as they continue to provide. There is a very great dearth, however, of certain books—children's books and light fiction by popular authors in the sixpenny type of edition. I do not think we should overlook the necessities in this respect. People do require to get away from the strain of their work. I myself felt badly in need of a thriller after preparing this speech on raw materials, and I can sympathize with airmen who like to read No Orchids for Miss Blandish when they return from their jobs. I hope it may be found possible slightly to increase the quotas, and perhaps give a slightly increased quota for the purposes of which I have spoken. It would, I think, give valuable results.

May I also ask what is happening about printing done for our Allies here? imagine that the American Army is cursed with the same rash of Army Forms from which we suffer here. Where does the paper on which they are printed come from? Does it come from our stock or not? I hope also that something can be done about paper for another reason. In large camps which are springing up where contractors are carrying out big works employing thousands of men in remote districts, the men sometimes never see newspapers at all. There are none available for them. I think that is unfortunate, and if more paper could be made available so that there could be a wider distribution of newspapers in such places I am sure it would meet a real need.

I say nothing on account of time about iron and steel or hematite, but I would like to say a word about rubber. There, it seems to me, we have the most serious situation of all in regard to raw materials. I am bound to say that our difficulties in this respect are due to failure to look ahead and envisage the possibility of war with Japan and the possible consequent loss of sources of supply. Because of that lack of foresight stocks were not accumulated and no preparations were made for synthetic rubber production. That failure to look ahead with the serious difficulties which have followed has been made the subject of an inquiry by the Senate of the United States of America. Here, of course, we have had recourse as usual to the whitewash bucket. There has been no inquiry at all. That lack of prevision has had the most serious, and will have very serious, results on the conduct of the war. I wonder if at any time someone did point out the practical certainty of Japan coming into the war and the advisability of checking consumption of rubber and building up stocks of that essential material which comes from the Far East.

The United States is planning a very rapid expansion of synthetic rubber production. The plan is to produce as much as 700,000 tons per annum. That is a very ambitious programme, because the technical difficulties are very great and there is already a bottle-neck in America in regard to certain raw materials required for the production of synthetic rubber. At the same time, several firms in America have manufactured synthetic rubber on a commercial basis for some time. I understand that we do not intend to make synthetic rubber here, and that we are going to leave the matter to the United States because she has oil and we would have to use more shipping in order to get oil, or extract oil from coal of which unfortunately we are unable to get adequate supplies. It is quite evident that we have been caught short of supplies, and we ought not to have been caught short if there had been the proper foresight which average common sense should have dictated.

I hope very much that the Minister within the limits of public security—I fully realize the importance of that point—will be able to tell us something about the steps which are being taken in this matter of rubber supplies. Optimists have told me that we hold very large stocks and that a shortage is unlikely to occur before American synthetic production gets going. I wish I could believe what the optimists tell me, but I find difficulty in doing it and I would like to ask what steps are being taken to ensure adequate supplies of rubber for essential purposes, whether those steps are proving satisfactory and what steps have been taken, for instance, to increase the output of reclaimed rubber. Is it really certain that the United States will be able to meet the immediate needs of the United Nations for raw rubber? I apologize to your Lordships for having taken so long in developing what I fear is rather a dry subject, but I hope that at any rate my Motion will have provided the noble Lord with a peg upon which he will be able to hang his hat. I beg to move.

THE MINISTER OF WORKS AND PLANNING (LORD PORTAL)

My Lords, first I would like to read the Notice of my noble friend, which is "to call attention to the necessity for practising economy in raw materials to the fullest possible extent, and to move for Papers." I would like, if I may, to congratulate my noble friend on the fulness of his remarks. He has covered a very large and wide field, and if in my remarks I do not answer all his questions it is because I do not want to keep your Lordships too long, and also because he has perhaps in some ways greater knowledge than I have of some of the subjects discussed. My experience in regard to raw materials started when I served three different Ministers of Supply, the present Home Secretary, the present Minister of Supply, on two occasions, and also my noble friend Lord Beaverbrook. It was during that period of a year and a half that I was responsible for raw materials to those three Ministers. When I moved to my present Ministry the present Minister of Production asked me to take on the allocation of raw materials which had previously been done by the present Minister of Aircraft Production.

