Lords Sitting of 20 November 1956

Preamble
The House met at half past two of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers

SITUATION IN BAHRAIN
2.35 p.m.
LORD GLYN: My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
[The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether a statement can now be made concerning the present situation in Bahrain and whether the troop movements into this area have given adequate support to the Sheikh of Bahrain and how far the British interest in oil production has been safeguarded]
THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF READING): My Lords, Her Majesty's Government are not responsible for the internal affairs of Bahrain. But they favoured the various changes that the Ruler of Bahrain has introduced during the past year, designed to permit a gradual evolution in the direction of more representative institutions in his country.
A self-constituted body known as the Committee of National Union has assumed to itself the right to act as the mouthpiece of the people of Bahrain. Over the past year the Bahrain Government have shown great patience in dealing with this Committee, hoping that it might contribute to constitutional progress and provide a means of maintaining regular contacts between the Government and the public. The Committee has, however, refused to co-operate in working the new constitutional machinery and latterly turned to more extreme courses. In consequence it lost much moderate support and it then began a campaign of intimidation to prevent others from co-operating. It has
370
also fostered dissension between different sections of the community. This activity culminated on November 2 and 3 in violent demonstrations which caused damage to property and danger to the lives of peaceful citizens. The Bahrain Government thereupon decided to detain five of the leaders of the Committee. This they did on November 6. One of these leaders had already been apprehended in the act of fomenting disorders. The Bahrain Government informed the British Political Resident of their decision to take this action, but my right honourable and learned friend the Foreign Secretary saw no reason to instruct him to advise them in any contrary sense. Since these arrests and the simultaneous dissolution of the Committee, there have been no further disorders.
The dissolution of the Committee improves the prospect of political evolution in Bahrain by opening the way for greater participation in the administration of moderate reformists, who have in the past been intimidated by the Committee. The Ruler has affirmed that constitutional progress will continue. During the disorders on November 3, British troops, who had been held in readiness to respond to any request for assistance from the Bahrain Government, took up positions within a few minutes of receiving such a request. They did not open fire, but their presence no doubt contributed to the restoration of order.
No damage has been done to the Bahrain Petroleum Company's oil installations, although production has been affected by absenteeism. The Company is owned, as the noble Lord knows, by United States interests. The stoppage of the flow of oil from Saudi Arabia has not yet affected production at the refinery.
LORD GLYN: My Lords, arising out of that reply, may I ask whether or not it is a fact that 75 per cent. of the teachers employed in Bahrain are Egyptian and have been busy organising these difficulties with the various students?
THE MARQUESS OF READING: My Lords, I would not commit myself to the exact percentage, but I think the gist of the noble Lord's question is probably correct.

IMPROVEMENT OF COMMON LANDS
2.39 p.m.
LORD BARNBY: My Lords, I beg to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
[The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in view of the inevitable interval between the reporting of the Royal Commission on Common Lands, and any possible ensuing legislation, consideration can now be given to the provision of a fund out of which temporary allocation could be made to public authorities responsible for Common Lands, which only recently were in effective agricultural production, and are now forced into dereliction, with the result of the disadvantageous propagation of obnoxious weeds, and loss of potential national production of food.]
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD (EARL ST. ALDWYN): My Lords, the obstacles to the effective maintenance and use of common land are primarily legal, and special financial assistance for its improvement would be unlikely by itself to produce worthwhile results. A public authority responsible for a common has financial power to clear noxious weeds but its ability to do so is impeded by the need to obtain the agreement of all the commoners and to refrain from interfering with any rights of public access.
LORD SILKIN: My Lords, could the noble Earl say when the Report of the Royal Commission which is sitting to inquire into this subject may be expected?
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, I regret that I cannot give the noble Lord a forecast of the date at all.
LORD SILKIN: Could the noble Earl find out whether it is imminent, or whether it is likely to take three, four or five years?
EARL ST. ALDWYN: My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that it is not imminent, but I certainly hope it will not take four years or anything like that time. If I can get any more accurate information I will let him know.

UNITED NATIONS' REVENUE
2.41 p.m.
LORD BARNBY: My Lords, I beg to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
[The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government if they will state (a) the current annual revenue of the United Nations, based upon existing membership and assessment of existing issues; (b) what Member Nations are in arrears.]
THE MARQUESS OF READING: My Lords, the gross budget of the United Nations for 1956, including the supplementary estimates which will be presented for approval to the Eleventh Session of the General Assembly, which has just begun, amounts to 50,283,000 dollars. The Secretary-General's estimates (including supplementary estimates already presented) for 1957 amount to 49,115,700 dollars. To this figure will be added the cost of carrying out the recommendations of the Salary Review Committee, if approved by the General Assembly, which is likely to be in the region of 1 million dollars. The Secretary-General will also present supplementary estimates in respect of 1957 to the Twelfth Session of the General Assembly in the autumn of 1957. The exact size of these supplementary estimates cannot be foreseen but is likely to be between 1,500,000 dollars and 2 million dollars.
As regards the second part of the noble Lord's question, a document published by the United Nations Department of Public Information states that Bolivia, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Iran, Nicaragua, Peru and Uruguay were in arrears, on September 30, in respect of their contributions for 1955 and, in the case of China and Uruguay, in respect of earlier years also.
LORD BARNBY: My Lords, I thank the noble Marquess for that reply. Arising out of it, can he first of all say whether the exercise of the last year to which he referred resulted in the carrying forward of a credit or a debit balance? Secondly, can he say at what point nations or countries in arrears with their dues forfeit their right to participate in the activities of the United Nations?
MARQUESS OF READING: My Lords, I do not think I can give the figure for which the noble Lord asks in the first part of his supplementary question. As regards the second part of his supplementary question— what happens when nations do not pay the amount due— the position is as follows. A member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contribution forfeits its vote in the General Assembly if the amount of the arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions which the member should have paid for the two full years preceding the current year. The General Assembly may nevertheless permit a member in such case to vote if it is satisfied that failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the member.
EARL HOWE: My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess whether we may take it that the cost of the present operations in the Middle East will be in addition to anything to which he has referred in his Answer?
THE MARQUHSS OF READING: My Lords, that is so.

POLICE, FIRE AND PROBATION OFFICERS BILL
Brought from the Commons; read 1a and to be printed.
CLYDE NAVIGATION ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL
Considered on Report (according to Order).
OBAN BURGH ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL
Considered on Report (according to Order).

SUPPLIES AND SERVICES (TRANSITIONAL POWERS)
2.43 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT KILMUIR)THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT KILMUIR) rose to move, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under section eight of the Supplies and Services (Transitional Powers) Act, 1945, praying that the said Act, which would otherwise expire on the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-six, be continued it force for a further period of one year until the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-seven. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, I rise to move the first of the five Motions which stand in my name on the Order Paper. Each of them has to be approved separately by your Lordships, but if the: House will allow me it would be convenient, I think, for me to deal with the five in a single speech. They are all closely related, being concerned will the continuance for another year of various emergency provisions. Every year Her Majesty's Government have to ask Parliament for these provisions to be extended, since otherwise they would lapse. Last year, when I made a similar request, the noble and learned Earl, Lord Jowitt, was kind enough to thank me for not having precisely explained the relationship between the various Statutes which affect the Motions before the House. I shall again endeavour to earn the thanks of your Lordships by a similar reticence this year, but it is, I think, right that Her Majesty's Government should tell Parliament precisely which powers they are seeking to retain, and why.
Apart from the Defence Regulations, with which I shall deal later, there are three Statutes conferring powers which the Supplies and Services (Transitional Powers) Act extends for a year. Your Lordships will see those in paragraph 5 of the White Paper: they are the subject of the first Motion. The first is the Ministry of Supply Act, 1939, the powers under which are needed because, without them, the Board of Trade could neither wind up its current trading operations in raw materials nor continue to deal in imported jute goods, a function that it must continue to fulfil until there is suitable statutory protection for the home jute industry. The second Statute is the Requisitioned Land and War

375
Works Act, 1945, which contains powers that are supplementary to the Defence Regulations dealing with the requisitioning of land. As I hope to show, the use of these powers has been greatly reduced, but they cannot be dispensed with until they are replaced by permanent legislation, which noble Lords who have departmental experience will understand is exceptionally complicated and difficult. The third Statute is the Supplies and Services (Defence Purposes) Act, 1951, which gives power to close or divert a highway temporarily for defence purposes. The procedure for doing this permanently is too protracted where defence requirements are concerned.
There are two further Statutes conferring powers which are extended for a year by the Emergency Laws Acts of 1946 and 1947—your Lordships will see these in paragraph 7 of the White Paper. The first is the Agriculture (Miscellaneous War Provisions) Act, 1940, which confers various powers on drainage boards. These powers are quite obsolete and we should be delighted to dispense with them. Unfortunately they cannot be repealed unless, at the same time, other provisions which deal with the Wheat Acts are also repealed; and these latter provisions must stay until the necessary repeal legislation is enacted. This will be done as soon as the opportunity occurs. The next relevant Statute is the Sugar Industry Act, 1942, which will also be extended, but this Act will, in fact, be superseded by the Sugar Act, 1956. This Act will be completely in force by March 20 next year, and at that date the last surviving provision of the 1942 Act will have been repealed.
I now turn to the Defence Regulations. As I told the House last year, we are up against the hard core which may have to become a permanent part of the law of the land. Our policy has been to incorporate these provisions in Acts of Parliament. By this process we have reduced the number of Defence Regulations, although the process has not been as rapid as we should have wished. When we came back to office in 1951 there were 215 Regulations. Last December, there were thirty-four substantive Regulations and, in addition, thirty-five which are ancillary and formal. To-day, there are thirty-two, with the same additions,
376
and we propose that only twenty-three of the substantive Regulations, again with the additional ancillary and formal ones, should be re-enacted. I will explain to the House how this comes about. First, there are two casualties which I am glad to say are gone. Legislation in the form of the Aliens Employment Act. 1955, has devoured Regulation 60D, and Regulation 58A, which dealt with the engagement of labour, has been revoked. Secondly, there are nine Regulations whose days are numbered. They are the surviving Sale of Food Regulations, which are replaced by the Food and Drugs Act, 1955, and the Food and Drugs (Scotland) Act. 1956. We are, accordingly, not asking Parliament to renew them, and they will lapse on December 10 this year. We shall also be able to dispense with paragraph 2 of Regulation 59, because on January I next the Mines and Quarries Act. 1954, comes into force, and the regulation which it replaces will be revoked. So much for the Defence Regulations, which will trouble us no more.
I now turn to those we are proposing to keep for the time being, though, as your Lordships will see, another two should go with reasonable speed. Most of the contents of these will, we hope, be embodied in permanent legislation. Such legislation, however, is difficult to prepare, and it demands Parliamentary time which is not at present available. For example, there is the group of Regulations, 50, 51, 51A 52, and 62 relating to the acquisition and use of land. It is under these Regulations that the Ministry of Fuel and Power operate open-cast mining and the Service Departments can, in the case of urgent necessity, acquire speedy possession of land required for defence. I hope that, in due course, legislation will make these Regulations unnecessary. Meanwhile, they arc not used if it can be helped. I will just illustrate that by giving your Lordships certain details with regard to requisitioning. The requisitioning of buildings by Government Departments is covered by Regulation 51, in conjunction with certain statutory powers. In 1951, 3.858 buildings were so requisitioned. On September 30, this year, the figure was 376. And that was nearly 300 less than the figure for a year before. Putting it in forms of percentage, there has been a reduction of 90 per cent. on the number of the premises requisitioned in 1951, and

