Lords Sitting of 4 June 1957

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

DRAFT CONSTITUTION FOR MALAYA
2.35 p.m.
LORD MILVERTON: 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 it is appreciated that, in connection with the decision to give the Malayan Federation independence with a new Constitution as from the 31st August, there is considerable disquiet amongst sections of the population of Malaya on account of their fear lest this new Constitution should put them at a disadvantage in regard to such important matters as religion, citizenship, franchise and official language; and whether in these circumstances an early statement can be made as to the procedure which is to be followed to ensure first, that the people of Malaya shall be given an adequate opportunity to consider the terms of the new Constitution before it is enacted, and secondly, that Parliament shall be given full scope to consider the implications of the draft Constitution.]
THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COLONIAL AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF PERTH): My Lords, Her Majesty's Government are aware of the differences of opinion that exist in the Federation of Malaya on such matters as religion, citizenship, franchise, and official language in regard to the future Constitution of the country. It is because of this that Her Majesty's Government have taken great care in consulting all shades of opinion in the Federation on these important questions.
Your Lordships will remember that the date of August 31 for independence was fixed at the Constitutional Conference held in London in January and
194
February, 1956. Subsequently, a Constitutional Commission, under the Chairmanship of the noble Lord, Lord Reid, visited Malaya and heard representations from all points of view in the Federation before preparing a draft Constitution. The constitutional proposals have been discussed carefully with those in authority in Malaya, and they have been considered by representatives of their Highnesses the Rulers and the Government of the Federation, both in Malaya and, more recently, with Her Majesty's Government in London. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies hopes shortly to publish a White Paper setting out the agreements, which have now been reached, and a similar White Paper will be published in the Federation.
So far as the Constitution itself is concerned, it is subject to approval by the Federal and State Legislatures in the Federation, who will thus be given an adequate opportunity to consider it. Our Parliament here will equally, of course, have an opportunity to consider the constitutional arrangements as soon as the necessary legislation can be brought before it. I must warn your Lordships that, however hard we try, the timetable for debating the arrangements both here and in another place is likely to be tight, I should emphasise that this is owing to the time necessarily taken in consulting the various opinions in the Federation on the constitutional proposals.

TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION IN THE NORTH-EAST
2.39 p.m.
VISCOUNT FALMOUTH: 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 they are yet in a position to make a statement about the proposed College of Advanced Technology in the North-East.]
THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION (VISCOUNT HAILSHAM): My Lords, the Northern Advisory Council for Further Education recently submitted at the request of my predecessor a report on the pattern of technical education in the northern region, with particular reference to the establishment there of a college of

195
advanced technology. I have been studying this question in the light of this report and have myself visited the region. The Council expressed the unanimous opinion that a college of advanced technology should be established in the region as soon as possible. They reviewed various proposals for establishing such a college and considered, in particular, the possibility of either building a completely new college for this purpose or of designating an existing college. They were unable to put forward a specific recommendation, but they recorded their conviction that all the authorities would accept and support any decision I reached on the matter.
I agree with the Council that a college of advanced technology should be established in the northern region as soon as possible. On the other hand, in my view no existing college is at present suitable for designation. It is necessary, therefore, to contemplate a large-scale programme of development in order to provide the necessary conditions. I have considered whether this development programme should be devoted to the establishment of an entirely new college, but I have decided that, apart from the extra time involved, the establishment of a new college outside the existing industrial centres would have no merits.
After considering the situation in all its aspects I have decided to request the Newcastle Local Education Authority to undertake the development necessary at the Rutherford Technical College, so that it may become in due course a college of advanced technology. My officers will begin negotiations with the Newcastle Local Education Authority forthwith in order to settle a programme for the erection of buildings, the recruitment of staff, and so forth. Designation will follow when in my judgment the college is sufficiently well established as regards staff, buildings and numbers of students, and when, in particular, a substantial volume of advanced full-time and sandwich courses is in sight.
It is essential that the college of advanced technology should take its place in a regional scheme in which the other colleges in the region, and in particular the Sunderland Technical College and the Constantine Technical College, Middlesbrough, will play their full part. I shall
196
be requesting the Newcastle Local Education Authority, amongst other things, to review their scheme of government for the Rutherford Technical College in order to afford representation to certain other authorities in the region. I also propose to ask all the local education authorities to consider, through the medium of the Northern Advisory Council, what amendments will be necessary in the existing regional scheme of technical courses.
The Sunderland Technical College will, as a regional college, continue to make its distinctive contribution to the provision for technical education in the region, and I hope that the Constantine College, Middlesbrough, may also develop into a regional college in the near future. In both cases there exist plans, based on regional college status, for the expansion of accommodation, the development of new courses and the re-constitution of the governing body. My decision about a college of advanced technology in no way militates against these plans, and I hope that the local education authorities concerned will press on with them as urgently as possible.
VISCOUNT FALMOUTH: My Lords, I wish to thank the noble Viscount for his detailed reply.