As this subject has not been debated before in your Lordships' House, I would like to give you a picture of the difficulties of raw materials as I have seen them. I would divide those difficulties into three stages. The first stage was before France went out of the war, when, although we were cut off from a great part of Europe, we had nearly the whole world from which to draw raw materials. You had then the natural difficulties that occur with shipping during the war, but the position was comparatively easy in the stage to which I am now referring. That was stage number one. Stage number two of raw materials was when France went out of the war: Europe was overrun by the Germans and we were faced with the necessity of a much longer haul for our raw materials. And so great difficulties arose in regard to the shipping situation. The third stage, to which Lord Winster has alluded, developed when Japan came into the war and overran Malaya and Burma and the Dutch East Indies. It made our task even more difficult. The difficulties were increased for other reasons also. There are two other aspects of this question at which we must look. One relates to when the Americans brought in their Defence Bill and the other to when they came into the war. Both these events occasioned increased pressure on our raw materials. We were confronted with the fact that our Allies now required raw materials at the same time as ourselves. With regard to the question of shipping it must be patent to all your Lordships that that must be the first governing factor with regard to the bringing of raw materials into this country. As my noble friend Lord Winster said, the only raw material of our own which we have in this country is coal. I am not going to discuss coal to-day, but it will be clear to your Lordships that everything else must depend on shipping.

With regard to the question of shipping I may say in passing that I am very glad that the Minister of Food is here to-day. In the beginning of 1941 those of us who served on the Import Committee asked my noble friend the Minister of War Transport to give us, if he could, his approximate estimate for shipping for 1941. The Minister of Food, I remember, used to compete with the then Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Supply to see who could get the best of the argument. It was all done in a very friendly way, however, so that we were generally able to share our troubles together. As I have indicated we used to worry the present Minister of War Transport asking what he could give us. It was a difficult problem we set him when we asked him at the beginning of 1941 to tell us what we could get by the end of 1941. It must have rather taxed his imagination. At the beginning of 1941 he gave a figure of many millions of tons of goods which he said he thought we would be able to bring over to this country. At the end of 1941, as my noble friend Lord Woolton I know will agree, the whole of that programme of many millions of tons was fulfilled except for a deficiency of 200,000 tons. That I think was a great feat on the part of the Ministry of War Transport.

Now in 1942 we have to reckon with Japan being in the war against the Allies, and we have to take raw materials to Russia. Ships are wanted for all sorts of things besides the transport of raw material and food. The burden on the Ministry of Transport has become heavier, and their difficulties have increased day by day. I do not think that until you sit down and study the question you can really grasp the full extent of these diffi- culties. Lord Winster has paid a tribute to the work which has been done. We thank the Minister of Food for the size of our stomachs and we should also like to thank the Minister of War Transport for the work which he has done in bringing food to these shores. If you take shipping as the principal factor governing the import of raw material, two other essential matters are those to which Lord Winster has already alluded. Economy is one of those factors, and the other, which I myself was going to bring up if he had not already done so, is substitution. Those two things go hand in hand and along with allocations they are under the charter of the Minister of Production. If you want economy of raw materials the question of salvage must be very seriously considered. We, in this country, before the war, were not, I think, salvage-minded. I think all your Lordships will agree with that. However, the need was recognized and the great salvage drive was started at the Ministry of Supply, whence it is now directed. The movement grew and the Salvage Board was instituted.

Let me refer to three important matters in connexion with the salvage campaign in this country to-day. The first matter to which I wish to refer is the recovery of iron and steel scrap. There was a certain amount being recovered in this country, and then in August, 1941, the Americans told us that they wanted scrap for themselves. We were also under the necessity of saving shipping space, and so we started a big drive for scrap. The Ministry which I now represent—I did not represent it then—was asked to take over the handling of scrap. Now we have a regular scrap collection in this country. It amounts to 80,000 tons of scrap in the week. Of that an average of 26,000 tons is collected for the iron and steel recovery campaign by the Ministry of Works and Planning and some 6,500 tons is brought in through the local authorities. That gives you a figure of approximately 4,000,000 tons of scrap a year. At the time when we were cut off from America we were importing half a million tons of scrap a year into this country. The collection of scrap has had other repercussions besides helping to offset the cutting down of imports. It saves the importation of ore, and one ton of scrap means a saving of approximately two tons of fuel, which would have been necessary in conjunction with the three and a quarter tons of ore which each ton of scrap replaces. So by this collection of scrap we are saving millions of tons of fuel a year, which as my noble friend I am sure will recognize is a great thing.