377
of 40 per cent. on last year's figure. Since 1945, 99·6 per cent. of the premises then under requisition have been released. So your Lordships will see that, though the powers still remain, their use has been drastically reduced.
LORD SILKIN: My Lords, could the noble and learned Viscount say how many were under requisition in 1945?
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I am sorry that I have not the figure at the moment, but I will endeavour to find it. I have been given only the percentage that I have just quoted, 99·6. I do not think that I could work out the calculation on my feet, but if one takes my final figure of 376, which is the ·4 per cent., and then works it out, I think it might be possible to get the figure which the noble Lord is asking for. However I think I can get the figure if the noble Lord will leave it until I make my speech in reply. I will use the utmost of my arithmetical powers. I think I have shown the noble Lord how it can be done. I do not see the noble Lord, Lord Adrian or any other eminent mathematician here, but I have no doubt that there are other noble Lords who can do it.
LORD SILKIN: I think I am equal to doing the arithmetic, but I wanted the noble and learned Viscount to appreciate the point that a great deal of de-requisitioning took place between 1945 and 1951.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: The noble Lord, Lord Silkin, will not misunderstand me when I say that I hope so. The period he mentions was six years, and the Government of the Party to which the noble Lord belongs had plenty of time to derequisition during that period. However, it is a fair point, and the noble Lord is perfectly right to make it. But I am, I think, justified in saying that my figure is quite striking, showing, as it does, a reduction from 3,858 to the extent of 90 per cent. since the present Government took office. And there was a 40 per cent. reduction last year.
Then there are Regulations 50A and 56, which are required for the maintenance of water supplies by various undertakings. Her Majesty's Government had hoped that a Water Bill to replace theme Regulations would by now
378
have been before Parliament. Unfortunately, Parliamentary time has not been found, and the Regulations must therefore remain. The outlook for the Defence (Patents, Trade Marks, etc.) Regulations is rather more hopeful than it was. The Report of the Howitt Committee was published on June 20 this year. My right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade proposes to discuss its recommendations with parties interested and to introduce legislation as soon as practicable. The Regulations will then be no longer needed. Similarly, Regulation 26 of the Defence (Agriculture and Fisheries) Regulations, which deals with the marketing of milk, will be kept only until the proposed schemes f Dr Scotland are in force. It is already obsolete in England and Wales, and its final demise should not be long delayed. The other provisions (only a few of which are substantive) of these Regulations will be required for a somewhat longer period—that is, until further marketing schemes have been worked out and put into effect.
I do not think that any noble Lord will quarrel with the continuance of Defence Regulation 46, which confers power to control trade by sea. This power is used to prevent the delivery by sea of strategic materials t) countries where they might be put to a use of which we should not approve. Nor do I think that anyone will quarrel with the last remaining provision of the Defence (Finance) Regulations, which enables assets owned by people outside the sterling area to be controlled and also supplements exchange control in Hongkong.
Strategic goods can also be controlled under Regulation 55, which., together with Regulation 55AA and 55AB, gives power to control the supply and sale of named commodities. At present only a few are so controlled—coal, oil, iron and steel scrap and some foodstuffs. These powers would be used, for example, for the introduction of petrol and oil rationing, a subject on which, I understand, my noble friend the Earl of Munster will shortly have something to say. As I have said, at present, there are very few commodities controlled under these powers, and we shall in fact, he able to give up the control of tinplate. I am authorised by my right honourable friend the President of the Board of

379
Trade to say that the supplies in 1957 are expected to increase so much that control will no longer be necessary. These same Regulations are also used to impose restrictions, which we consider very necessary, on hire purchase and hiring agreements. However, as was stated in the gracious Speech, these particular controls will be replaced by legislation.
Regulations 58AA and 59 of the Defence (General) Regulations are both retained. Regulation 58AA is needed to keep the Industrial Disputes Tribunal in being, and Regulation 59 permits exemption from some insufficiently flexible provisions of the Factories Act, 1937. Neither Regulation can be dispensed with until there is complete agreement on what should take their place. Lastly, there is the sole substantive provision of the Defence (Armed Forces) Regulation, which makes it clear that serving members of the Forces can be used temporarily for agricultural or other urgent work of national importance.
I hope that I have said sufficient to show that Her Majesty's Government are anxious to get rid of such of these Regulations as can be replaced by Acts of Parliament. In fact, in the last five years we have got rid of a great many. May I remind your Lordships that in 1951 there were 215 Regulations in force—of which 180 were substantive Regulations—I am sure that noble Lords will agree that one of the defects of having too many Regulations is that many people are prosecuted for offences which are neither created by, nor defined in, any Statute. Our policy has reduced enormously the number of these convictions. In 1951, 6,049 persons were found guilty of offences against Regulations. Last year, the number was 251; and in the first half of this year, only 57. I think we can fairly claim that these figures show that we have had considerable success in grappling with this problem. However, I do not wish to conceal from the House that the hard core will present a more difficult task. I can assure your Lordships that it is a task which Her Majesty's Government will make every effort to carry out. I beg to move the first of the Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper.
380
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under Section eight of the Supplies and Services (Transitional Powers) Act, 1945, praying that the said Act, which would otherwise expire on the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-six, be continued in force for a further period of one year until the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-seven.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
3.3 p.m.
LORD SILKIN: My Lords, I agree with the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor that any discussion we may have—and so far as I am concerned it will be very little—can conveniently take place on the first of these three Motions. I should like to thank the noble and learned Viscount for the restrained way in which he has explained the Regulations which still remain. It was necessary that they should be explained to the House because, in spite of the fact that they have been reduced to some extent in the past twelve months, eleven years after the war, there are still in existence far too many regulations by which the subject is governed by war-time legislation. I make no quarrel with particular Regulations which it is desired to renew for another year. I do not think that the House will wish to deal with these Regulations individually, but I think that the House will be interested to know when they really are going to come to an end.
I remember that, year after year from 1945 to 1951, we used to have a full dress debate in your Lordships' House in which the Government were rebuked for not putting an end to the Emergency Regulations. That debate was usually headed by the late Lord Simon and the noble Viscount, Lord Samuel, who seems to be less interested in this matter than of yore, and the noble Earl, Lord Woolton, the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, and others used all to come forward and attack my noble and learned friend Lord Jowitt, who was then Lord Chancellor, for not getting rid of the Regulations within a short period after the war. in 1951, the noble Earl, Lord Woolton, was particularly violent, so far as he can be. He 'said that he was responsible for making a great many of these Regulations, arid that if he had realised that eight years afterwards they would still be in force he would have been horrified. Some of these Regulations have now been in force,

381
not for eight years, but for eleven years after the war. Instead of the process being accelerated, it seems to me that it has been decelerated.
I should like to ask the noble and learned Viscount whether he can give the House an assurance that, if the Government are in office this time next year, all Regulations will have come to an end or will have been incorporated in permanent legislation. I know that the noble and learned Viscount is always pointing out to us the difficulties of finding Parliamentary time and of formulating legislation, and I agree that both those are difficulties which every Government has to face; but in view of the persistent attacks which we used to receive, surely, in the name of decency, these Regulations should now come to an end. I ant not greatly impressed by the argument about lack of Parliamentary time. I should have thought that the Government might make a much wiser use of the Parliamentary time which is available to them than they have done. For instance, we have spent weeks and weeks in passing perfectly futile legislation. I am not referring to legislation with which we happen to disagree, although there was quite a lot of that, but to legislation which has had no effect whatever on the life of the country, not even the effect which was intended by the Government themselves—I refer particularly to the Housing Repairs and Rents Act. If anyone can tell me that that Act has had the slightest effect in improving the condition of houses, or even of one single house. I should be astonished. Yet we spent weeks and weeks on: hat Bill, both in this House and in another place. And I could mention others.
If the Government had been wiser in their use of Parliamentary time, all these Regulations would have been swept away. There were Bills that were introduced and withdrawn, either because of pressure from friends of noble Lords opposite or because the Government had second thoughts. Some of them had gone a long way, even past Committee stage, before being withdrawn. The noble and learned Viscount mentioned one Bill, which is also referred to in the Report of the Standing Orders Committee--namely, the Inventions and Designs (Crown Use) Bill. There are a number of Regulations which could have been
382
ended if this measure, which was introduced in the Session of 1953-54, or some such measure, had been passed. I notice that the Bill was introduced, considered and then dropped. So year after year we are getting these Regulations.
I do not want to labour the point in the way that it was laboured in the years between 1945 and 1951. All I say is that there is far less excuse to-day than there was in 1951. While I recognise that the number of Regulations has diminished, and is diminishing, I would point out that only last year the Government found it necessary to publish a pamphlet setting out a list of the Regulations then in force, and if they were to publish one to-day it would be almost as long. I hope the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack will be able to give us an assurance that this matter will be treated seriously, and that Parliamentary time will be found to get rid of these war-time Regulations.
3.11 p.m.
LORD REA: My Lords, in order that the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack may not feel neglected, I rise once more to the attack on this point, which has come up for the last, not five years. but eleven years. I have had the unusual privilege of seeing one Side, attack the other and the other side attack the one. The noble and learned 'Viscount, the Lord Chancellor, has pointed out that the Labour Government had s x years in which to make progress in this matter; but that applies equally to a e five years of the Conservative Government. It is my privilege to accuse both sides of between them utilising eleven years without doing enough. I do not altogether support the remark of the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, about deceleration. As the Lord Chancellor explained, we come down to a hard core, and it must get more and more difficult as time goes on. However, I beg him to see that the rate of deceleration will be decelerated.
3.12 p.m.
LORD MERTHYR: My Lords, after listening to the noble and learned Viscount: on the Woolsack, I was almost, but not quite, tempted to apologise for intervening in this debate. I do so in order to draw attention to two comparatively small, though not unimportant,