GENEVA CONVENTIONS BILL [H.L.]
2.43 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT KILMUIR): My Lords, I beg leave to introduce a Bill to enable effect to be given to certain international conventions done at Geneva on the twelfth day of August, nineteen hundred and forty-nine, and for purposes connected therewith; and to move that the Bill be read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

ABERDEEN HARBOUR (SUPER ANNUATION) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL
Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1936), deemed to have been read 2a and reported from the Committee.
DONCASTER CORPORATION (TROLLEY VEHICLES) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL
READING CORPORATION (TROLLEY VEHICLES) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL
MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (COUNTY OF BERKS. (CONSENT TO LETTING)) BILL
Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND (PROPERTY AND ENDOWMENTS) BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
SUNDAY ENTERTAINMENTS ACT, 1932
VISCOUNT HAILSHAM: My Lords, the three Motions on the Order Paper under this Act are, as far as I know, purely formal, but before moving such orders I always like to assure the House of their purpose. I have not yet had an opportunity of doing so, and your Lordships may therefore think it better if we postpone them for a few days.

MAGISTRATES' COURTS BILL [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the consideration of Commons Amendments read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I rise to move that the Commons Amendments be now considered. In doing so it may be convenient if I intimate to the House that it has been mentioned to me that as these Amendments are limited in scope and, in so far as they alter the procedure, reflect views generally expressed in this House, then, unless any noble Lord feels to the contrary, they might be taken en bloc. If no noble Lord intimates to the contrary, I propose that your Lordships pass this Motion and deal with them in that way. On the other hand, should any noble Lord desire any information I am quite prepared to deal with them in detail. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Commons Amendments be now considered.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS
[The references are to Bill (72) as first printed for the House of Commons.]
In the Title, line 3, leave out ("and as to") and insert ("to provide for").
In the Title,line 4, leave out from ("matters") to ("and") in line 5 and insert ("; to restrict the power of such courts to issue a warrant for the arrest of an accused person on his failing to appear; to extend the power of such courts with respect to the mitigation of penalties;").
Clause 1, page 1, line 5, at beginning insert (" Subject to subsection (5) of this section,").
Clause 1,page 2, line 10, leave out from ("(a)") to ("the") in line 14.
Clause 1,page 2,line 31, leave out from beginning to ("shall") in line 44 and insert—
(" (ii) before accepting the plea of guilty and convicting the accused in his absence under this subsection, the court shall cause the notification and statement of facts aforesaid, including any submission received with the notification which the accused wishes to be brought to the attention of the court with a view to mitigation of sentence, to be read out before the court;
(iii) if the court proceeds under this subsection to hear and dispose of the case in the absence of the accused, the court shall not permit any statement to be made by or on behalf of the prosecutor with respect to any facts relating to the offence charged other than, the statement of facts aforesaid except on a resumption of the trial after an adjournment under subsection (3) of section fourteen of the Magistrates' Courts Act, 1952 (which confers power to adjourn after convicting he accused but before sentencing him) and").
Clause 1,page 3, line 38, at end insert—
(" (5) The Secretary of State may by order made by statutory instrument provide that this section shall not apply in relation to such offences in addition to those specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) of this section as may be specified in the order, and any order under this subsection—

(a) may vary or revoke any previous order thereunder; and

(b) shall not be made unless a draft thereof has been approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.").

After Clause 3, insert the following new clause—
Amendment as to arrest of accused on non-appearance
(" 4. In paragraph (b) of the proviso to subsection (2) of section fifteen of the Magistrates' Courts Act, 1952 (which provides that where the court adjourns by reason of the non-appearance of the accused after having received any evidence, either on that or on

199
a previous occasion, it shall not issue a warrant under that section for the accused's arrest unless it thinks it undesirable, by reason of the gravity of the offence, to continue the trial in his absence), for the words "after having received any evidence, either on that or on a previous occasion" there shall be substituted the words "after having, either on that or on a previous occasion—

(i) received any evidence; or

(ii) convicted the accused without hearing evidence on his pleading guilty, whether under subsection (3) of section thirteen of this Act or under subsection (2) of section one of the Magistrates' Courts Act, 1957".")

THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendments.
Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendments.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY BILL
2.47 p.m.
Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.
Moved, That the House do now resolve intself into Committee.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
LORD MILNER OF LEEDS: My Lords, your Lordships may remember that on the Second Reading of this Bill the noble and learned Earl, Lord Jowitt, and I offered some observations which were designed to find some means whereby rather greater protection than at present exists under the law might be given to children who trespassed and thereby suffered injury. The noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack was then good enough to say that he would look into the matter, so that we might see whether it was possible to put any Amendment before your Lordships on the Committee stage. I think I owe your Lordships some explanation as to why, in my view and also in the view of the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, it has not been possible to do so.
Following upon the Second Reading I made a number of inquiries and found that there were provisions of a kind in certain Acts of Parliament. One was
200
supplied to me by the Association of Municipal Corporations, and was a provision in the Mines and Quarries Act, 1954. That applied only to any quarry or disused mine, or place of that description, and put upon the owners thereof the obligation to fence, and so forth, where there was or might be danger to the public. Then there was a rather remarkable provision in the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Improvement Act, 1865, whereby the mayor and corporation were entitled to take certain steps to compel owners to repair or protect dangerous places. But neither of those two instances precisely covered the position which the noble and learned Earl, Lord Jowitt, and myself had in mind. I am bound to say that the real difficulty here is that which was set out by the Law Reform Committee—namely, that it was difficult to evolve an exception in favour of child trespassers which in practice would give any substantial degree of protection without imposing too heavy a burden upon occupiers of land used for perfectly legitimate purposes.
I have therefore to tell your Lordships that I have not been able to devise a formula which would protect children who trespass and yet would not place an intolerable burden upon landlords or occupiers of property, if one were to put a general obligation other than the common duty of care which is set out in the Bill itself. Incidentally, the Bill before your Lordships does make a provision whereby an occupier of premises, in considering what is his common duty of care, has to take into account the fact that children are less careful than adults. The difficulty, of course, is to extend that provision to the case of children who are trespassers. It would appear that if an obligation were put on landlords or occupiers, I might have to protect trees in my garden, or a pond, or a bathing pool, or even a wall; because these, conceivably, could be potential dangers to children. We all know that children are apt to climb walls and trees, and it might be that these objects might therefore be thought to be potential dangers. In the circumstances, it has not been possible to devise a formula or to put an Amendment before your Lordships.
There is a further difficulty, though I have no doubt that this could be overcome. It is questionable whether a provision of the nature we had in mind could

201
be inserted in this particular Bill which covers only lawful visitors. I think the term is, "persons lawfully on any land or other property." The point we have in mind is some form of protection for children who are trespassers. The matter is rather serious, because some figures which have been supplied to me by the Association of Municipal Corporations indicate that quite a number of fatal accidents occur—as indeed your Lordships must know. In Birmingham, for example, the number of fatal accidents by drowning in two years was four; in Manchester, there were twenty-seven fatal accidents by drowning in eleven years; in Hull, there were twenty-three fatal accidents by drowning in twelve years. I assume that in all these cases the victims were children. The matter, therefore, is quite a serious one, and I should welcome—as I am sure would the noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack—any suggestion which could be made for solving the problem. Meanwhile, it clearly would not be any use to offer any Amendment to your Lordships on this particular Bill. I am glad to have had the opportunity of making these few observations upon it, and to thank the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack for his help and courtesy.
2.53 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Milner of Leeds, for the care that he has given and the trouble he has taken in regard to this point. He has been good enough to write to me since the last stage of the Bill. I wrote in reply and I hope that I showed him—as indeed is the case—that I had given very careful consideration to the point he raised. As he has said, with the frankness which one would expect from him, the difficulty is to find a solution of this problem which would not place an intolerable burden on the occupiers of land. I did consider the suggestion which he put forward about local authorities proscribing certain places as dangerous. That has its own difficulties, and it would also introduce the further complication of a criminal sanction into a Bill which is dealing with civil remedies. Therefore, I am afraid that we must come to the position which I took up on Second Reading—that this is not a problem that can be solved in the context
202
of the present Bill. I should like the noble Lord to know that if he has any further ideas, either for legislation or for reference to the Law Reform Committee, on this point, I shall be very glad to discuss them with him at any time.
On Question, Motion agreed to; House in Committee accordingly: Bill reported without amendment.

NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL
2.56 p.m.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (THE EARL OF SELKIRK): My Lords, this is quite a substantial measure and it covers the whole field of naval discipline which, with the disciplinary Acts of the other two Services, has been under close examination in recent years. Since the war, naval discipline was first examined by a Committee sitting under Mr. Justice Pilcher in 1948. The recommendations of this Committtee are almost entirely included in this Act, but the Admiralty wished to go further. A Select Committee was therefore set up under the chairmanship of Sir Patrick Spens, and I wish to express my gratitude to them for the speed and thoroughness with which they examined the subject. Indeed, the proposals which we now have in front of us in the form of this Bill are substantially those which they drew up with only a comparatively few minor changes.
In effect, this Bill is modernising the Naval Discipline Act, 1866, which, in its turn, succeeded Acts starting with 1661, 1749 and 1847. That is to say, this is the fourth major Act in three centuries. Prior to that, the Articles of War had been laid down by the Commonwealth Parliament in 1653, and these in turn had been largely drawn from the non-statutory provisions of the Book of Oleron according to which crimes were dealt with
" According to the law and customs of the sea."
These customs appear to have been of great antiquity and they are graphically described by Professor M. A. Lewis in the introduction to Naval Court Martial Procedure in the current edition of B.R.11 (1954). They seem to have gone back through the ages to a remote period of antiquity, back through Roman times to