From the question of scrap steel I go in the second place to waste paper. Nine months ago about 12,500 tons of waste paper were being collected a week. As you know supplies of paper are becoming less and less. It is encouraging to know that the rate of recovery has been raised to 18,000 tons a week. That has been brought about entirely through the help of the great newspapers. They started their waste paper recovery association and they pushed up the results of the recovery campaign by 33 per cent., I should like to take the opportunity of thanking them for their services. I repeat that we are now saving 18,000 tons of waste paper a week. That again saves the importation of pulp—a further economy in the use of shipping space. As I am dealing with paper, and as my noble friend Lord Winster mentioned the use of substitutes, perhaps I may take the opportunity of mentioning what is being done in connexion with the use of substitutes for the making of paper. Not only are we using waste paper, which was almost unheard of before the war except in the case of a few mills, but we are employing other substitutes. Before the war one-third of the great paper industry of this country was using esparto grass, which comes from North Africa. The supply of esparto grass has been completely cut off, and the paper-makers in this country are now using straw, which was used in countries like Italy before the war, but never in this country, to take the place of esparto grass. The only limitation to the use of straw is the boiling capacity of the various paper mills. The yield from straw is not as good as that from esparto grass, but it is a valuable substitute. Strictly speaking, that does not come under the heading of salvage, but I mention it because I have been discussing the question of paper.

Your Lordships will not expect me, I am sure, to go into every question connected with salvage, but I propose to refer later to rubber (which is my third point in connection with salvage) and to try to answer what my noble friend Lord Winster has said. Perhaps I might mention that the Ministry of Supply are now collecting large amounts of waste rubber. Non-ferrous metals, bones and string are also being collected. It will help enormously if every citizen becomes "salvage-minded" and plays his part, because salvage is of the utmost importance to the country at the present time.

A point of great importance is the cutting down of the various raw materials allocated for civilian use. I do not think it is generally realized how much is being done in this direction. I shall be referring later on to timber. We are recovering an enormous amount of timber from the bombed areas, which is being put under the Timber Control and used for many purposes. Iron and steel form the basis of almost the whole war effort of ourselves, the United States of America and Russia. Almost everything that we require for war purposes needs iron and steel. During the last three weeks an American Mission representing the American iron and steel trade has been in this country. I have met the members of this Mission on four or five occasions. They have been discussing the position with the Iron and Steel Control in this country, and nothing but good can come of their visit; their difficulties have been explained to us, our difficulties have been explained to them, and they are going back with a very different picture in their minds from that which they had when they came to this country. When speaking of iron and steel, perhaps I might mention that under 7 per cent. of our iron and steel is being used for domestic and civilian purposes; the remainder is used for direct or indirect military purposes.

I now pass to the question of timber, which is in many ways all-important at the present time. We were not producing timber in any quantity in this country before the war. Most of our timber came from Scandinavia, and, when Norway was overrun, the supply stopped. We imported timber on a very large scale before the war. I wish that I could be more explicit by giving you figures, but there are certain figures which I cannot very well give here. At any rate very little timber was produced here before the war, but we have now increased the timber production in this country more than eight times. That has been possible owing to the great help given to us by our Dominions. We have military companies, dealing with timber, from Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and other companies from Newfoundland, while even British Honduras has sent some of its people to help us. Those who have seen these men at work in Scotland and elsewhere will realize the great work which they are doing. We are now supplying, from the resources of this country, the whole of the mining timber which we require, and the amount of timber which we import has been very considerably cut down. Only 3 per cent. of our timber is now available for civilian and domestic consumption. Timber from bombed areas was at one time more readily available for civilian consumption, but this is now also controlled.