383
Regulations. These are Regulations 51 (2) (b) and 52 (1) (b) and (c), which both deal with the restriction or prohibition of rights of way over land. I cannot help joining in the chorus and asking that these Regulations should either be repealed or converted into permanent legislation. I would make two suggestions. With regard to Regulation 51 (2) (b), would it not be possible to rely in that regard upon the Supplies and Services (Defence Purposes) Act, 1951?—an end which I believe could be achieved with a small amendment of that Act, and we should consequently be able to leave out altogether this paragraph.
With regard to Regulation 52 (1) (b) and (c), again could we not rely upon the old Defence Acts and Military Lands Acts? I know that some of them are antiquated, but could we not rely upon them, instead of having these Regulations? Once more I would suggest that this Regulation should be repealed or converted into a permanency. What we all want is some permanent legislation on these matters. Finally, I would plead for a complete overhaul of the law relating to closure and diversion of highways. I am aware that in Part IV of the National Parks Act we have recent legislation, but that deals only with footpaths and not with highways generally. I submit that there is an urgent need for a complete investigation and a consequent Act of Parliament upon the whole law of closure and diversion of highways. If that should come out of this matter of the Defence Regulations, much good would be done.
3.15 p.m.
LORD CHORLEY: My Lords, I should like to support warmly what has just fallen from the noble Lord, Lord Merthyr. This particular Defence Regulation, Regulation 51 (2) (b), which comes under the Motion just moved by the Lord Chancellor, and Regulation 52 (1) (b), which I think technically comes under the next Motion, are both concerned with the interference of rights of way across the countryside. For over a hundred years the interference with the rights of way across the countryside has in many cases given rise to great feeling among a certain group of people in the community, who are represented in strong organisations and who form an important section
384
of the community. These Defence Regulations confer powers on competent authorities to interfere with rights of way. That is proper interference at a time when the country is struggling in a great war situation, but ten years afterwards it is quite indefensible. We went on for hundreds of years without powers of this kind, and I suggest that they are quite unnecessary now.
The noble Lord, Lord Merthyr, pointed out that in effect Regulation 52 (2) (b) is practically covered by the recent Supplies and Services (Defence Purposes) Act —and why that Act was not drafted so as to cover this point completely it is difficult to see. However, I think that with a small Amendment it could be done. For well over a hundred years the competent military authorities obtained all that they were entitled to, and possibly more, under the Defence Acts and the Military Lands Acts. Naturally, during the war crisis additional powers were required and taken; but I suggest, again, that in peace time, more than ten years after the end of the war, they ought not to have these powers. I hope that the Lord Chancellor will look at these two particular Regulations and make sure that he gets them on to the list next year of those that are not going to be renewed.
3.18 p.m.
EARL JOWITT: My Lords, I should like to add a word or two. I well remember for six years, from 1945 onwards, having to defend these Regulations. I can assure the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack that he is lucky when comparing his task with mine, because even in 1945 the most bitter attacks were made on the Government of the day for having any of these Regulations at all. I have not troubled to look up the debates; it is a topic which to me is so unpleasant that I do not want to refer to it at all. I dislike intensely the business of these Regulations. However, you do not deal with this question adequately by just taking numbers of Regulations; you have to look at the gravity of a particular Regulation.
The Regulation which always gave me more worry than any other, and upon which I was more bitterly attacked than any other, is Regulation 55. If the noble and learned Viscount, the Lord Chancellor, tells me that Regulation 55 has gone

385
into limbo, or is going, I shall be delighted to hear it. However, if I am right—and I invite correction—it is being continued. If that is so, I should like your Lordships to know exactly what Regulation 55 does. This Regulation is still in force after all these years and, as I say, I had difficulty in regard to it in the very early days. After all, were not the present Government elected on the cry that they were going to set the people free" from this monstrous tyranny which was being imposed upon them? Let me remind your Lordships of what Regulation 55 does. It says:
"A competent authority, so tar as it appears to that authority to be necessary for the purposes specified in subsection (1) of section one of the Supplies and Services (Transitional Powers) Act. 1945, may by order provide"—
and then you get these sweeping wordsߞ
"for regulating or prohibiting the production, treatment, keeping. storage, movement, transport, distribution, disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of articles of any description."
Now that is a Regulation which is surviving eleven years after the war, and I ask your Lordships to say whether you can imagine any Regulation more drastic and more stringent in its powers than that. There ought to be an association for the protection of Lord Chancellors who have to defend these Regulations. It is not easy for any of them. I sincerely hope that the present occupant of the Woolsack will not next year have to defend the continuation of Regulation 55— which he does, of course, with that charm and grace with which he does everything, but which he cannot like at all. The society for the protection of Lord Chancellors must see to it that no Lord Chancellor ever has to defend in time of peace any Regulation couched in the wide language of Regulation 55.
I sincerely hope, therefore, that if this Regulation does come up next year your Lordships will support this side of the House (if we are still "this side") in saying that Regulation 55 must go. On that basis, I ask your Lordships not to dissent from the Lord Chancellor's Motion. but to tell him that he can have his Motion this year, but that if he moves it next year we shall all have something to say to him.
3.22 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I am grateful to those of your Lordships who have joined in the debate
386
for, I must say at once, the most reasonable attitude which your Lordships have adopted towards this Motion. I have no more liking than any of your Lordships for the continuance of war-time powers. In fact, for three years I had to deal with this matter in another place, and such are the bullets of fate that it was only on my last occasion in dealing with them in another place that I was sternly rebuked by the Front Bench representative of the Party sitting on those Benches for the extreme speed which I was using in getting rid of the regulations. It only adds to the spice of variety of poi tics that the voice of Mr. Chuter Ede and the voices of noble Lords who have spoken have that: pleasant variation in substance which so adds to our delight in our daily round and common task.
I should like to deal with the minor, if very important, point which was raised first by my noble friend Lord Merthyr and supported by the noble Lord, Lord Chorley. I agree with them that that is a very important aspect of the matter. The Common Law, and, indeed, our early Statute Law, has always been careful in protecting footpaths and the like, and I promise to give the matter attention. This merges into one of the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, in asking me for an undertaking. Having struggled with these Regulations for a period of five years, I should be chary of giving an undertaking as t.) the completion of the work. As I think Addison observed:
"Tis not in mortals to command success, But we'll do more, Sempronius; we'll deserve it."
I give noble Lords this undertaking: that I shall myself give my personal attention to the Regulations dealing with requisitioning of land and cognate matters, and do my utmost to produce something for the next Session. That is the most I can do, and I will do my best, having given that undertaking.
With regard to the other Train Regulation—those dealing with economic controls, which the noble arid learned Earl, Lord Jowitt, has mentioned-I should like to remind him of this. Your Lordships notice that I have put on my spectacles, and it is a matter of spectacles. If the noble and learned Earl will look

387
at the bottom of the page from which he read his Regulation 55, he will see:
"By virtue of the Defence Regulation No. 9 Order 54 (printed in the Appendix), the powers conferred by paragraph I of the Regulation are now exercisable only to the extent mentioned in Article I of that Order, and further provisions of the Regulation have been revoked."
That was the method we chose of narrowing the Regulation, so that it deals only with the goods that I mentioned in my earlier speech. I agree with the noble and learned Earl that it is not nearly so good as getting rid of it altogether, but I thought it would be consoling to some extent that we have narrowed down the width of application that he mentioned in his speech. These are the two main groups of Regulations which have to be dealt with—Regulations concerning the land and Regulations concerning economic controls.
I wish to say only one word on economic controls before I leave them. When I started on this work in 1951, speaking from memory—but a fairly exact memory on this subject matter—there were 278 orders under Regulation 55 alone. In the first three years, with my right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade we reduced these by nearly 200, and they have now, as I have indicated, been reduced to a mere handful. So we have tried to deal not only with the main Regulations but with their statutory grandchildren, the orders made under them, and even their statutory great-grandchildren, the licences and so on which are made under the orders. I mention that, not to excuse Her Majesty's Government or myself. I think this is a task with which we must proceed as quickly as possible, and that is my intention.
There was only one other matter which the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, mentioned specifically, and that was the Defence (Patent and Design) Regulations. He will remember that when the original Bill was introduced into your Lordships' House, your Lordships felt, irrespective of Party, that there had not been sufficient consultation with those interested in the subject matter. Since then, as I said in my speech, there has been a Howitt Inquiry under that distinguished accountant known to many of us. They reported in the summer of this year, and my right
388
honourable friend is now having discussions, not on the original subject matter, but on the Howitt Report, and I hope that the legislation will come. As I say, I welcome immensely that your Lordships should desire that this work should continue. We, as legislators, all want to see legislation brought into effect by the regular methods of discussion in the two Houses of Parliament during the various stages of the legislation. I can say only that it is an example of the difficulty that arises when one goes outside the ordinary methods of legislation, because everyone concerned in the machinery of Government has at his hand this easier method of carrying it out. I promise your Lordships to bear the lesson in our hearts, how facile is the slope to Avernus and how much we should avoid it in the future. Again, I am grateful to your Lordships.
On Question, Motion agreed to: the said Address to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

EMERGENCY LAWS (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS)
3.30 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, in accordance with the support of the noble Lord. Lord Silkin, I propose to move these Motions formally. I beg to move the second Motion standing in my name.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under section seven of the Emergency Laws (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1947, praying that the Defence Regulations specified in the Schedule hereto, which would otherwise expire on the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-six, be continued in force for a further period of one year until the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-seven.
SCHEDULE
The following Regulations of the Defence (General) Regulations, 1939, namely:—
Regulation fifty-two (Use of land for purposes of Her Majesty's forces);
Regulations eighty-three and eighty-five (Obstruction, and entry upon, and inspection of, land);
Regulations ninety-two, ninety-three, ninety-eight, ninety-nine B, one hundred to one hundred and two, and one hundred and five (Legal and supplementary provisions).
Parts I, II, III and IX and Schedules I and II of the Defence (Agriculture and Fisheries) Regulations, 1939.
Regulations one and six of the Defence (Armed Forces) Regulations, 1939.
Regulation one and paragraph (5) of Regulation three of the Defence (Patents Trade Marks, etc.) Regulations, 1941.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to: the said Address to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move the third Motion standing it my name.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under section seven of the Emergency Laws (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1947, praying that the enactments specified in the Schedule hereto, which would otherwise expire on the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-six, be continued in force for a further period of one year until the tenth day of December, nineteen hundred and fifty-seven.
SCHEDULE.
Subsection (1) of section three of the Emergency Laws (Transitional Provisions) Act, 1946 (which, as amended by section four of the Emergency Laws (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1947, extends certain provisions of the Agriculture (Miscellaneous War Provisions) Act. 1940 relating to wheat and land drainage).
Section six of the said Act of 1946 (which extends the Sugar Industry Act 1942).—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to: the said Address to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

PATENTS
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move the fourth Motion standing in my name.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under subsection (3) of section forty-nine of the Patents Act, 1949, praying that the Patents (Extension of Period of Emergency) Order, 1956, be made in the form of the draft laid before this House on 6th November. —(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to: the said Address to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

REGISTERED DESIGNS
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move the fifth and last of these Motions.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty under subparagraph (3) of paragraph 4 of the: First Schedule to the Registered Designs Act, 1949, praying that the Registered Designs (Extension of Period of Emergency) Order, 1956, be made in the form of the draft laid before this House on 6th November.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to: the said Address to be presented to Her Majesty by tile Lords with White Staves.