203
the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon. In the words of Professor Lewis this was:
" a deep pool of universal maritime custom."
In this Bill, either the uncertainties of these laws and customs are terminated or it is proposed to incorporate them in a formal Statute. In particular the Bill lays down maximum penalties for offences. The general basis on which the Bill proceeds is to bring naval discipline in line with the Army and Air Force Acts (which were recently passed) except in so far as there is some compelling naval reason which makes it necessary to take a different course. The main reason why this is necessary is that the Navy is a highly mobile force, and the lines of its future organisation suggest that it will so continue and indeed perhaps become more so. It is not very practicable to conduct courts martial nowadays except in port, and in any case it would be necessary to draw members of the court martial from at least two ships and therefore to have two ships present. For this reason courts martial are more rare in the Navy than in the other two Services. They are presided over by senior officers.
The second reason for the difference is that in the Navy a distinction is not generally drawn between active Service and peace-time service, as is done in other Services. Lack of discipline in the Navy may endanger the safety of a ship at any time. It is therefore very necessary that the captain should continue to act as a magistrate of the community as well as a guardian in these other respects of the welfare and safety of the crew. It is for these reasons that Clause 49 of the Bill makes no change in the disciplinary powers of the commanding officer.
I will not attempt to go through all the clauses, because they have been published for some time, but perhaps I may mention some of the more important ones. At the present time, the Navy has no power to try civil offences committed in this country outside ships and naval premises. Clause 48 proposes that the Navy should have the same jurisdiction as the Army and the Royal Air Force in regard to civil offences in this country—that is to say, all offences except treason, murder, manslaughter, treason-felony and rape. The jurisdiction of the civil courts would, of course, continue to
204
operate wherever they might wish to do so, but the Home Office have expressed their willingness to enter into an agreement with the Admiralty, similar to that which they have with the War Office and the Air Ministry, governing the kind of cases which would normally be handed over to the Service authorities. For example, any offence affecting the property or person of a civilian would be tried in the civil courts. Clause 129, however, makes it clear that a conviction in either court, civil or naval, is a bar to further proceedings in either court.
The death penalty is no longer mandatory for any Service offence, but it is retained as a maximum penalty for a number of offences committed with the intent to assist the enemy or to impede the operations of Her Majesty's Forces or Allies. Clause 8 gives the definition of mutiny, which is identical to that already contained in the Army and Air Force Acts. This is necessary because mutiny may arise by communication between members of two of the Services. It is perhaps worth remarking here that only one capital sentence has been carried out in the Navy in the last 100 years.
Clause 71 (1) (b) defines the powers of the Admiralty in the manner which is now necessary following the Courts-Martial (Appeals) Act of 1951. A Serviceman has to petition a Service Department before he can appeal to the Courts Martial Appeal Court. This is obviously necessary as a filter for the Appeal Court, but it follows from this that the reviewing authority must have the same powers as the Appeal Court. If the Appeal Court is not satisfied that the accused was guilty of the offence of which the court martial convicted him, but is satisfied of facts necessary to convict him of some other offence of which the court martial could have found him guilty, the Appeal Court can substitute the one finding for the other.
If the Admiralty did not have this power, they might find themselves reviewing a trial in which they disagreed with the court martial but were unable to substitute another finding which they thought should be substituted. In such a case, they would be left with no option but to quash the conviction, because they could not uphold it, and hope that the accused would appeal to the Appeal Court, who could substitute the alternative finding.