My noble friend Lord Winster then went on to refer to rubber, which I agree is one of the raw materials which gives us more to think about than most of the others. When Japan overran Malaya, my noble friend Lord Beaverbrook, who was then Minister of Supply, was in America. The actual overrunning of the country happened very quickly, and we had to do what we could to try to meet the position which was created. We have cut down our crude rubber consumption by 40 per cent., and we are working very closely with the United States of America on this question of saving rubber. Very good results can often be achieved by letting the United States know what we are doing here and by their letting us know what they are doing. If they are doing a little better than we are, we can push people here to do a little better and try to reverse the position. That is not a bad way of dealing with these questions. Crude rubber, as I say, has been cut by 40 per cent. Capacity for dealing with reclaimed rubber has been planned, and results should be forthcoming in a few months' time. We have made plans to utilize four times as much reclaimed rubber as we used before the Japanese came into the war. I can say quite definitely that our capacity for dealing with reclaimed rubber is more than sufficient to cope with the amount of reclaimed rubber which we shall be able to use in this country. I hope that that will be considered satisfactory.

LORD STRABOLGI

Does that mean that you can deal with all the scrap that you can get?

LORD PORTAL

In the case of some commodities it is possible to use 40 to 50 per cent. of reclaimed rubber, but in the case of others only 15 to 20 per cent. can be used. We try to keep our figure in line with what we find the Americans are able to use. If we are using a certain total amount of rubber, a certain fraction of that total can be in the form of reclaimed rubber.

LORD STRABOLGI

Do you mean that we are having enough plant prepared to deal with all the rubber scrap in this country?

LORD PORTAL

I am unable to give any figure for the amount of rubber scrap that there is in the country at the present time, but the best way of dealing with reclaimed rubber is to have sufficient plant to deal with all the reclaimed rubber which we can use. That is what we are doing. My noble friend Lord Winster then referred to the question of synthetic rubber. This question has been discussed by us with the United States, and it is considered that the United States of America had better supply the synthetic rubber that we want here, for the reasons given by my noble friend. The great value of the "hands across the sea" between ourselves and America is that in some cases they can produce the things that are wanted and in others we can do so. The Minister of Production has discussed in another place the question of whether it is advisable to put up a small plant here to deal with a certain amount of synthetic rubber, and that question is in course of being settled at the present time. Synthetic rubber, as a whole, is going to be supplied. One more word on rubber. The noble Lord, Lord Winster, raised the question of whether common sense had been shown in view of the possibility that Japan might come into the war. Looking at it perfectly fairly, I should have said that common sense was shown on the question of stocks, but perhaps one might have had more vision beyond the ordinary common sense. The stocks at the time, compared with other raw materials, were more than adequate, though in the light of what has actually happened those stocks may not appear so impressive as they would otherwise have done.

There are two or three other commodities which I will deal with quite shortly because I think they are of interest to your Lordships. There is, for example, the question of textiles. The Limitation of Supplies Order and the rationing of clothing by the coupon system have cut the consumption of textiles as a whole in this country to probably not more than a quarter of the pre-war level. In the case of clothing, allowing for footwear on which economy measures cannot proceed as far as with other articles of clothing, the ration available is less than half pre-war, in fact about 45 per cent. In household textiles the present allowance is only 10 per cent. of the pre-war supplies. Some textiles such as furnishing fabrics are no longer produced at all. The details I have just given are interesting showing what reduction has been effected in the consumption of materials for civilian purposes.

I should have said when talking of rubber that besides cutting down rubber by 40 per cent., as has been done, we have stopped the making of all sorts of rubber goods in this country: for example, Wellington boots. They are practically done away with except for the Navy and for other essential war purposes. Substitutes are put into belting and into cables, and all these savings will be cumulative. All kinds of things have been thought of—even the homely hot-water bottle has been abolished. That is important to many people, though I do not suppose any of your Lordships suffer from cold feet. All these questions of substitution have been dealt with week by week. It is in many respects a question of substitution rather than economy, but the two things are so closely connected that you have to mention them together.

