HL Deb 20 February 1947 vol 145 cc851-7

4.47 p.m.

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (THE EARL OF LISTOWEL)

My Lords, this is a short and quite uncontroversial measure, and its intention of removing what has been a source of real hardship to many unfortunate people in the past will, I am sure, appeal to noble Lords in all quarters of the House. Shortly put, it will enable the Registrar-General and the local registrars in England and Wales to issue a shortened birth certificate without any reference to parentage or adoption, at a reduced fee of sixpence. The present form of birth certificate, as your Lordships are aware, is a certified copy of an entry of birth, and gives many particulars, both about the child and its parents or adoptive parents. In a very large number of cases the production of a birth certificate is required merely as evidence of age. A school-teacher or an employer, for example, needs only to verify the date of birth of a child or a prospective employee. The use for such purposes of the long and detailed existing certificate imposes a quite unnecessary hardship on those who were born out of wedlock, or have been adopted, or who, for any other reason, do not wish to disclose the details of their parentage. This requirement has not only caused acute anxiety and embarrassment to the unfortunate people concerned, but has in some cases led to the refusal of employment or the loss of jobs. I has even resulted in the forging of certificates, I believe, in order to conceal particulars of parentage.

It is very much to the credit of Scotland that she has moved ahead of us in this respect, and has undertaken an experiment on a sufficiently large scale for it to be a test of success. The Scottish Registration Act of 1934 provided, among other things, for the issue of an abbreviated birth certificate at a fee of sixpence. The experiment has proved so successful in Scotland that we have no hesitation in extending the same facility to England and Wales. The existing unabridged birth certificate will, of course, still be required for a variety of purposes, including evidence of relationship, and the Bill leaves it available to any applicant. At the same time, we want to ensure that the new certificate will not be used only by those who have something to conceal, because in that event the whole purpose of the Bill would be defeated. That is why, following the example of Scotland, we are arranging for the shorter certificate to be issued at sixpence as compared with the present charge for the full certificate of two shillings and sevenpence.

Let me add this, as being an encouraging sign of what has happened in Scotland, and as an indication that the Bill will safeguard the position of those who use the present certificate. What has happened in Scotland is that the majority of the short certificates that have already been issued relate to people born in wedlock. This means that the production or possession of one of these certificates does not give rise to the slightest comment or speculation. I very much hope, and I am sure this hope is shared by your Lordships, that in England and Wales, too, the abridged certificate will rapidly become the type of certificate asked for on all occasions when nothing more is required than evidence of age. I am glad to be able to inform your Lordships that it will be acceptable—this has already been agreed—to the Civil Service Commission, and to the Passport Office, and also for the purposes for which a birth certificate is required under the Shops and Factories Acts. I am confident that it will also be accepted by the local educational authorities, and by employers, who will undoubtedly wish to co-operate to the utmost of their ability in the effort to make this humane reform a success.

What I have said up to now covers the contents of Clause 1 of the Bill. It will be noticed that Clause 2 provides that the Bill is to come into force on January 1, 1948, unless an earlier date is fixed by Order in Council. We should have liked the Bill to come into operation immediately after its passage through both Houses of Parliament, but for administra tive reasons that is not possible. If it should appear that the interval before the Bill conies into force can be shortened, I can assure your Lordships that the necessary steps will be taken.

This Bill will be particularly welcome to the noble Lord, Lord Broughshane, and on behalf of the Government I should like to acknowledge the pioneer work which the noble Lord has done during many years as the principal Parliamentary protagonist of this reform. There is, after all, no more grievous injustice than the penalizing of children or adults because, at the time of their birth, their parents were unmarried. I commend this Bill to your Lordships because it attempts to put an end to this longstanding social injustice and to give a better chance of happiness to those whose sole fault is that they had less than average luck in their parentage. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Listowel.)

4.52 p.m.

LORD LLEWELLIN

My Lords, I am quite certain that every member of your Lordships' House will welcome this short Bill, which brings a measure of justice to a large number of people who have suffered criticism, and who have felt it quite keenly, through an affair with which they themselves had no concern. The other day a friend of mine was asked the date of his birth, and he replied that he was not quite certain of it. The person who had asked him then said: "But everybody must know the date of his birth"; to which my friend answered:" I can assure you that I was there, but I can assure you, equally, that I do not remember anything about it." Taking it a step further back, a child who is unfortunately born illegitimate knows nothing whatever about its birth or about what happened before its birth. It is quite right that this disability—because it is a real disability, especially at a time when, for more and more purposes, these certificates are required—should be removed.

I was very glad to hear the noble Earl tell us of the authorities—such as, for instance, the Passport Office—which have already agreed to accept this abbreviated certificate, but I would like to ask him whether or not the Service Departments have also agreed to accept it. Perhaps some inquiry could be made about that. In the Service Departments there are a number of matters in respect of which a birth certificate is required, but they were not among the Departments mentioned by the noble Earl. I think in a matter of this sort they might well give a lead, and I hope we shall be assured that they will.

