HL Deb 19 July 1956 vol 198 cc1316-22

3.27 p.m.

LORD BARNBY rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether with regard to Chapter 2 (a) 6, and Chapter 2 (b) 2 of the First Annual Report of the Oversea Migration Board (Cmd. 9261), they can now state whether regarding the first an appropriate early statement can be expected, and with regard to the second, if such policy is yet formulated. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the question of the development of the Commonwealth is ever one of solicitude to your Lordships. Migration forms an important part of the conditions which contribute towards that steady development, and so it would seem that the moment is timely for some additional statement to be made upon it. It is a subject which has received consideration at intervals since the war, when it became time to resume the steady flow of migrants from this country to the Dominions. I emphasise "steady flow", because in all matters connected with this there is a tendency to complicate the issue by suggestions: there are those enthusiasts who would see a mass movement, and so complicate and tend to bring into disparagement the whole subject.

But I repeat that discussion would seem timely, for three reasons. There is the impending need for legislation—the Government must by next year have ready their proposals for the renewal of Acts which expire. Then, recently we have had the conference of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers, during which exchanges of view must have occurred between those taking part and the Secretary of State. Lastly, the Secretary of State himself has now completed his tour of the Commonwealth with his visit to Canada. Wisely he has until recently followed a course in Parliament of being reserved in any recommendations or commitments. But now it would seem necessary, for the three reasons I have mentioned, that the subject should be raised, with the hope that he may find it possible to convey something to us.

What we really want is an indication of a more active, rather than a passive, attitude by the Government to this matter.

I recognise that recently the Prime Minister said: If we strengthen the manpower and resources of the Commonwealth as a whole we strengthen ourselves.

So there is no suggestion of an insufficiency of enthusiasm about this matter. But there remain in people's minds earlier statements of an authoritative character which were less clear. I would suggest that there is need for more education of a character which would convey to the younger generation of this country the opportunities which the Commonwealth offers. It would seem that there is room for something better in the curriculum. I know that the Secretary of State himself realises this strongly and we have reason to believe that he has been doing his best to bring about some improvement in that matter.

Naturally finance must govern the whole question of Commonwealth migration, but the finance is more at the receiving end than at the despatch end. Therefore, it may be said that this is a matter for the Dominions rather than for this country. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself has indicated the importance of the proportion of finance available for Commonwealth development, and the suggestion is that we might justifiably see a higher rate expended by the United Kingdom on this matter as a whole. I will not take time to remind your Lordships of the legislation; the subject was last dealt with in 1937, and it is always a matter of some confusion of mind as to what relation the £1½ million voted bears to the annual expenditure, which seems so meagre, of only about £150,000.

Recently, there was in The Times newspaper an article which dealt with the dangers of the rigidity of our economy, and that doubtless caught the eye of most of your Lordships and suggested the importance of some overriding considerations of the realignment of our economy. It is because that is in the minds of many that it is urged that migration, or the rate of it, from this country to the Dominions, justifies more active attention by the Government and calls for some guidance of public thinking. Again, I would add that automation, which has been so much mentioned in the Press of late, seems to be an additional reason for long-range consideration.

That brings me to a point which I will not shirk referring to, and I recognise the Minister's necessary and justifiable concern. There are many industrialists who argue that any outflow of bodies from this country must inevitably be a disadvantage to this country. My Lords, it is that belief with which I most emphatically venture to disagree. I submit that the suggested steady outflow of 250,000 people a year is not unreasonable when it is considered in relation to our past history, the proportion of the gainfully employed people in this country, and the needs of strengthening the ties of the Dominions with the Mother Country. I support, with a most emphatic conviction, the view that exports from this country to the Dominions, which form so large a part of our total exports, are influenced by sentimental ties, and will be influenced in the future by the proportion of our migrants who, out of the total inflow, inescapably rise to the top and become the important purchasers of goods. If the proportion of inflow into the Dominions from this country is high, the higher will be the proportion of our people who obtain these high positions and who will, I submit, be inclined to buy goods of British origin rather than goods of other origin. So, as I say, sentiment enters a great deal into the question.

I mentioned earlier that it was the decision of the Secretary of State, after he took office, to familiarise himself with the position. We have good reason to be convinced that his tours of the Dominions gave great satisfaction there. Those quarters which are interested in Commonwealth development had high hopes that, following his assuming of office and bearing in mind his grasp of the position, there would be a quickening of interest in this matter at home and indications of decision to substitute for a passive attitude a more active one. Those bodies concerned with migration have indeed been grateful for the considerate receptiveness which the Minister has shown. I do not need to remind you that the Secretary of State has at his disposal the Oversea Migration Board, who are established for the purpose of giving such advice to the Minister as may be appropriate and for considering all problems before they pass him for consideration. It is the Report of the Board (Cmd. 9261) to which I particularly refer in my Question, and I would quote from that Report: If the United Kingdom Government wishes to adopt a positive migration policy, and to encourage a high and steady rate of emigration, then our own needs and the needs of the Commonwealth to make it essential that a complementary policy of encouraging larger families should be followed.