205
This power is, I am sure, necessary, but it does not, of course, in any way restrict the accused's right to appeal to the Courts Martial Appeal Court, whatever course the Admiralty may adopt. These powers are also identical with those held by the Army Council and the Air Council.
The other important change from the proposals of the Select Committee is in the composition of courts martial. The Select Committee suggested that this should be confined to persons holding permanent commissions and on the General List The Government felt that this was too restrictive and should include officers on the Supplementary and Special Duties Lists, who have been eligible to sit in the past and who, in certain cases, might be specially suitable to sit on courts martial. This is particularly the case in regard to flying offences, because a fairly large number of pilots are on 12-year engagements.
The other recommendation of the Select Committee was that half the members of the court martial should be holding a watchkeeping certificate. This would, of course, continue the predominance of the old-style executive officers. Although it will no doubt be necessary to limit the number of non-seamen on a court martial, at any rate for the time being, it would be wrong to fix a definite limitation by Statute. Clause 54 (4) provides that the members of the court shall not be drawn exclusively from the same ship as the accused. Moreover, by regulation, the governing authority will be personally charged with the responsibility for ensuring, so far as possible, that the courts are impartial and suitably experienced.
A peculiarity of naval discipline is, of course, that the safety of the whole ship's company may well depend on the proper execution of his duty by one or two members of the shin company. That is still as essential as it ever was, and it is now possible to obtain that standard of discipline without falling back on forms of punishment which were once thought necessary. Indeed, it is fair to say that the severity or brutality of naval punishment has long since ceased to exist; in fact, I suspect that there are many people who believe that naval discipline as practised is much more severe than it really is. I doubt if there
206
are many people to-day who really think that such punishments as keel-hauling or flogging are still resorted to in the Navy. But if there are any, I can assure them that it is many decades—in fact, almost a century—since either of these punishments has been used.
I should like to add that since holding my present office I have had the task of seeing a number of courts martial proceedings, and I am struck by the meticulous care with which these cases are examined and the manner in which justice is done, both in the spirit and in the letter of the law. I believe that this Bill is in line with what we think right and proper to-day, and I recognise that any penal system must necessarily depend on the imagination and sympathy with which it is administered. This Bill retains something of the flavour of the naval approach to this problem and is, I believe, a worthy successor to the great Naval Discipline Acts of the past. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
3.7 p.m.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH: My Lords, we are all grateful to the noble Earl the First Lord of the Admiralty for the manner in which he has introduced this Bill and for the care which he has taken to give an exposition of its more important clauses. It would seem that we are now bringing to an end the difficult discussions that were going on in the years immediately succeeding the end of the last war. I know that my noble friend Lord Hall, who at the time was First Lord of the Admiralty, and I, as Defence Minister, were very anxious to have the position cleared up but still be able to retain all those essential features distinctive to the Royal Navy which needed to be preserved in any disciplinary legislation, I must say that the Pilcher Committee and the Select Committee, under the Chairmanship of Sir Patrick Spens, have done a remarkably fine job. I watched with a certain amount of interest and—I will not say with either apprehension or anxiety, but with helpful curiousity, to find out what would be the results of their labours.
I have read the Bill carefully and I must say that I can understand it. I often found that, as a layman, I

207
did not understand the old Naval Discipline Act so well, and I had to rely on the advice of the Judge Advocate or on what other legal advice was available to me at the time. I feel that the personnel of the Royal Navy, from the quarter deck to the humblest rating, could, with a little care and attention, easily understand every clause of this Bill. I think, with respect to the noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack, that that is how the law ought to be made. There is a great deal in our legislation to-day that still makes it necessary for one to take the advice of numerous counsel before one can find out exactly what Parliament is supposed to have intended, but I do not think that there can be any dubiety about the manner in which this piece of legislation has been drafted.
I should like to say how much I welcome the Bill. I have looked round the House to see whether we have been favoured with the attendance of the number of professional naval men who are Members of your Lordships' House; but they must think very well of this Bill, for they have not wanted to come along to hear or join in the Second Reading debate. The only point on which I thought some of them might have desired to say something was the clause which he First Lord explained with regard to the constitution of courts martial, and the different procedure which is now possible from that which was usually practised under the old Naval Discipline Act. I take it from what the noble Earl said that care will always be taken to see that the court martial includes an executive officer, although I agree it would be wise, as he suggests, to draw on a wider field to make up the members of the court martial. I do not wish to comment further on the Bill which I think is a great step forward. It is pleasing to see that in the Statute-to-be we have left out powers which, if they had been in use, could have kept in being a good many of the more cruel punishments that were perpetrated in days gone by. Certainly they have not been in use in the Royal Navy for a considerable time; now, by this Bill, that is confirmed by law.
There is only one other matter to which I should like to refer. I was reading with great interest subsection (5) of Clause 111,
208
dealing with such organisations as the Women's Royal Naval Service and Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service, which are excluded from the operation of the Bill. In thinking of that, I should like to pay two tributes. The first is to the general conduct and discipline in the Navy, which has stood this country in great stead in many dangerous and difficult situations. That, I know from my experience of nearly nine years as First Lord of the Admiralty.
The second tribute is to the first on the list of bodies excluded from the operation of the Bill, the Women's Royal Naval Service. I expect that some people have had doubts from time to time as to whether or not suct an important and great serving body as the Women's Royal Naval Service should be subjected to naval discipline. But I am bound to say, looking back over the years, how much we owe to the general conduct and deportment of that great Service, and to the interest displayed in it by Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent; to the magnificently constructive work of Dame Lawton Matthews, and especially of one who is well known in this House, The Marchioness of Cholmondeley and of one who is now dead and gone, but whom I shall never forget for her service to the Women's Royal Naval Service, Miss Goodenough, who died on service in Ceylon. I think the decision of the Board of Admiralty not to include the Women's Royal Naval Service in the Naval Discipline Act has been amply justified and borne out by the magnificent service they have rendered, and the admirable conduct of that body through all the years. Generally speaking, of course, we can apply the same reasoning and tribute to Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service. I have much pleasure in supporting the Second Reading of the Bill.
3.13 p.m.
VISCOUNT BRIDGEMAN: My Lords, I hope the noble Viscount who has just sat down will believe me when I say that I am not going to attempt to step into any breach created by the absence of noble Admirals, but I want to say a word or two in support of this Bill from the point of view of our defence arrangements, as a whole. Among the many merits that I think this Bill has is the merit that it brings the disciplinary