There is one other point before I come to allocation. The noble Lord, Lord Winster, mentioned the question of tin and the development of tin production. Before I left the Ministry of Supply that question was already being dealt with in regard to Cornwall. The maximum amount of tin is being got out of Cornwall at the present time and labour which is one of the essential factors is being provided from other parts of Cornwall. The other material I want to mention, in which there has been a development of much interest, is flax. Before the war flax was obtained mostly from the Baltic States and the Low Countries. When they were overrun we had to get flax from other places. At that time the only other sources were Egypt and Canada. Flax is now being grown for us in Australia and New Zealand and we have got the cultivation of flax extended in Egypt and also in Canada. The production of flax is also being expanded four times in Northern Ireland, and in this country there are 50,000 acres of land laid down under green flax. Green flax is no doubt not of the same value as ordinary flax but the green flax that is being grown in this country is, nevertheless, a valuable contribution.

This development of the production of flax in the various countries I have mentioned has been of great help since the flax-growing countries from which we drew our supplies were overrun by the énemy. Before the war, the only place that I know of where flax was grown in this country for some years was on the Sandringham Estate. I remember it well because I was asked if I would see whether that flax was suitable for paper-making in this country. There is also the question of hemp, which has also disappeared. We are using sisal instead of hemp. I should like to pay a tribute to the help which has been given by the Secretary of State for the Colonies and his Department. People have been sent out to Central Africa, and the Empire Clearing House has been very valuable as the co-ordinating centre under the Minister of Production for collecting data about each country's requirements. We have had every assistance from the Colonial Office in the development of the resources of the Colonies and in dealing with the labour question in the Colonies.

I should like to give one more example of substitution. When iron and steel ran short in this country we had to cut off the making of many Nissen huts. During the last war many of us lived in the Nissen hut, which is supposed to be still the best and most comfortable, but its manufacture unfortunately eats up an enormous amount of iron and steel. There are now seven types of hut being made, some of plywood, others of asbestos cement, others of concrete, of sawdust cement, and so on. When we started manufacturing the plywood hut and got it going, plywood ran short and we had to go on to the other materials. All these things are continually being looked into. What we have to remember from day to day is that labour and raw materials are now playing a far greater part in the direction of production than they were before. As to the noble Lord, Lord Winster's question about hold-ups in our production, I should say definitely that there is no hold-up at the present time. There are the usual bottle-necks but no hold-ups due to raw materials.

I should like to allude to the question of allocations to which the noble Lord referred. These allocations in this country were started under the auspices of the present Minister of Aircraft Production and they have, I think, been functioning satisfactorily since. We have been short of supplies during the last six months, and if there is any appeal it has to go first to the Minister of Production. But during the last six months there has been no occasion for any of the Services or any of the Departments to go to him. I should like to describe the way the allocation works in this country. At the outbreak of war we had an impressive scheme of priority certificates, all worked out and ready for use, but before the flood of certification began better counsels fortunately prevailed. Instead we have from the outset developed the alternative plan of allocation. The allocation method is to share out the flow of materials such as steel and of all other resources in the right proportions over the whole range of minimum essential requirements. In that way the seven per cent. of steel found by experience to be indispensable for domestic ironware and for the repair and maintenance of essential civilian factories is as certain of being supplied as is the 93 per cent. of munitions and war factory requirements.

The scale of provision of tanks and guns and warships and aircraft and other munitions is worked out in advance, having regard to the strategic plans, and to the labour and production and shipping capacity available. The corresponding quantities of materials are re-calculated by Production Departments at least every quarter for the year ahead, so that the right supplies can be arranged. Every three months these supplies as they become available are shared out by the Materials Committee in the right proportions over the whole range of the country's requirements, taking into account the progress so far achieved and all the relevant circumstances. The decisions of the Materials Committee are carried into effect by the Departments and the raw material Controls, so that all factories can be supplied with the quan- tities they need to produce whatever is required of them. The labour and machine tools are allocated in accordance with the same overall plan Priority problems are, of course, bound to arise continually as the result of unexpected emergency needs or of plant breakdowns. These are, however, usually short-period difficulties of the bottle-neck variety, and machinery is in being in the form of the Central Priority Committee in which the Departments concerned come together and work out their minimum needs so that a ruling can be given which will ensure the best use of the limited resources until such time as new arrangements can be completed. By and large, therefore, resources are shared out or allocated in accordance with the strategical plan.