NURSES BILL [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, as your Lordships will see, this is a Consolidation Bill and, of course, will be referred to the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills. I beg formally to move the Second Reading of this Bill.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.

NURSES AGENCIES BILL
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, this also is a Consolidation Bill. Therefore, I beg to move the Second Reading formally.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a. —(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a

WEST INDIAN IMMIGRANTS
3.33 p.m.
LORD ELTON LORD ELTON rose to draw attention to problems arising from West Indian immigration into the United Kingdom: and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, my main object—I think perhaps I can say my sole object —in moving this Motion is to give Her Majesty's Government an opportunity of making a considered statement on a problem which, though difficult and complex, is still only a problem, and no in any sense a crisis. In these days of rapid communications, and in the distracted state of contemporary civilisation Governments seem to find time to consider practically nothing but crises, of which, it is only fair to say, they usually have two or three in their laps at the same time.
In the enviable Victorian era, with its comparatively leisurely communications and its comparatively stable civilisation Governments seemed usually able to ponder their problems before the matured into crises; but nowadays one gets the impression that any problems which is still only a problem is all toe apt to be relegated to its pigeonhole until perhaps merely for lack of timely attention, it, too, matures into a crisis, and forces the Government of some future day into belated action which Minister may have insufficiently considered and for which they have almost certainly insufficiently prepared public opinion I hope, therefore, that this debate may make some small contribution towards ensuring that the problems involved in the present wholly unplanned immigration into this country from the West Indies shall be considered while they are still entirely tractable and while their discussion can arouse no hard feelings or either side.
I hope very much that nothing that I at any rate, say this afternoon will be able to be taken amiss, either here or in the West Indies. For the only West Indian island of which I have any direct personal knowledge, Jamaica, I have s great affection. I have a number of friends there, and indeed a coloured Jamaican will be spending Christmas with my family and in my home this year. I have a great admiration for both the present Governor of Jamaica, Sir Hugh Foot, and
392
its present chief Minister, Mr. Norman Manley—two exceptionally able men, both of whom, I hope I may say, are my personal friends.
As distinct from any personal contact which any of us may have had with this problem, printed information is not at all easy to come by. I have studied the Report by Dr. Clarence Senior and Mr. Douglas Manley on Jamaican emigration, but it is, of course, a Report to the Jamaican Government and is therefore solely, or almost solely, concerned with the problems of the immigrants, and not with those of their hosts. I have also had the advantage of examining a very large collection of cuttings from both the West Indian and the British Press which a distinguished Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, kindly made available to me.
While we are discussing the particular problems involved in this immigration, problems of housing and the like, about which I want to say a few words, I think we ought to keep in mind a much wider background. As I understand the position, unrestricted right of entry into, and permanent residence in, these islands is indefeasibly inherent in every citizen of the British Commonwealth, all the 539 million of them. And from this it naturally follows that the present wholly unplanned and wholly unregulated immigration from the West Indies, with all its attendant hardships, frustrations and dangers, both to the immigrants and to their hosts, must continue wholly unregulated and unplanned, for an indefinite period. In an era which is, if anything, excessively addicted to regulation and planning, and in which immigration into virtually every other country in the world, and certainly immigration from these islands into any other part of the Commonwealth, is subject to the most elaborate processes of selection, regulation and prohibition, this does certainly seem to be a paradoxical exception.
As regards the dimensions of the immigration, they are probably very much smaller than is supposed by the general public. There are no accurate statistics, for the simple reason that under the law as it stands no statistics whatever can be compiled. But the Government's estimate of the numbers of West Indians who have arrived in considerable parties during the last four years, and with the intention of remaining, is as follows: in

393
1952, 2,200; in 1953, 2,30; in 1954, 9,200; in 1955, 25,700, And I believe that the figure for this year will be found to be running at approximately the level of 1955—at somewhere about 25,000. No doubt the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, will be able to tell us whether that is so. That is not a large number in proportion to a population of 50 million. It is apt to seem to the public to he larger than it is, partly because the West Indians arrive in parties of considerable size, and make for a comparatively few centres, notably London, Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham and Derby.
There are other reasons, too, I think, why the West Indian is particularly conspicuous. The other coloured colonials who come here do so mainly to acquire qualifications, and intend to return home; moreover, they possess a distinct culture of their own, so that they have no particular need or desire to integrate themselves with our culture, from which indeed they are insulated by their own. On the other hand, the West Indian mostly comes to stay here and does not possess a distinct culture of his own. Indeed, one who knows the West Indies and the West Indians extremely well once remarked to me that the whole outlook of the West Indian curiously resembles that of Victorian England: Dr. W. G. Grace, for example, would probably have found himself entirely at home in present-day Jamaica.
My Lords, since it is mainly to the disadvantages and dangers involved in the present unplanned immigration that I wish to draw attention, it is only right that I should point out that there are a number of countervailing circumstances. In the first place, the first considerable influxes of coloured colonials came here during World War I and World War II, when they served in the Armed Forces and in the Merchant Marine; so that if there is anyone prepared to say that they are not needed now, he has to remember that they were needed then, and that they came. Then secondly, I think one must always remember that despite certain alarmist rumours in the Press, the immigrants are not applying to the assistance boards, or appearing in court on criminal charges, in numbers sufficient to cause comment, let alone concern. And finally, of course, there are all the imponderables which can be set to the credit of immigration. I,
394
for one, recollect how the friendly and curiously uninhibited smile of a West Indian ticket collector at a London underground station suddenly transported me back to the brilliantly coloured island from which he had come to that grey place, and recalled the patience, and the beautiful manners, of its inhabitants.
But in spite of all of this, we cannot be blind to the fact that there are a great many risks involved in the present situation; and, first and foremost, the risk, not now but at some future time and in altered circumstances, of racial conflict arising from competition in the labour market. It is perfectly true that the Trades Union Congress has roundly and explicitly condemned any sort of racial discrimination; but it is probably easier to lay down a general principle in the somewhat rarefied atmosphere of Transport House than for those in actual contact with the problem to carry it out. And we have to remember that when there was competition in the labour market there has been serious trouble. There were serious race riots in Liverpool and Cardiff after the First World War, as well as lesser disturbances on Tyneside, in Glasgow and in London. There was a race riot in Liverpool as recently as 1949. And even with the present full employment there have been threats of industrial stoppages in Wolverhampton and West Bromwich, all of which suggest that when the period of full employment is over there may be trouble.
Perhaps even more ominous has been the report that a considerable number of works committees have stipulated that no coloured worker shall he promoted if there is a white worker available, and that in the event of redundancy or unemployment the coloured worker shall be the first to be sacked. I think it must be that aspect that the committee of the London Labour Party had in mind when they expressed their concern—I think I have their exact words:
"for the intensification of the present problems that will come if the volume of immigration of coloured people continues to rise each year."
Surely it is now, while there is full employment, which may last a long time or may last a short time, but will certainly not last for ever, that the Government should be seriously considering whether we may not be storing up for

395
ourselves serious trouble of the most unwelcome kind if and when full employment comes to an end. Have the Government any plan for forestalling such trouble? Have they convincing reasons for supposing that no such trouble will arise, or are they merely, under whatever sonorous camouflage, hoping for the best?
Then there is the trouble which may arise, and indeed has arisen, from competition elsewhere than in the labour market. My noble friend Lord Middleton is going to speak about the Health Services, and I shall say nothing about those. But what about housing? There has certainly been trouble there. Are the Government as confident as they would wish to be that trouble is not likely to revive in the comparatively near future? Certainly there has been evidence of exploitation by both parties. A Barbadian Minister said that he knew of a case in which a landlord evicted an English tenant paying 25s, a week and —it sounds almost incredible—let the space made available to no fewer than eight West Indians, at 25s, a week each. Cases have been reported in the Press of six West Indians living in one room at 25s, a week each. That again sounds almost incredible. but it has been reported in responsible quarters. If you look on the other side of the fence, so to speak, an Englishman in Lambeth is recorded as having said that an Englishman now has no chance in Lambeth.
But, of course, the real hardship of the housing problem falls upon the immigrant. When we remember that Birmingham recently reported that it had a housing waiting list of 60,000, and that it may take a newcomer at least five years even to make his way on to the waiting list; and when we remember too, that a recent survey reported that 85 per cent. of London landladies are unwilling to take in a dark coloured African or West Indian, one realises the extraordinary discomforts and difficulties which the immigrants must have to face. Are the Government really prepared to say that all this is a thing of the past? Does it not sound at least feasible that with a yearly intake of 25,000 immigrants, all making for a few already congested centres, housing difficulties may be far more acute in the future than they have been in the past?
Then, my Lords, there is the delicate question of miscegenation, a subject on which Senior and Manley's Report says nothing. But we must surely ask ourselves what will be the results after, say, a generation of immigration on this sort of scale. We have absorbed a great many immigrations in our long history, and profited greatly by many of them, but it is no reflection on either of the potential partners to say that history itself has shown that not every form of interbreeding is successful or desirable in every context and in every area. And in this connection, it is relevant, I think, that the Beacon, the leading Jamaican daily paper, itself remarked last year, what is certainly true, that not more than one-half of Jamaican marriages are permanent, and that the tradition is to have large families. Have Her Majesty's Government any views on this profoundly important aspect of immigration?
I say nothing as to the contrasting but characteristic ways in which the difficulties of the immigrants have been exploited, on the lunatic periphery of politics, by Fascists and Communists; for I do not think that either Fascists or Communists are of much importance nowadays. But I would ask Her Majesty's Government how they assess the consequences to the West Indies themselves of the present unplanned immigration. There is, of course, much unemployment, and much poverty there, a lot of it due to the beneficent effects of Western medical science. Our own doctors, by eradicating yellow fever and other previously endemic diseases, have greatly reduced the death rate, while the bulk of the population continues to breed without thought for the morrow. Our own Dominions have, of course, closed their doors against West Indian migration; and West Indians can no longer go to Cuba or the United States, as once they could. And though it is known that there are many openings in Nigeria and the Gold Coast, I understand that the doors there, too, are to be closed.
To view migration from another West Indian angle, it must surely be the energetic and enterprising to whom this blindfold adventure (for it is a blindfold adventure, I am afraid, in nine cases out of ten) of seeking one's fortune in Britain, appeals. May it not be draining the Caribbean of just the type of citizen