The other point to which I drew attention in my Question is the need for some statement, and I support it by another quotation from this Report: …there was an impression that the United Kingdom was not anxious to encourage emigration to the Commonwealth.

Further on it says: The view was expressed that if the United Kingdom Government could see their way to making some sort of declaration that in their view a movement of a given number of people would be entirely helpful in strengthening the Commonwealth, many people who at the moment were hesitating might decide to emigrate.

My Lords, it is on that last point that I suggest to you that there are in our Islands many who still have an adventurous spirit, and whose spirit would give even better results, perhaps, in the atmosphere of progress in the Dominions than it does here. It is they who would maintain this long tradition of flow that would help to develop the Commonwealth as one wishes it to be developed. I beg to put the Question standing in my name.

3.37 p.m.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS (THE EARL OF HOME)

My Lords, I hope I shall never complain of the question of Commonwealth migration being raised in this House. As the noble Lord has said, migration from the United Kingdom plays a very important part in the economy of the Commonwealth. I hope that no-one has the impression that Her Majesty's Government are averse to it. I have on three or four occasions in this House emphasised what the Prime Minister has already said, that we wish to see a steady flow of the right type of emigrants going from the United Kingdom to the various Commonwealth countries, and that we believe—and we think we can say this without any arrogance—that British stock exported from this country to the different Commonwealth countries adds strength to their economies and to their communities.

As the noble Lord, Lord Barnby, will realise, the British Government cannot compel people to leave this country to go to other Commonwealth countries, but each Commonwealth Government, through their High Commissioners in this country, have the fullest facilities to recruit emigrants in whatever way they like to go to the different Commonwealth countries. There are, of course, at the receiving end certain physical limitations, the ability to build houses or hospitals or schools, or to make roads quickly enough to receive the full number of emigrants who may wish to go. But having said that—and I am not going to embark on a long speech on migration to-day—I would again emphasise that Her Majesty's Government do wish to see a steady flow of migrants from this country to the other Commonwealth countries.

The noble Lord's Question really draws attention to two points which were raised in the last Report of the Oversea Migration Board. First, the suggestion was that if Her Majesty's Government could make a declaration that in their view the movement of a given number of people would be helpful in strengthening the Commonwealth, many people who were hesitating would, or might then, decide to emigrate. I will have that suggestion considered in the review of various aspects of migration which is necessary before the Empire Settlement Acts expire in 1957. I am bound to say to the noble Lord that my experience of the fixing of a figure for a target—which has been a popular exercise in so many public fields since the war—has been that in almost every case the target has been made irrelevant almost before it has been written down on paper. Nevertheless, I will have this proposal considered.

I may tell your Lordships here, as a matter of fact, that in the five years 1951 to 1955—which is the latest period for which we have accurate figures—350,000 persons emigrated from this country to other Commonwealth countries. So we have kept up a fairly steady flow, even in years of full employment in this country. Indeed, in some ways it is remarkable that so many people have been willing to go overseas.

The second point was the suggestion that if the Government wish to encourage a high and steady rate of migration it is essential that a complementary policy to encourage larger families should be followed. That does not quite come under my Office, but I will certainly convey the suggestion to the Minister of Health, who is already interested in any measures which might be taken further to stimulate the birth rate. Again, I will also put that suggestion to the Oversea Migration Board. The reason I am going to tell my noble friend that I do not want to make a statement to-day on the migration policy which we shall have to adopt early in 1957 is that the Oversea Migration Board will be making a report in, I think, three or four weeks' time. This will be their second Report and I would very much rather have that expert information and the accompanying recommendations at my disposal before we decide on any changes that may be necessary in migration policy.

The noble Lord said a word about education. Education, I equally believe, is needed in this country about the meaning and purposes of, and the opportunities in, the Commonwealth to-day. What I should like to tell him (though I cannot say exactly what will follow from it) is that I am now having discussions with the Minister of Education to see what practical measures we could adopt with a view to ensuring that children in this country are brought up with a wider knowledge of the Commonwealth than they have at present. I hope that I shall have something to report at a later date upon that matter. So, I would ask the noble Lord perhaps to allow me to see the Report of the Oversea Migration Board which is coming along in a number of weeks and perhaps later on, in the Autumn, when the review I have set in motion is completed, I shall be in a position to give a fuller answer to the noble Lord's Question.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, can the noble Earl, the Secretary of State, make any comment on the question of finance? Can he give any encouragement in that direction, particularly in regard to the discussions that have taken place recently with Commonwealth Ministers?

THE EARL OF HOME

My Lords, I have discussed migration with various Ministers from Commonwealth countries, both here and in the Commonwealth. I am afraid, however, that I cannot add anything to-day on the subject of finance.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for his reply.

House adjourned at sixteen minutes before four o'clock.