There is one further word I wish to say before I sit down, with reference to what the noble Lord said about America. In America to-day we have the Combined Raw Materials Board, which was started when the Prime Minister and Lord Beaverbrook went over to America. On that Board sits a direct representative of the Minister of Production, and that representative is Sir Clive Baillieu. That Board is an overall Board—that is to say, it has the central control of pooling of all raw materials. That means that we must be in constant touch with the Board. Whatever the supplies may be, and wherever they come from—from the Empire or anywhere else—they come to that Board to be allocated to ourselves, to Russia, or to any other of the Allied Nations. We work in the closest touch with the Board. I am not going to discuss to-day the question of the Combined Production and Resources Board which was initiated on the other side by the present Minister of Production when he went to America two or three months ago. Sir Robert Sinclair represents the Minister of Production on that Board. It is obvious that these two Boards must work closely together because you must ally production with raw materials.

As to the criticism of Controls mentioned by the noble Lord, if you take iron and steel and all the various commodities concerned, non-ferrous metals and so on, I think the results have been eminently satisfactory. I am sorry for the people who run these Controls. Most of them belong to the trades concerned, and my dealings with them convince me that they are men who forget all about their own particular interests, and therefore do not always remain very friendly with some of their neighbours with whom they were associated in the past. Apart from what the various Ministries do, whatever success after three years of war we have had in this matter has depended in large measure on the strength of these Controls. I say to your Lordships that, after all, these Controls have not Only been successful, but they have yielded other results—they have given us the present Minister of Production, who was formerly in charge of non-ferrous metals, and the present Minister of Supply, who was at the head of the Iron and Steel Control before he took on his present duties.

I have been rather long, but this is the first time that the question has been debated. What we have to remember is this. When I speak on behalf of the Minister of Production, I say "Use less"; when I speak on behalf of the Minister of Food, I say, "Eat less," and when I speak on behalf of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I say "Spend less" These are the three objects we keep in view, and I think that in what I have said I have answered the noble Lord as fully as I can.

LORD WINSTER

My Lords, you will agree that the noble Lord has given an account of his stewardship in which he may take legitimate pride. I should like to thank the noble Lord for the great courtesy he has shown in answering so fully the far too numerous questions that I addressed to him. In regard to scrap, the figures which the noble Lord gave of what is being reclaimed were very impressive, but I may remind your Lordships that figures like these must always be related to the figure of what is possible before one can express any opinion as to whether they are satisfactory or not. These drives for scrap tend to peter out, and it might be a very good thing if there were a monthly target so that one could see whether endeavours are being kept up to the mark. I should like to ask whether a national survey has been begun as to what is possible in the matter of reclamation. Reclamation of scrap is very important, especially where steel is concerned.

In regard to timber, the position seems to be very good. I was very interested a little time ago, in the Forest of Dean, to see timber which was planted in the last war being felled for use in this war. Again I wonder if there is any shortage which is accountable for the lack of development of wooden aeroplanes. I have heard that reason ascribed. I hope it is not so. In regard to rubber, I paid great attention to what the noble Lord said, but I am bound to confess he did not entirely relieve my anxieties on this point. I willingly agree that great efforts are being made to economize and to extend production, but it was very clear from the noble Lord's remarks that we are by no means round the corner yet as regards rubber, and that constant endeavour and vigilance are necessary in that respect. What he said about what is done in the Colonies to expand production sounded very satisfactory indeed, and all those concerned are to be congratulated. Also what was said about allocations and priorities was extremely satisfactory. It was clearly shown that the system of allocations has replaced that of priorities with good results. We were told that there have been no appeals against these allocations. That might be due to the persuasiveness of the noble Lord where those to whom he allocates are concerned.

If this debate has served no other purpose, it has had great value in drawing from the noble Lord the remarks he made regarding our relations with America. All that he said in that respect must have given great satisfaction to your Lordships. I remember, before America entered the war, the Prime Minister in one of his speeches said he felt that the affairs of our two nations were inevitably bound to get somewhat mixed. In regard to this matter of raw materials, I hope by now they are inextricably mixed, and will remain so until the conclusion of the war. The noble Lord also performed a good service in clearing up some of the misapprehensions in regard to the matter of Control and showing that some of the criticisms of the gentlemen concerned in working them is unfounded. Again I thank the noble Lord for the courtesy he has shown in answering my questions, and I beg leave to withdrawn my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.