397
whom it will most need in the early days of federation? Have Her Majesty's Government any plans for developing industries in the Caribbean which may absorb some of the unemployed? Then, what about the often-reported exploitation of the urge to migrate by unscrupulous travel agencies with misleading posters, or by those who advance money at exorbitant rates, or on oppressive mortgages?
I must cad more or less where I began, with the background to this whole question; because in the background looms the much wider question which we may sooner or later have seriously to consider. Must this small, already over-populated and, on the whole, racially homogeneous island, because it is the metropolis of the Commonwealth he open in perpetuity to unrestricted entry by the whole of the 539 million citizens of the Commonwealth overseas? If we reflect on the historical origin of the present indefeasible right of any citizen of the Commonwealth to take up residence here, we shall remember that it derives from an age, long past, in which the infant Commonwealth was similarly wide open to unrestricted entry by English settlers whereas to-day we all know of the restrictions or regulations which would-be emigrants from England have to face, even in the West Indies. If some regulation of immigration into, as well as emigration out of. these islands were introduced, it would, in effect, he a matter of reciprocity rather than discrimination. Also, if we reflect we must realise that the indefeasible right of the 530 million to settle in this country similarly derives from an age, long past, when it meant little more than the natural right of an Englishman to return home after he had attempted to settle overseas and maybe found conditions not to his liking.
In the long view—and it is only with the long view that we are here concerned —may we not come to a time when we shall have to return to some such conception of the indefeasible right inhering only in those who will he returning to the home which they, or their forbears, once left: and for the rest of our fellow citizens of the British Commonwealth, rights roughly reciprocal and analogous with those which our own citizens enjoy with them overseas? The time has not yet come to answer, or perhaps even to ask, that question; but it may come one day. And the whole object of this Motion has
398
been to look ahead and reflect coolly, while there is still time for cool reflection. I beg to move for Papers.
3.57 p.m.
LORD MIDDLETON LORD MIDDLETON had given Notice of a Motion—"To draw attention to the state of health of immigrants into the United Kingdom from the West Indies and other Colonies; and to move for Papers." The noble Lord said: My Lords, since the Motion which stands in my name is so closely related to that of the noble Lord, Lord Elton, I understand that it would be for the convenience of the House if both Motions were taken together. My noble friend has spoken about certain problems that have arisen from the great influx of West Indians into our country. I propo3e to speak on another problem in that connection, but I should like to make it abundantly clear that the last thing I have in mind is anything in the nature of a colour bar in this country for I should regard that as quite deplorable.
As the noble Lord, Lord Elton, said, it is true that, by long tradition and indeed by law, every British subject ordinarily resident in any of our Dominions or Colonies has the right of entry into the United Kingdom, for visits, on business, for education or to seek employment. Our doors are open to all such subjects, regardless of their character, their sanity or their health, and whether or not suitable employment or accommodation is available for them. So long as that practice involved no serious social problems in: his country and brought no hardships to our own people, there was no apparent reason why there should be any departure from tradition or traditional legislation.
I am informed by doctors practising in our hospitals that very many of the immigrants from the West Indies come to our country riddled with diseases, in particular tuberculosis and venereal disease. Before this influx, our hospitals were filled to overflowing. Your Lordships will be aware of the delays for many of admission into hospitals for operations or treatment, and will be equally aware that patients are frequently discharged far sooner than is desirable, to make room for others. I cannot give your Lordships figures to show how these difficulties have been accentuated since West Indians have flocked into this

399
country, because they are kept highly confidential; but I can say, without fear of contradiction, that members of the medical profession are gravely concerned about the unsatisfactory state of health of a high proportion of immigrants and the ill results to our own people.
I know that many Members of your Lordships' House have spent long years and worked hard over problems of migration from this country to our Empire, and I need not point out to noble Lords who, with me, have worked for that object, that when any of our people desire to emigrate to any of our Dominions they must satisfy the immigration authorities of the Dominion concerned, not only of their suitability for the employment they have in mind but also as to their character, their health and, in some cases, their means to tide them over the settling-in period. I must not weary your Lordships with details. Suffice it to say that our Dominions are very selective in regard to immigrants from this country or any other country. Who can blame them? In regard to our Colonies each one has its own laws governing conditions of entry. Generally speaking, these conditions apply equally to British subjects and to aliens. In no Colony is there unrestricted right of entry for intending settlers—even if they are British subjects from the United Kingdom. Is it too much to ask the Government to consider reciprocal arrangements in respect of migration as between this country and the Dominions and this country and the Colonies, irrespective of race, colour or creed?
It is difficult to suppose that if these arrangements were reciprocal there could be any hard feeling in any quarter by any reasonable person. I am aware that, as the noble Lord has said, the population in some Colonies is increasing alarmingly, thanks to the success of the doctors in combating diseases that were endemic and kept the population down. I agree with the noble Lord that much might be done in the Colonies, if there is underemployment, to develop and encourage industries to absorb the surplus population. The principle I suggest is that no component part of the Commonwealth—and, after all, this country is one of them —should be under any obligation to
400
receive any immigrants likely to be liabilities by reason of bad character, ill-health or any other serious defect.

OIL RATIONING AND RESTRICTIONS
4.3 p.m.
THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (THE EARL OF MUNSTER): My Lords, perhaps I may interrupt the business of your Lordships' House for a few moments in order to make a statement similar to that which has just been made in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister of Fuel and Power.
In view of the continued uncertainties of the situation in the Middle East, the Government have decided that further measures are necessary to reduce oil consumption. The broad purpose of these measures, which will affect all the main petroleum products, is to make good an estimated shortfall of 25 per cent. in United Kingdom supplies. The measures have been designed to maintain industrial production to the maximum possible extent. They fall under three main headings.
First, a statutory rationing scheme for motor fuels—that is, motor spirit and diesel oil used in road vehicles will come into operation on December 17. My right honourable friend has to-day made the necessary Order. Ration books for private motor vehicles will be made available at main post offices and local taxation offices from this Thursday, November 22. There will be a basic ration, with limited supplementary allowances for really essential purposes. Coupons for goods and public service vehicles will be issued by the regional transport commissioners of the Ministry of Transport, and for farming, industrial and miscellaneous uses by regional petroleum officers. Public passenger transport consumption is to be reduced, on average, by 10 per cent. the cuts varying widely according to the type of service.
Secondly, for non-industrial central heating the present cut of 10 per cent. will be increased from December 1 to one-third on gas/diesel oil and 25 per cent. on fuel oil. Hospitals, nursing homes and similar buildings will continue to be wholly exempted, and the further cut will not be applied to schools, but

401
all will be expected to make every possible economy.
Thirdly, for industrial purposes the present cut of 10 per cent. in gas/diesel oil will be increased from January 1 to 20 per cont. Minimum requirements for the railways and for coal production will be maintained, but diesel oil for agriculture and fishing vessels, which have hitherto been supplied in full, will be cut by 10 per cent. Thanks to the substantial savings that can be made in ships' bunkers and by the Central Electricity Authority, my right honourable friend does not propose at present to increase the 10 per cent. cut on fuel oil for industry. I must warn the House, however, that further cuts in fuel oil may in time become unavoidable.
LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH: My Lords, it would serve little useful purpose to make any comment upon the deplorable circumstances that have made necessary the making of the statement which has just been made by the noble Earl. I should like to ask him just one or two questions to enable him to inform your Lordships further about certain details. The noble Earl spoke of a 25 per cent. shortfall in supplies. Will he answer this question: a 25 per cent. shortfall in what? And will the noble Earl be good enough to say what will be the basic ration for those members of the public who have to use their motor cars now more than ever for purposes that are essential to their life? Will the noble Earl also inform the House what is to happen to the thousands of nonindustrial consumers of oil who use it for heating their houses, having installed the necessary apparatus because of the difficulty there was last winter in getting solid fuel? There are no past arrangements upon which the authorities can exercise a 25 per cent. reduction in fuel oil. With regard to the 33⅓i per cent. reduction in diesel oil, may I also ask whether there will be any alleviation of this restriction in the case of invalids living in houses, this being perhaps, in view of the varying supplies of solid fuel, the main reason for installing oil heating? And will the noble Ear], finally, tell your Lordships how long Her Majesty's Government expect this "freedom" for the citizens of this country to last.
THE EARL OF MUNSTER: Perhaps I could answer the questions which the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, has addressed to me by telling him that immediately this short discussion is over one hundred copies of my statement, together with Press notices, will be available in the Printed Paper Office. I think that the noble Lord 'will find, if he will be good enough to read that Paper, that it answers many of the questions which he has addressed to me. As regards non-industrial users of oil, I am not at the moment in a position to give the noble Lord any answer to his question. I will certainly make inquiries and let him know as soon as I can. With regard to the basic ration for motor cars, that will be worked out on a basis of 200 miles per month.
LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH: My Lords, as the installation of fuel oil-burning apparatus in non-industrial houses has been one of the main activities during the past summer, a 25 per cent. reduction on previous supplies moans nothing. Cannot the noble Earl tell your Lordships here and now on what basis these people are going to be allowed to have fuel oil to heat their houses this winter?
THE EARL OF MUNSTER: I quite see the noble Lord's point, but at the moment I am not aware what the answer may be. I will certainly let him know, as soon as I can, what is to be done in the case of those who have quite recently put in this non-industrial central oil heating.
LORD MATHERS: My Lords, may 1 ask the noble Earl to look at mother side of this matter? He has Liked about decreased consumption. May I point out to him that there is a possibility in this country of increased production of oil, and that the power to bring about that increased production is in the hands of the Government? I am referring to the Scottish shale oil industry, which is in a dwindling condition. Appeals have been made to the Government to give the necessary encouragement. Will the noble Earl see that the Government consider that possibility in the present emergency?
THE EARL OF MUNSTER: My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, and I will

403
certainly convey his observations to my right honourable friend the Minister of Fuel and Power.
EARL HOWE: My Lords, may I ask this question: is it proposed, in this rationing scheme, to revive pool petrol, or is it simply ordinary commercial petrol that is being rationed?
THE EARL OF MUNSTER: My Lords, it is not intended to revive pool petrol.