It seems to me that this should be the common and normal form of certificate, and I hope it will be. If ever I am asked to produce a birth certificate I can assure the House that I shall have the shortened one at 6d, rather than the longer one at 2s. 7d. I hope that procedure will be adopted by everybody, even though they can afford to pay the extra 2s. 1d. without any inconvenience. In fact, the only place where a disability in this respect ought to exist is in applications to be admitted to this hereditary Chamber, where obviously the shortened certificate would not contain the full facts which it is quite properly required should be known before anybody can come here.

The only criticism I had intended to make of this Bill, before I heard the noble Earl, concerned Clause 2 and the date of its coming into operation. Up to January I, 1948, seems to me to be too long a time to require to get the necessary forms printed, because that is really all that is needed to be done. I would have liked to see an earlier date than that. Too often people in Government Departments say: "That is all right. The date is January of next year, and we have plenty of time in which to get the necessary machinery going to operate this new Bill". It is not as though new offices had to be set up; it it only a question of having the new and shortened forms printed. I hope the noble Earl will do his best to see that the interval is shortened.

I must confess that I do not like a lot of these Orders in Council—we have too many of them—but I should welcome one putting this Bill into operation before January 1 of next year. I believe it can be done. It ought not to need ten months to print these forms. The only amendment I should have liked to see made to the Bill would be the alteration of the date to, say, June 1 next. I believe we could get the forms printed by then. This Bill does not start with us; it comes from another place, and it would obviously be stupid for us to send it back with such an amendment as that. But I hope the noble Earl will do his utmost to see that this Bill, which, in my view, might well have been brought in before—I am saying this about Governments of which I was a member, although this was not a particular concern of mine—will now come into operation at the earliest date possible. I, too, should like to congratulate my noble friend Lord Broughshane who, not only in this House but in another place as well, has pursued this subject for a number of years. I am glad to be in the House this afternoon to see his ambition on at any rate one topic come to fruition.

4.58 p.m.

THE MARQUESS OF READING

My Lords, I should like to congratulate the Government on having found time, in a not entirely vacant programme, for this Bill. It seems to me to be effective, within a very small compass of space, in lifting from the minds of a not inconsiderable number of people a quite undeserved dread which might otherwise have haunted them during the whole of their lives.

4.59 p.m.

LORD BROUGHSHANE

My Lords, I welcome this small and uncontroversial measure which is at long last on its way to the Statute Book. It was only on December 11 last that I ventured to raise this matter in your Lordships' House, and I have, therefore, no reason to complain of the Government's expedition in bringing this Bill forward. I then urged how desirable it was to have a certificate which would be the normal certificate, and that a person who produced the cheaper certificate should not be identified as a person who, for some reason or other, was unwilling to disclose the facts of his birth or any question of adoption. The only thing that occurs to me now is whether it would not be possible for a larger fee than 2s. 7d. to be charged for the full certificate, so that everyone who wanted a birth certificate would naturally take the cheaper form. Like the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, I too trust that it may be found possible to bring this measure into operation at an earlier date than January 1, 1948. I cannot see why there should be so long a delay in getting any necessary forms printed.

This matter first came before me some years ago in connexion with a trust which I administered for the giving of exhibitions to girls to fit them for the medical profession. A very excellent girl won a scholarship, and she came up before me. I congratulated her upon her papers and the good work she had done, and as she was going away I said to her: "By the way, you might just let me have your birth certificate so as to confirm the age as stated on your form." She became scarlet in the face and it quite nonplussed me, as I could not understand what I had said to upset her. I said: "It is quite a small fee," and she said, "Oh, yes, I will send it on." When I got the certificate I found that this girl was illegitimate and was unwilling to disclose the fact. I did not want to know that and I only wanted a certificate to show that she was under eighteen, which she claimed to be when she won the scholarship.

I have always thought it is one of the most extraordinary things in life that the word "bastard" is considered the most opprobrious word in the English language. You may call a person almost any name under the sun, and he may not resent it, but if a person is called a bastard it is considered a most awful thing. Unless violence is immediately done to the person who so describes you, you are considered to be a coward and a person who is not fit for human society. Yet it is the one case in the world where there can be no blame whatever attaching to the person who is slandered. It is really a very extraordinary state of affairs, and I have never been able to understand it. However, this being so, it is a terrible hardship for so many people, not only in the world of exhibitions but in connexion with many other walks of life where a birth certificate is required, to have to disclose the fact that they are illegitimate or adopted.

As I said before, I hope it may be possible to charge rather a larger fee for the full certificate. When I raised the matter in your Lordships' House on December 11 I suggested that in order that people should not be identified in any way it might be desirable that the old full certificate should be issued only in exceptional cases, with the consent of the court or other statutory body. As the Minister has indicated, I think it has been shown in Scotland that this is not really necessary and, especially if the authorities raise the price for the full certificate, the shortened form will be considered the normal certificate. I feel very much obliged to His Majesty's Government for having dealt with this matter so promptly, and I thank the noble Lords who have been good enough to refer to what I have done to secure this result. As in the case that I indicated, and others which have been brought to my attention, I know that anyone, whether a member of your Lordships' House or the public generally, would be horrified to think that so much pain and anxiety should be occasioned to so large a class of the community to whom no blame whatever attaches. I thank the Government again for having introduced this Bill so promptly.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.