209
arrangements for the Royal Navy much more into line with the arrangements for discipline in the other two Services. I am sure that is right. Whilst one recognises that there must be special arrangements for sailors at sea, just as there must be for airmen in the air, nowadays the sailor on shore, the airman on the ground and the soldier are all much the same people. For that reason, I am sure that this Bill represents a great step forward, particularly in the sense that it brings one more of our administrative arrangements for the Services into line each with the other, which I am sure is the policy we should pursue in every direction. Therefore, I warmly support this Bill, not merely because of the great traditions it enshrines but because I believe it to be a Bill suited for all ranks of the Royal Navy at the present time.
3.15 p.m.
THE EARL OF SELKIRK: My Lords, I thank noble Lords for the support they have given to the Bill. It is a subject which may be highly controversial, and I am grateful for the welcome the Bill has been given. There is not much else that I have to say. The noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, asked about the structure of courts martial. That is entirely a matter for the convening officer. I think I am right in saying that there is no absolute assurance that there will be a seaman officer on the court at all. I think it is most improbable that that situation will ever arise, but, as I say, there is no assurance in the Bill that that will be the case, due, as the noble Viscount is aware, to the, new officer structure in the Navy. I think that is the right approach, and I am sure he will agree when he thinks this over.
I should like to thank the noble Viscount, Lord Bridgeman, for what he said. I agree with him. I think it is absolutely right, when we are thinking more and more in terms of combined Service operations, that a common disciplinary code should, so far as possible, run through the Services; and, indeed, that is the intention. The noble Viscount. Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, referred to the Women's Royal Naval Service and Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service. I entirely agree with what he said, and I think the Navy owes a great
210
deal to those two Services. I am sure they will warmly appreciate the words the noble Viscount has spoken, coming from one who held the high office of First Lord for so long. I am glad to know of the high regard he still retains for the sense of discipline in the Royal Navy, and for his reiteration of the high duties and high responsibilities which they have fulfilled in the service of this country, which I am certain they will continue to fulfil in the future.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

NAVAL AND MARINE RESERVES PAY BILL
3.19 p.m.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF SELKIRK: My Lords, I beg to move the Second Reading of this Bill. The purpose of this limited Bill is to remove certain doubts and obscurities and to clarify the position in regard to the manner in which the pay of the Reserve Forces should be laid down. What, in fact, Clause 1 (1) says is that the pay of Reserve Forces will be laid down in exactly the same way as the pay of the Regular Forces by Order in Council, and in Clause 1 (3) it is made clear that the Act of 1946 should not apply to such Orders in Council, so that, where necessary, as is so often the case with pay claims, the effect of the Order can be to some extent retrospective.
The Act of 1865 governs the position of the pay of Regular Forces and this now puts it on exactly the same footing. Many of the Acts governing Reserve pay go back quite a long way and often apply in a manner which has comparatively little relation to the manner in which these matters are handled to-day. The effect of this is to give a certain rigidity to the system which in some circumstances, I am informed, might conceivably result in the rates of pay for Reserve ratings being higher than those for Regular ratings. This is the sort of anomaly which is unacceptable to us to-day. This is a small Bill which does not change any existing situation but

211
removes the possibility of difficulties arising under any future Reserve Forces pay code. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Selkirk.)
On Question, Bill read 2a; Committee negatived.

GOVERNORS' PENSIONS BILL [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill, which is a Consolidation Bill, be now read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and referred to the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills.

NATIONAL INSURANCE BILL
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
NEW STREETS ACT, 1951 (AMENDMENT) BILL
House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without amendment.

HEBRIDEAN GUIDED MISSILE RANGE
3.23 p.m.
VISCOUNT ELIBANK VISCOUNT ELIBANK rose to call the attention of Her Majesty's Government to matters relating to the installation of the Guided Missile Range on the Hebridean Islands; and to move for Papers. The noble Viscount said: My Lords, in moving the Motion which stands in my name, I think it appropriate that I should explain in the first instance why and how it appears on the Order Paper. Some months ago, the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, intimated to me that he and the Secretary of State for Air, Mr. George Ward, were to visit the Uist Islands, and would let me know when they returned. He was kind enough to inform me about ten days ago that they had paid their visit to the Islands, and as a result of
212
that information I placed this Motion on the Order Paper in order to enable him to give the House an account of his visit and any information that he thought suitable in connection with it.
It may not be inappropriate if I recall that the matter first arose in this House when I put a Question to the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence, the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, who at the present time, if I may mention it incidentally, is the highly popular and successful High Commissioner for the United Kingdom in Australia. On October 27, 1955, I asked the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, whether Her Majesty's Government could indicate the sites which were examined for a guided missile range in the North West of Scotland and the Hebrides, other than on the Island of South Uist, and whether they could state the results of such examinations. A debate followed my Question on a Motion moved in a forceful speech by my noble friend Lord Polwarth, in which the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, showed that it was [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 194, col. 102]:
" only in the islands of North and South Uist and Benbecula that all the essential features "—
that is, for the establishment of a guided missile range, for teaching our Forces the use of guided missiles—
" were present."
After some considerable differences of opinion relating to the holding of a public inquiry, that situation was finally accepted by this House and by Parliament. But I may say that, although the military arguments for the rocket range were accepted, many of us were not at all impressed by the arguments advanced in some quarters that one of the accompaniments to the range would be to bring great prosperity to a backward Hebridean island. It is true that benefit will be derived from rebuilt roads and bridges and such amenities, but South Uist is no miserable, poverty-stricken desert as is sometimes imagined. It is one of the most prosperous communities in the Hebrides, with good crofts and flourishing seaweed and tweed industries. As regards North Uist, it is true to say that the seaweed and tweed industries are still in their infancy, and although many crofters may now be working on the Sollas Aerodrome, when that work is completed they will have to rely on tweed and seaweed to help them