WEST INDIAN IMMIGRANTS
4.11 p.m.
Debate resumed.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, the question raised in the Motions of the two noble Lords, Lord Elton and Lord Middleton, is one that it is good to have discussed in public from time to time, especially when we can get authentic figures from the Minister, as I am sure we shall, about present trends of immigration and the present situation regarding the health of the immigrants. I do not wish to detain your Lordships long, but I should like to make one or two points clear on behalf of noble Lords who sit on these Benches. I was glad to hear the noble Lord, Lord Middleton, say that he has no intention of raising any question of colour bar in the case of immigrants to this country, and, so far as I understood, the noble Lord, Lord Elton, has the same view. But let us look at the question in perspective. The number of immigrants from the West Indies in recent years has been only a small proportion of the total number of immigrants—indeed, only a small proportion of the coloured immigrants from other countries in the Commonwealth. As regards their health, I am told that far from many of them being riddled with disease, it is not the case that West Indians are carriers of disease when they arrive in this country. It is people from Asian countries and other parts of the world who are more susceptible to tuberculosis and are more often carriers of disease than the West Indians.
In order to get the matter clear and not to allow any sort of alarmist ideas to gain currency, I should like to quote a few words from a speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of
404
Health in another place on July 27 last year, The honourable lady said [OFFICIAL REPORT (Commons), Vol. 544 (No. 37), col. 1317]:
"… we have 7,000 more"—
tuberculosis—
"beds than we had in 1948. Therefore, despite the immigrant problem, we have the disease well under control. We have better methods of detection, and, despite that, far fewer cases arc being recorded. Facilities and treatments are more widely available and the preventive services, in which the immigrants share, are in an increasingly better position to take vigorous and effective action."
Although some two years ago the Central Health Services Council were attracted by the idea of some action to ensure that immigrants are free from disease, that opinion was completely reversed by the Standing Tuberculosis Advisory Committee, which definitely expressed the view that the position did not indicate a serious menace to the health of the country and that the number of immigrants entering with active tuberculosis was very small. That should be made clear at the start. It seems to me that before we attempt any new departure from our established practice over many years, we should continue the methods of persuasion and advice, of increasing voluntary help and of co-operation of immigrants which are being practised at the moment.
A body called the National Association for the Prevention of Tuberculosis have brought out an admirable leaflet entitled A Warm Welcome to a Cold Climate, in which they advise the immigrant to watch his health, to take precautions and to find out and make a note of the addresses of the voluntary bodies which have been set up to help him. On the question of health, it should be said that the danger to health seems to arise more from non-coloured immigrants, particularly from Ireland, than from West Indians. I do not think that the situation as it is justifies any sort of reversion to a restrictive policy or to any reciprocal arrangements with other countries. Other Commonwealth countries and colonial territories may think that their interests are best served by a more or less rigid screening of would-be immigrants. It has been the opinion of Governments of various complexions here over many years that that would not serve the interests of this country, and I do not think that the noble

405
Lord has produced any evidence to justify a reversal of that policy.
I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Elton, brought out the point about the statistics of crime and indigence or dependence on National Assistance. Authentic statistics are not available, for the good reason that in this country statistics are not collected on the basis of the colour of a man's skin, so it is not known how many people in different categories are what we call coloured people. I was glad to hear he noble Lord emphasise that there are no grounds for believing that the proportion of West Indian immigrants who take to crime, or who depend on National Assistance, is any larger than that of any other category of the population, naive born or immigrant.
The noble Lord evidently had misgivings as to the long-term effect on this country of unrestricted immigration. I do not share those misgivings, and I would say that there is no reason to change our policy. It is a policy under which this country has permitted members of the Commonwealth and refugees from various parts of the world—people coming to seek their fortunes, or to escape persecution—to come to this country, and, on balance, there is no doubt that we have benefited as a result of that policy. Certainly in recent years since the First World War, the number of coloured immigrants has increased.
Whether, in fact, as the noble Lord said, most of them come intending to make their homes here is, I think, questionable. From all that I have read on the subject, the reason that they come here would seem to be to make their fortunes. It is much the same motive that drove countless Englishmen abroad to colonial and other territories, to go and make their fortunes and then come back to their own country. One hears already of Jamaicans who came over here four or five years ago and who, having made some money, have returned to their own country. There seems to be no reason to impose any restrictions. What is needed (and I hope the Minister will tell us something about what is being done) is a great deal more personal advice to intending immigrants and to new arrivals as to the formalities. the forms that have to be filled in, and the general ways of life in this country, so
406
that they may fit themselves to their places in this country.
In the matter of accommodation, undoubtedly there have been cases of hardship among immigrants; but, for the most part, I should doubt whether their conditions are any worse than those they left in their home country. What is different are the climate and the conditions. They need some personal help in tiding over the first few weeks or months of their stay here. I believe that the Jamaicans have set up a welfare office, and I hope the Minister may be able to tell us of its activities and development. That, I am sure, is what is needed. There must be no hindrance; there must be no walls built up round this country to keep Commonwealth citizens out. On the contrary, there must be every assistance given to those who wish to come and settle in this country, so that they may contribute, as they can, as useful citizens.
4.26 p.m.
LORD MILVERTON: My Lords, I do not propose to detain your Lordships for long in this debate, because I have listened with great pleasure to the comprehensive quality of the speeches of the noble Lords who introduced the subject, and they have left little for others to say. The gist of most of what they said was rather an invitation to careful thought than to suggestions of definite action. Perhaps I might in a moment or two underline one or two of the things they have said. I would say, first, that 1 personally have no reason to think that the Government are not giving that attention which is needed when there is an incursion such as this of immigrants from abroad, and I have no doubt that the proper authorities are studying the problems that have been raised and are likely to arise.
The one thing I feel one ought to be clear about is that the people coming from the West Indies, and from Jamaica, in particular, are not in the ordinary sense the unemployed and the under-employed, who abound in the island, but are only too often people in quite good employment, who have been attracted by visions of the Welfare State and what they hear of conditions and opportunities in this country: they are, indeed, people whom the West Indies can ill afford to lose. The great hope for the future, as I see it,

407
is that when federation of the West Indies gets going there will be created greater opportunities for development in the West Indies, and this problem of the loss of some of their best citizens, who are needed for the development of the vacant lands of some parts of that Federation, will then be given proper attention by the very able West Indians who will be in charge of that new Government. I know that these matters are very much in the mind of Mr. Manley, the Chief Minister in Jamaica, who is a personal friend of mine, as he is of the noble Lord, Lord Elton.
Here I should like to take the opportunity of branching off to say that I hope that nothing I say in this debate will be interpreted as criticism of the fact that West Indians are coming here, or as unfriendliness towards them in the opportunities that they have been anxious to seize here. They have an indefeasible right, as has been said, to come; and they are serving, and probably will serve, a very useful purpose now that they have come. We are all familiar with the work they do in the Underground, in the hospitals of this country, as nurses, and in many other occupations. The time will come, no doubt, when, perhaps after discussion between the British Government and the Government of the Federation, they may agree together that certain conditions—I would not call them restrictions so much as conditions—for such immigration will be laid down with mutual agreement. I believe that the time has not yet come for that, and I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, that much can be done and, to the best of my knowledge, is being done at the moment by talks between representatives of the Governments concerned.
There are one or two comments that I should like to make on the difficulties which have seen such advertisement in the Press—for instance, housing. There is still a shortage of houses in many parts of this country, but I do not think there is any special West Indian grievance in the matter. If it is true that landlords are allowing eight West Indians to live in one room, surely the reply is that there must be sanitation rules and regulations, and there must be rules about overcrowding, which can be applied by the municipal authorities. If that is so, it is high time
408
that these regulations were applied, irrespective of whether it is a West Indian, Englishman or anybody else, who is breaking the rules of public health. I know that a number of statements have been published in the Press about the question of the general health of these visitors. But I have also heard, as the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, has mentioned, that tests have been made, and that the general standard of health of the average West Indian immigrant compares quite well with the general standard in this country; and it is not true to say that they are introducing here a number of people who are suffering from many undesirable diseases.
Of course, economic conditions in the West Indies at the moment encourage the enterprising young man and woman to come over here. And I suggest, with the greatest respect, that when they do come, there is a certain amount of muddled thinking in the trade unions of this country. It is all very well to have these high-minded slogans about equality and so forth: "Workers of the world unite—so long as you are not foreigners, whether black or white, and so long as you do not want to unite with me". That is a question which that powerful body, the Trades Union Congress, might well consider. It is not a matter about which I can offer any helpful suggestion at the present moment, except to say that this is an aspect about which there is a great deal of illogical and muddled thinking and which does require careful thought, not only on the part of Government but also on the part of the trade unions. One hears of instances of refusal to accept West Indians on buses and in other places. I do not attach very great importance to such cases, because they have not been universal; and in many instances the matter has been settled. But they are indications, as my noble friend Lord Elton has said, of trouble which might come. I do not feel that the time has yet come for having definite restrictions; and when it does come it would be better for the matter to be worked out in mutual agreement and with mutual restrictions upon which the Governments would agree together.
I know it is true that if I want to go, shall we say, to Kenya, or to some other Colony like that, I have to get an entry

