§ 5.47 p.m.
§ LORD BARNBY rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether, in view of the statement of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and of replies made to Questions, they are able to announce relaxation in restrictions applying to transfer of funds to Canada in favour of migrants to that Dominion. The noble Lord said: The subject of this Question is one with which I am satisfied there is widespread sympathy. Moreover, there can be no doubt about the harshness that it aims to correct. It is a matter which has been frequently referred to in your Lordships' House, both in the course of the debates in the last two or three years and by Questions, all of which, alas, since the present Chancellor of the Exchequer came into office, have ceased arousing any apparent sympathy and certainly have brought no relief in actuality. It is for that reason—that it has been so frequently referred to—that there is little need to go in great detail 864 into the arguments which urge a revision of the present practice or of the particular position of Canada. Since this Question was put down, however, the matter has been raised in connection with migration through a debate on Supply in another place. Those who care to read the report of that debate in Hansard will see how strong is the feeling in support of the argument which it is my purpose to make this evening, in the hope that there may be some encouragement of redress. I speak, not with any great hope or expectation, but in the knowledge that it is only by a question being raised sufficiently often that correction can come about.
§ I want, first of all, to refer to a speech by my noble friend, Lord Tweedsmuir, in this House in the course of the recent debate on migration in general. He there set out the particular and peculiar hardships which followed from the policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to Canada, so I will not repeat them. I see that my noble friend the Leader of the House is in his place. I assume he is to reply and, therefore, there is little purpose in my going over matters with which he is so familiar and which I have raised so often myself, to the weariness of your Lordships' House. I would pass to the debate which took place in another place. There support was given and reference made to a letter recently published in The Times from a Member of the House of Commons. It suggested a very practical way, and it brought into the minds of everybody something that had been referred to in both Houses.
§
I now pass to the statement of the Minister, the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, in which he tried to give grounds why it was not possible for the Government to agree to the suggestion that had been put forward. He said:
In 1949 the amount going to Canada in migrants' funds was £8,500,000 sterling.
He added, however, that the figures were not exact and that they included Canada and the United States. In view of the meticulous correctness always followed by the noble Viscount the Leader of the House, I think it is very regrettable that in another place there should have been this latitude in a manner which is so misleading. I hope the noble Viscount may be able to clear up that point, if he cares
865
to refer to it at all to-day. To save your Lordships' time, I will merely emphasise a great deal of what has been said already in both Houses. The plain fact of the matter is that it is suggested that it is not possible to release a larger sum of money to migrants who seek to go to our great Dominioa of Canada. Surely that is very paltry. Considering the great scale of generous assistance given to us by Canada, it would seem reasonable that greater effort could be made to correct these hardships.
§ I believe the immediate position is still that a migrant may take out a maximum of £1,000, released over a period of four years. That is the same amount as was allowed before sterling was devalued. What an astonishing suggestion by the Chancellor, that he cannot at least make up the amount to what was originally intended before sterling was devalued! Apart from that, however, so paltry an amount as that cannot give any encouragement to migration to Canada. There is no need to comment upon that fact because it is so obvious. How can an intending migrant be expected to sell up in this country and face a future in Canada, with wife and family, upon so meagre an amount? This sum is released only to a married man, regardless of family, and I ask the noble Viscount whether it would not be possible for it to be regarded as a per capita amount, and for the amount now allowed to migrating families to be raised, first, by the difference brought about by devaluation, and secondly, by an extension of the same amount to a married man and his wife, plus (if not the whole amount) at least £100 per child.
§ My Lords, I have spent a good deal of time in Canada. By reason of being in business there, I have had occasion to hear at first hand how deep is the desire for migrants from this country to Canada. It cannot be expected that Canada can get the flow of technicians that is required to man her expanding business except from this country, and she will not get them under the present limitations. May I interpolate here that the present arrangements contemplate a substantial immigration into Canada of people of origins other than the United Kingdom, such as displaced persons from Europe; and, by devious means, much better consideration in the way of getting 866 funds is given to people of other origins than is given to people from the United Kingdom.
§ In conclusion, I would just remind your Lordships of the brilliant future that is progressively developing for Canada, with its bounteous discoveries of oil, and the unearthing of deposits of iron ore and other metals. That must require an industrial development in the secondary industries of Canada. We want to get more technicians to hold key positions in Canada, so that purchases in the future of essential replacements and supplies of machinery of all kinds will come from this country and not from other countries. The policy of His Majesty's Government is deliberately hampering the kind of uplift to our export which has been proved so clearly in the past. The noble Viscount will be well aware that generous treatment is now accorded by the Treasury to the provision of funds for new businesses starting in Canada, where, of course, there is a prospect of complying with the conditions imposed, and this has been set against the interest-free level. Surely, when the shortage of dollars is not an impediment it would not be unreasonable to say that there should be included within this arrangement some redress in respect of the past on those impounded funds, and an encouragement to the future by a more generous release to intending migrants.
§ 5.59 p.m.
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I hope that the noble Lord will allow me to say how much I appreciate his great interest in this matter and how sympathetic a chord he is always likely to strike in the breast of the Government when he discusses these Empire questions. He will understand that I am bound fairly closely to my prepared statement, but any new points that he has brought up this afternoon will be laid most conscientiously before my right honourable friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. Before coming to what I want to say in detail, I should just like to tell the noble Lord that it is not quite such an easy matter as he supposes to throw these funds open to those who wish to migrate. The simple fact is, of course, that increases in concessions in respect of emigration to Canada and the United States have to be balanced against a 867 number of other relaxations which are also desirable—for example, for extra timber and extra imports of food. That is the balance which has to be struck by my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as I feel sure the noble Lord will appreciate. It is certainly not from any wish to stunt Empire migration or to impede purposes which the Government and the noble Lord have in common that restrictions in one form or another have been introduced and are maintained.
I am afraid that I must make it plain that we are not yet in a position to increase the total amount of money which emigrants may transfer to hard-currency countries. But my right honourable and learned friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is announcing in another place this afternoon that all emigrants who can make out a good case will, in future, be permitted to draw in the first year such sums up to the total for four years as they require. The noble Lord, I am sure, appreciates the concession. The amount to be anticipated in this way will be determined in each case on its merits upon application by the emigrant. This is the relaxation which my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations promised to discuss with the Chancellor. The practice which ruled before the emigration concessions were generally reduced in April, 1948, was that emigrants who showed good reason why they should be allowed to do so, were permitted to take out at once up to 50 per cent. of the total; the other 50 per cent, was spread over the last three of their first four years abroad. We are now going to allow this again and, in fact, to go further, since we shall not limit the initial amount to 50 per cent. where good reason is shown that more is needed. As I have said, they will be permitted in future to draw in the first year such sums up to the total for four years as they require. When the emigration concessions were reduced, this facility had to be withdrawn, because of the need to reduce immediately the number of dollars going out of the country. It is hoped that, now that we can afford to re-introduce it, this facility will go far to help those who emigrate, particularly to Canada and the United States, to meet their settling-in expenses and to make a good start in their new world.
868 I hope that the noble Lord will feel that some progress has been made. I have taken special pains to ascertain what more I can say to him, and I can assure him that the question is kept continually under review by my two right honourable friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, who fully realise the importance of the issue and are always anxious to find ways of helping emigrants. I am specially authorised to say that to the noble Lord this afternoon. On that note I hope he will allow me to close with just a further word of thanks to him for raising this issue in the way he has done.
§ 6.4 p.m.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, before the House adjourns, may I express my apologies to the noble Viscount, Lord Addison, for having failed to realise that as he is no longer Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs he would not be replying to my question?