213
to live. Much the same conditions exist on Benbecula as exist on North Uist.
The work of installing the guided missile range is now in hand, and the process of settling claims by the crofters and others is, as the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, knows, now nearing completion, following on the sitting of the Land Court in the month of April at Balevanich. Since the Land Court first came upon the scenes under an Act which, I perhaps; may be allowed to say, was introduced into the House of Commons by the late Sir Donald Maclean and myself, the crofters of the Highlands and Islands have always held the Court in the highest regard, and probably at no time has their confidence in the justice administered by the Court been greater than during the conduct of its proceedings at Balevanich under the fair and understanding chairmanship of Lord Gibson; and that confidence was, I am certain, felt by all, on both sides, who took part in the hearing.
If I nay introduce for one moment a personal note, it is that for some twenty years I lived on the very shores of the broad Atlantic, with the Islands of Mull, the Garvellachs, Colonsay, Islay, Jura, Scarba and Luing, circling our view to the West, and northwards towards Skye and the Uist group of Isles. It is small wonder, therefore, that the Island of South Uist, of which Her Majesty the Queen last year when she visited it said,
" This heavenly Island!I love it",
should have figured much in my thoughts and activities in recent years.
On several occasions in the last two years I have asked the Government whether, in all the arrangements connected with the guided missile range, the Air Force authorities will have continuing regard to the safeguarding, so far as is possible, of the elements of Gaelic culture, and of archæology, and all the rare bird life on the Islands. My Questions in that respect have been reinforced by similar Questions addressed to Her Majesty's Government by the noble Lord sitting opposite, Lord Saltoun, and by my noble friend Lord Haddington. When I use the term "Gaelic culture", I mean Gaelic as distinct from Celtic. Though it is true to say that usage has made it convenient to employ the term "Celtic", "Celtic" cannot be properly applied to
214
what is really Gaelic, and it is quite misleading to apply the term "Celtic" to the Gaelic language.
It may with truth be said that, from a cultural point of view, South Uist is one of the few parts of the Highlands still retaining its Gaelic culture and ways of life. It is indeed the citadel which keeps alive the Gaelic tradition and poetry and its collection of folklore and proverbs. These considerations will, I hope, be borne constantly in mind by the Defence and Air Ministries and by the Air Forces on the Islands. I hope also that they will remember the words of a distinguished soldier, Major-General Douglas Wimberley, Colonel of the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders, who commanded the famous 51st Highland Division from 1941 to 1943. Speaking as Chairman of the Annual Piping Competition of the Uist and Barra Association on February 16, 1957, General Wimberley, in a reference to the establishment of the guided missile range in the Uist Islands, said that these Islands were
" the acknowledged last stronghold of all that was best in Gaelic culture, and it would require all the Islanders' resolution to hold on very lightly to their culture, their Gaelic, their Highland ways and their ceilidhs in the days that lay ahead."
It is my earnest hope that, so far as is possible, the newcomers to these Islands will assist the Islanders in the task laid down for them by General Wimberley. My Lords, I beg to move for Papers.
3.33 p.m.
LORD SALTOUN: My Lords, I come into this matter on two points particularly. One is that in South Uist—and, I think, in North Uist—there are believed to exist, on very good and strong grounds, a large number of wheelhouses, one of which has been excavated practically as it was left by the people who deserted it. A great many others are also known to exist on these Islands. They are the last relics of what is now a completely forgotten civilisation. I think I am right in saying that the dating is not exactly agreed yet, but it is before the days of St. Columba. If this rocket range is established there, it will mean, probably, that a great many of these wheelhouses which are not visible but which are covered up by the sand dunes will disappear finally. The first question I should like to ask the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, who is going to reply is: what