409
permit and to fulfil all sorts of conditions. But: there is a little difference, even in that case, because this country, if I am allowed to say so, is not an undeveloped, vacant country which naturally has to restrict the numbers of immigrants who come at a time because it cannot digest too many at a time, and which must, therefore, insist on quality because it is building the foundations of a new country. We are not in that position, and there arc different considerations which arise when considering immigrants. I am not suggesting for a moment that health conditions, and so forth, are not a highly desirable thing; but, apart from that aspect, I feel that this is not the time to have any restrictive rules brought in. It is merely a time to do what the noble Lord, Lord Elton, pleaded for; that is, to think very carefully about the future. I personally have sufficient faith left in the Government to believe that they are doing precisely that.
4.36 p.m.
LORD COLYTON: My Lords, the question of West Indian immigration into this country is one which has aroused acute interest and, indeed, controversy, over the past few years. Curiously enough, it is not a matter which hitherto has been debated in your Lordships' House. Indeed, so far as I can ascertain, it is at least a year since it was debated in another place. For that reason, I think we should be all the more grateful to my noble friends who raised the matter here this afternoon.
I am not sure whether the last occasion on which it was debated in another place was when I, as Minister of State, replied to an adjournment debate on November 5, 1954. That was towards the end of the first year when West Indians, and particularly Jamaicans, began to come here in great numbers and a real problem presented itself. As my noble friend Lord Elton said, in 1952 and 1953 the figures amounted to roughly 2,000 a year. They then jumped in the next year to 9,000 and, in the year following, up to 26.000. I understand that for the first eight months of this year the figure is roughly 23.000, so, as my noble friend said, it wilt be about the same as last year. That means that although the rate of immigration is still increasing, it is not increasing in anything like the same ratio as it has been in the past. That, I think, is the
410
first important point, and it may well be that, although the influx of immigrants is still obviously causing local difficulties, that is the reason why there is not the same vociferous demand for a ban on immigration from the West Indies as we found a few years ago.
Of course, emigration from the West Indies is no new phenomenon. According to the Report which Dr. Senior and Mr. Manley wrote at the request of the Chief Minister of Jamaica, no fewer than 500,000 West Indians went to the United States in the years between 1820 and 1950. Others went, as has been said, to Panama, Cuba and elsewhere. Now we find that certainly part of the Commonwealth is blocked to them. We find that they are not popular in West Africa on the whole, and, above all, that the United States Immigration Laws from 1921 onwards have been increasingly drawn up so as to prevent immigration from the West Indies. That culminated with the unfortunate McCarran Act of 1952, which led to the flow of immigration front the West Indies, except of seasonal workers, being virtually dried up. Having regard to the economic situation of the territories, to the full employment and prosperity of this country, and the freedom of any kind of ban on entry into this country, it is not surprising that that flow was diverted here.
The British West Indies have, in the past, only too often been regarded at the economic despair of the Empire and Commonwealth. Governments of all political Parties must share the responsibility for the lack of foresight and imagination which led to the West Indies being treated as the Cinderella of the colonial territories, so that at the end of the great period, when the price of sugar slumped, estates and plantations were allowed to fall into decay and no attempt was made to put them on an economic basis or to build up other substitute industries. It is perfectly true that in recent years a great deal has been done through grants under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act and the Colonial Development Corporation. Some £30 million under the former and £9 million under the latter have been given to the West Indies in the past eight years. We must all hope that the coming in the near future of the new West Indian Federation will bring a powerful impetus to the investment of British and

411
foreign capital, and an all-round advance in development which will go some way to redress the present unfavourable situation.
But meanwhile unemployment still remains high, especially in Jamaica. On the other hand, the death rate has decreased by one-third while the birth rate has gone up by roughly 2·5 per cent. a year, which is almost twice the increase in the birth rate in India. It is quite clear, I think, that external finance, and we hope particularly from Britain, whether from official funds or by private investment, will be urgently needed in the West Indies in the coming years. I feel strongly that it is not asking too much of the various West Indian Governments, and the Government of the Federation when it comes along, to do their share to help to solve this problem by actively encouraging measures of birth control so as to secure a proper balance between the rate of increase of the population and the economic potentialities of the Territories. I should like to say this, with all earnestness, to my many political friends in the West Indies. This, then, is the real answer to the problem of West Indian immigration to this country: it is, to improve economic conditions in the islands so that there is no longer the desire to emigrate, and to secure a balanced population by means of birth control.
However, those are long-term aims, and we are faced with this problem as it is to-day. I should like to take this occasion to pay tributes to the efforts of officials of the Colonial Office and of the Jamaican welfare service, in collaboration with the local authorities, to find the solution to the many difficulties with which they have been confronted during these last two years. The rate of increase is now going down and it seems quite probable that, with the employment situation not altogether as favourable to-day as it was a few years ago, reports are going back to the West Indies giving a rather less favourable and attractive picture to their friends and relations, and we may well find that the numbers will decrease still further.
In the meantime, large numbers are still coming in. and certainly in many parts of the country, and particularly in some of our great cities, the presence of
412
what one might call these undigested elements presents grave difficulties. I should like to take as a typical example the city of Birmingham. I would, in particular, draw your Lordships' attention to a report published last month by the Central Council of Birmingham Young Conservatives dealing with the whole problem of coloured persons in this country. It is an excellent little report and I would commend it to all who are interested in this problem.
The first point (which was made by, I think, the noble Earl sitting on the Bench opposite) is that it is not solely a West Indian problem. In the case of Birmingham, for example, out of some 30,000 coloured persons in the city, 20,000 are West Indians and 10,000 are Indians and Pakistanis. According to the figures which I have been able to get. Indians and Pakistanis are entering this country at the rate of 7,000 to 8.000 a year. En a city such as Birmingham, where the problem appears to be typical of the problem throughout the whole country, it seems to me that there are two main points which stand out. There is certainly resentment among the Birmingham people at the presence of these immigrants, though, by and large, it is not due to the fact that they are coloured: it is due to the fact that they have come in in droves and have swamped in an almost unmanageable way the sections of the town where they have gone to live. I am told that in Birmingham there is an almost identical feeling about the Irish who come into that city and, to be fair, I believe it is true to say that on the whole the West Indians behave themselves far better than do the Irish in Birmingham.
Then the second, and by far the most serious, point to note is the impact of these people on the social services. Reference to this matter has already been made this afternoon, and I will not go into it in any detail. Housing, National Assistance, hospitals and other social services certainly have been affected by the presence of these immigrants. It is all the more noticeable in a place such as Birmingham, which has a particularly enlightened policy towards slum clearance. Whether it is true that they have had specially favourable terms in regard to National Assistance or not, many people believe it to be true. It is these things, these social effects of the West Indian

413
invasion, which have caused difficulties, not the fact that the people concerned are colored. They have been absorbed into industry without any major friction, except for one or two of the restrictions and warnings which have been given in regard to the possible disadvantages in the event of a trade recession
So the demand which has been made of the Government from time to time to limit the number of immigrants is on these social grounds and not on grounds of economics or on racial grounds. I have given a great deal of thought to this question of introducing legislation to control or ban immigrants from the Commonwealth countries to the United Kingdom. I say at once that I should be very reluctant indeed to see any general restrictions on the personal movement to this country of members of the Commonwealth unless it proved to be absolutely unavoidable. As I said once in another place, it was, I thought, a matter of pride to us that anyone who could say "Civis Britannicus sum" had the right to enter this country and to live here. What I do confess at once is that I should like to see some sort of control over the entry of undesirables, and some sort of means of deporting undesirables once they came to this country and misbehaved themselves in some way. But even that, I know, from examining the problem, presents very great difficulties. I should like to see something of that sort, but I believe that in the main the policy of not introducing any general control has been right. I believe the Government have been right not to be too hasty in being pushed into action on this matter. I cannot help feeling that, although West Indian immigration clearly still presents many difficulties, unless there is any very marked change the Government agencies, together with the local authorities, will slowly but surely overcome those difficulties and thus help to solve this problem, which at one time seemed to many of us to be almost in tractable.
4.49 p.m.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (LORD MANCROFT): My Lords, this is an important subject and, as my noble friend. Lord Colyton has just pointed out to us, it has not been debated in Parliament for some
414
considerable time. Nor deed has it featured recently, either in the Press or in the public attention. We are, therefore, grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Elton and Lord Middleton, for having given us a chance to debate it this afternoon. I will try to answer the questions that have been put to me and give your Lordships some idea of how I think the picture looks at present and, more daringly, I will try to make a forecast of what I think it may look like in years to come. But I must tell the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, at once that I shall have difficulty in giving him authoritative figures—that is the difficulty throughout the whole of this problem, because so few of the statistics from which I could quote to your Lordships in answer to this question contain any reference to colour. I think that is something to be proud of, although, of course, it makes it difficult for me to give your Lordships any precise picture.
I can be fairly accurate though, when I give the total numbers of West Indians in the country at the moment—and I should think that between 75,000 and 80,000 is probably a fair estimate. As your Lordships know, however, these folk are freely admissible, and there is no power to question them on arrival as to why they are coming, and for how long. That is why, to say the least of it, the figures are imprecise. As to the rate at which they are coming, my estimate is that this year we shall probably see about 30,000. I can tell the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, that I think West Indians make up more than half the coloured migrants —I think that in that respect his figures are not quite right. That is the situation at the moment. It is impossible to forecast the future or to guess if this is the peak. There is always the imponderable, such as the risk of economic difficulties here or in the West Indies. But I suspect that my noble friend Lord Colyton, is probably right when he suggests that it is unlikely that this geometrical progression will be continued.
As my noble friend Lord Milverton has pointed out, these 30,000 are not by any means the "rag-tag and bob-tail" of the West Indians. Many of them are skilled workers who have come here to try their hand at more lucrative work, and undoubtedly their loss will be felt in the West Indies. This shows how slender

415
is the link between the immigration figures and West Indian unemployment. Anyhow, as your Lordships well know, standards in the West Indies have recently risen considerably, and we hope that this may continue. There is a danger that this drain of skilled workers may be to the detriment of the West Indies, when they launch out upon federation and at a time when they want as many of their best citizens as they can have at home. But my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Governors of Jamaica and Barbados and Mr. Grantley Adams have discussed this matter in detail and are keeping in close consultation.
I agree with my noble friend Lord Elton that there is a danger, and has been a danger in the past, of unscrupulous travel agents over-promoting immigration and painting too rosy a picture of what the immigrants might find here. But there has been recent legislation in Jamaica to control them, and I think the situation is better. I agree with my noble friend Lord Milverton that it is important that the West Indies Governments should be alive to welfare problems over here; in fact I am sure they are. Mention has been made this evening of the excellent Report by Dr. Clarence Senior and Mr, Douglas Manley. That Report is difficult to obtain here, and perhaps it might be for the convenience of your Lordships if I put my copy in the Library for those of your Lordships who would like to read it.
As your Lordships know, there is little screening of intending immigrants, but I can console my noble friend Lord Colyton by telling him that more use is being made of the denial of passports to criminals or known "bad hats." I think that is a practice that we clearly need to encourage. When talking about social behaviour, I have no statistics to go on, but generally the West Indians over here have proved themselves cheerful, sociable and very well behaved—indeed, many of them could give some of us a healthy lesson in good manners. There is no disproportionate amount of crime amongst them.
I have been told that a few West Indians tend to veer towards living on immoral earnings and the drug traffic.
416
There is not much evidence of that. Perhaps it is the case that when a West Indian does turn to crime he happens to turn to these particular forms of crime; but the police tell me that the figures certainly are nothing to worry about. There have been some disputes and disturbances with white people. but again nothing serious, with the possible exception of one near-riot at Camden Town in August, 1954. Certainly, there has been initial white antipathy, and it exists in places to-day—there is no denying it. While, in the main. I think it is dying down, in a district like Paddington, near where I live, there is no getting away from the fact that it is still strong. Communism seems to have made little progress with the West Indians. and they do not take very much notice of offensive Fascist attacks upon their colour. This promising situation which I am describing could certainly become very difficult if we had serious unemployment. I think everybody realises that.
My Lords, I have said that there is no colour bar as such, but it is useless to deny that there is some form of prejudice. On the whole, the West Indians have settled down well. They have the advantage of being a friendly people, and the double advantage not only of speaking English but also of playing cricket. There has been little assimilation or fraternization with white people. Accommodation difficulties arc acute in some places, but there again the refusal of a landlady to take in a coloured immigrant is "news" and her acceptance of a coloured immigrant is not. I readily admit that the housing situation, which I think is probably the most difficult facet of this problem, is in some places acute, and I will say more about that in a moment. Therefore I think we can say that the situation at the moment is easy and may, with luck, get easier. I am talking about the present. It is the future that I am worrying about.
I come now to the subject which one or two noble Lords have raised—that of miscegenation, which is nearly as difficult a subject as it is a word to pronounce. Here again, I have no reliable statistics to offer the House, but I am told that it is not really a serious problem; and as 40 per cent. of the immigrants now coming in are women, that may again reduce the chances of future trouble. It is certainly true that a high proportion of

417
these West Indians are illegitimate. I am also told that there is a high proportion of coloured children in the care of local authorities and voluntary organisations. Here again, I can find no evidence of this. I do not believe the number is excessive or the position acute, though here again there is the risk of trouble in the future.
A number of your Lordships have discussed the welfare question. Here, I agree cordially with everything that has been said. A great deal is being done to help immigrants to settle down. I quite agree with the noble Earl, Lord Lucan, about the importance of all the authorities who are concerned, both here and in the West Indies, telling people what happens and giving them the fullest possible information. I think most of the authorities and voluntary organisations here are doing a good job in meeting the immigrants. advising them on jobs, clothing, accommodation and social conditions. The churches are helping and, on the whole, I think the voluntary system and the welfare services are working pretty smoothly. Certainly, the local authorities are also doing their best. In particular, in the Midlands, the West Midlands Commonwealth Council. which consists of many local authorities, has done excellent work.
Let me now turn to the question of health, which several noble Lords have mentioned. They have raised the point that these West Indians are particularly vulnerable to tuberculosis and venereal disease. That is not the evidence available to me. I have inquired carefully into this matter. I have no statistics to give your Lordships, but the general impression is that the West Indians give us no particular T.B. or V.D. problems. I feel, therefore, that on this matter my noble friend Lord Middleton is overpessimistic. I cannot find, either, that the arrival of these West Indians in the country is in any way increasing the delay in hospitals—in fact, the opposite appears to be the truth. I can console my noble friend by telling him that the West Indian Governments are all aware of this problem and are anxious to see that they do everything possible to control it—if, indeed, it is a problem, which I doubt. They are conducting campaigns for mass vaccination and mass inoculation in the West Indies which I think
418
will be a comfort to the noble Lord and to the medical profession in this country. They are well aware of their responsibility in this matter.
I would remind my noble friend, Lord Middleton, that this matter was examined carefully two years ago and Her Majesty's Government then came to the conclusion that the administrative difficulties and the cost of instituting any effective check, either here or in the West Indies, would be quite disproportionate to the amount of danger, if danger there is, to public health in this country. The situation has not changed in those last two years, so far as I know, but Her Majesty's Government are fully aware of the situation and are watching it carefully. As I see it, however, it shows no cause for alarm.
I should now like to say a word about employment. There is little difficulty in finding suitable work here for most of the West Indians. They settle down well, and employers are glad to have them; and their fellow workers. on the whole, get on well with them. although there are one or two regrettable exceptions, notably the Stratford Locomotive Shops, where the trouble may have arisen from something quite different from the colour question. On the whole, West Indians work cheerfully and well. In September, 1956, there were about 4,500 out of work, which is a degree of unemployment appreciably above the normal level. But the reasons are fairly obvious. First, the lower standard of skill which some West Indian workers have makes it more difficult to fit them into an equivalent job in this country. Secondly, there is the fact that many have only recently arrived and may 'take time in finding themselves suitable jobs. A third reason is, of course, the recent recession in the Midlands. If major unemployment were to recur in this country, however, the situation might well be very different from that which I am now describing. I can add that, so far as I know. there has been no real abuse of public funds by coloured people. The occasional "work-shy Willie" may be unmasked, but we have some, too, and there is nothing particularly serious in that situation.
What is serious, however, is housing. This problem is so familiar to your Lordships that I need not go into it in any detail. It is certainly our most difficult problem. There has been serious

419
overcrowding and "racketeering" by coloured landlords, but I believe that local authorities in areas where this is particularly prevalent are well aware of the problem and fully alive to it. I believe it was the noble Lord, Lord Milverton, who hit the nail on the head when he suggested that there was a need for assimilating this problem with the housing problem as a whole. Indeed, Lambeth do not even record on their housing waiting list whether an applicant is coloured or otherwise. Special arrangements are made for the welfare of immigrants in housing areas where they concentrate. Birmingham soon appointed a liaison officer.
It is certainly no good pretending, however, that all these difficulties and the overcrowding can be ended tomorrow. The problem is being tackled, however, and I saw in the Jamaica Star last month an article which showed that the West Indians themselves are well aware of our housing shortage. Housing is the most difficult problem and the least satisfactory picture that I have to put before your Lordships. The other problems are not as serious as they were feared to be when we had the first influx two years ago. I hope that I have not given any impression of complacency in discussing the present, because we have present problems enough; but it is the future which gives us our real anxiety. The facts I have given are sufficient to show your Lordships that the various Government Departments concerned have made it their business to keep in touch with developments, and that we have all watched these developments carefully since the increase of immigration from the West Indies first began to attract the attention of the public and the authorities two years ago.
Your Lordships will now expect me to make some reflections on the conclusions to be drawn from these facts, and the first reflection I should like to make is this: the situation has changed a good deal in the last two years and it is probably a little too soon to say whether or not conditions have yet stabilised. There can be no doubt that in 1954 there were certain things which appeared to all of us to give rise to more than a little anxiety. Apart from the mere fact that the numbers coming here from the West Indies had
420
greatly increased, and seemed likely to go on increasing, there were complaints from a number of local authorities about the housing situation which was appearing in their areas as the result of the uncontrolled influx of West Indians into them. There were complaints from friends of the West Indians that insufficient was being done to look after their welfare. I have, I hope, shown your Lordships how that situation has improved. There were apprehensions as to what might happen in the event of any trade recession on a scale leading to substantial unemployment among the West Indians. That fear, of course, still exists.
In many of these respects. however, the situation to-day gives less cause for concern than it then did. Arrangements for welfare have been improved and continue to improve. With isolated exceptions, their employment is now generally accepted and tolerated, and though the amount of unemployment among them is higher than in the population as a whole, it has not yet given any real cause for concern. I must, however, emphasise that we have so far only the experience of about two years on which to work. I certainly cannot make any confident forecast as to what may be the position in ten, or even five, years' time.
The total number of West Indians settled in this county at present. as I have said, is about 75.000 or 80.000, and that amounts to under 15 per cent. of the population of Great Britain; and on the assumption that it increases continuously at about the same rate, this figure would increase to about 225,000 in 1961, and to 375.000 in 1966. It may well be that in general the presence of West Indians in these numbers would not give rise further to difficult social problems, at any rate if they continued to be absorbed into suitable employment. If, however, the numbers were to increase at a greater rate or any unfavourable economic developments made it impossible to continue to employ them, the situation obviously might became more difficult. Experience may well show that in the course of the next few years we shall be able to absorb any influx which comes along, but I am sure your Lordships will agree that it would be unwise to take too rosy a view of the future. I am bound to say that we should be failing in our

421
duty if we did not at any rate contemplate the possibility of a situation arising in which action by Her Majesty's Government became necessary.
Certainly I should wish to make it clear to your Lordships that Her Majesty's Government have not just contented themselves with marshalling facts and reviewing social and political considerations. They have carried their study of the problem beyond this and have given some preliminary consideration to measures which might become necessary if, unhappily, it should appear that some control had to be imposed over rates of immigration. In the course of examining possible legislative and administrative measures, we have been impressed by two main considerations. In the first place, any attempt to impose restrictions upon the entry into the United Kingdom of any class of British subject would involve a great breach of our traditions. It is true that many of the self-governing and non-self-governing parts of the Commonwealth impose restrictions on the entry of British subjects into their territories and that there could be no complaint on the ground of equity if the United Kingdom were to follow suit.
But any comparison of this kind not only overlooks the fact that the political and economic conditions of the United Kingdom are different from those of any other parts of the Commonwealth, but it also ignores the special position of the United Kingdom as the Mother Country which has always welcomed to its shores British subjects of every colour, creed and race from other parts of the Commonwealth. It is perhaps unnecessary for me to say more than this. It would, however, be wholly repugnant to Her Majesty's Government, in the absence of a compelling need, to have to introduce any restrictions on the movement of British subjects into the United Kingdom. It is equally clear from our examination of the problem that, apart from administrative difficulties, any attempt to impose legislative restrictions would give rise to great difficulties of decision as to the scope of any such restrictions and the exceptions to be made from them.
It is not necessary for me to go into details this afternoon, but I am bound to say that one of the greatest difficulties in this connection is that of framing any
422
workable scheme which, whatever its object and whatever assurances might be given, would not be open to the suggestion that it was an attempt to introduce racial prejudice and to base our policy on a colour bar which would be contrary to all our traditions. I repeat, however, that it is necessary to contemplate the possibility that in the interests alike of the immigrants themselves and of the inhabitants of these islands it might be necessary to think in terms of some measure of control. Her Majesty's Government are satisfied that, if the necessity arose, it would be possible to devise legislative and administrative measures which could be put into operation at short notice and would be reasonably effective. But, for the reasons which I have given, Her Majesty's Government would be unwilling to contemplate measures of this kind in the absence of conditions which would be properly regarded as justifying action. I hope your Lordships will agree that Her Majesty's Government are wise in declining to take any precipitate action in a matter of fundamental principle.
LORD ELTON: My Lords, I should like to thank all your Lordships who have taken part in this debate. I hope, and think, that it has served a useful purpose in enabling us to pool our thoughts on a very important subject in an atmosphere which has been cool and reflective, and in which we have been looking forward to possible problems ahead rather than coping with a crisis. The noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, has made, if I may say so, a characteristic reply—courteous, lucid and far-reaching. If f understood him, he has told us that there is no cause for anxiety at the moment, that there may be cause for anxiety in a few years' time, but that the Government are watching the situation. I think that that is a very satisfactory reply, and I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD MIDDLETON: My Lords, I understand that I cannot be allowed to say that I withdraw my Motion, but I believe that I shall be in order if I say that I do not move it.
House adjourned at twelve minutes past five o'clock.