215
steps have been taken to excavate these wheelhouses and learn all that can be known from them?
One could have wished—and perhaps the noble Lord will have something to say on this point, too—that a great many of the mounds where these wheelhouses were thought to exist would be left undisturbed, because science is always advancing and we are always finding how to learn more from the places from which we excavate. Some of them might have been left to the future, for the greater technical resources and probably the greater intelligence of our successors. I should like to know what has happened and what is going to happen about these places, because it is certainly a matter of great interest. It is a great credit to a country that it takes care of its archæological remains.
My other point, referred to by the noble Viscount, Lord Elibank, so well, concerns Gaelic culture. The noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, will I think agree with me that the point that has always lain between us is this: that I wanted Her Majesty's Government to put a considerable sum of money, say £40,000, at the disposal of the appropriate Scottish historical and scientific department in Edinburgh for them to complete as soon as possible their investigations into the Gaelic remains in South Uist before they were entirely obliterated by the influx of the new population. It is absurd to say, although I have seen it said by a responsible member of Her Majesty's Government, that the influx of a great new population will not obliterate many of these things in the minds of the people who are there. They are traditional.
Anybody who has been to the Western Islands knows that the people there will sometimes do their best to entertain you with a ceilidhs—although sometimes they are too shy to get one going because you are a stranger. Investigation is difficult. It takes people who know their ways to settle down and make investigations and record what will so quickly be oblitera'ed. The noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, will, I think, agree with me that when I spoke about opposition, it was always conditional opposition; it was opposition unless a sum was provided for that purpose. I should be sorry to believe that it was not going to be
216
provided. I should very much like to hear what the noble Lord has to say on that point.

TRAVEL IN THE DOLLAR AREA
3.38 p.m.
VISCOUNT HAILSHAM: My Lords, by leave of the House I will interrupt Business to make the following statement on travel in the dollar area. My right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has decided that the ordinary travel allowance, at present £100 a year, will be available in future for travel to the dollar area in the same manner as for travel in the transferable account area. For the present travel year, from November to October, the whole £100, or such balance as may not have been spent already, can be used in the dollar area from now to the end of October. Dollars have not been made available for travel to North America, including Canada, for the last ten years. This has erected an unnatural barrier between the English-speaking peoples which should not be allowed to continue any longer than is necessary.
LORD PETHICK-LAWRENCE: My Lords, we on this side of the House have listened with interest to the statement made by the noble Viscount, and we support the proposal that is being made. We think it was quite right that in the last ten years, owing to the exceptional circumstances which prevailed during that time, there should have been this special selection of the dollar area as one in which travel allowances were not available. Now that the Treasury and the Chancellor of the Exchequer are satisfied that this change can be made, we think it will be to the advantage of the friendship of the English-speaking world on the two sides of the Atlantic.
LORD GIFFORD: My Lords, as your Lordships may know, I put down a Starred Question on this subject last week, when the noble Viscount said that the Treasury had the matter under continuous review. I am glad that this continuous review has brought forth such a bonny child in such a very short time.
LORD FARINGDON: My Lords, I wonder whether the noble Viscount could tell me whether actual travelling expenses will be permitted to be spent in London

217
as, for example, is the case in regard to Europe, over and above the £100 worth of dollars which one can take with one?
VISCOUNT HAILSHAM: My Lords, I should not like to commit my right honourable friend without consulting him, but my understanding of the statement which I have just made is that the same arrangement mutatis mutandis will apply to the dollar area as applies to the transferable account area.
LORD GIFFORD: My Lords, perhaps I may add that it has always been the case, even with no dollar allowance to spend, that one could pay one's travelling expenses in sterling in this country.

HEBRIDEAN GUIDED MISSILE RANGE
3.42 p.m.
Debate resumed.
LORD RAGLAN: My Lords, before the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, replies, I should like to say that I hope it will not go cut on the authority of your Lordships that Gaelic is not a Celtic language. Celtic is divided into two groups—namely, the "P" group, which includes Welsh, Cornish and Breton, and the "Q" group, which comprises Erse, Manx and Gaelic.
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (LORD MANCROFT): My Lords, fortunately one does not require dollars in order to journey to the Outer Hebrides, to which delightful islands I would now ask your Lordships momentarily to return. I am most grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Elibank, for giving me the opportunity of offering to your Lordships a progress report on this matter. I emphasise the words "progress report" because I do not propose to weary your Lordships by again going over ground with which I think the House is now tolerably familiar. Your Lordships have been given an accurate outline by the noble Lord, Lord Elibank, and will still have in mind the background description offered: to the House by my noble friend Lord Carrington, in the debate which we had in October, 1955. There has also been a recent explanation of the Government's point of view put forward by my honourable friend, the Parliamentary
218
Secretary to the Air Ministry, Mr. Orr-Ewing, in the Air Estimates debate of a few weeks ago.
I should, however, like, to emphasise three salient points. I think they must be borne in mind the whole time one is considering this controversy—though I hope, indeed, that it is no longer a controversy. The three points which I should like to reiterate are these. If we must have these dreadful, complicated and expensive weapons, then there must be training in their use: training must be given to the men and the regiments who may—though we hope never will—have to use them. The deterrent value of these weapons would be notably reduced if they had never been tactically deployed, or if they had never been fired in realistic-conditions. That is the first point.
The second point is this. This site in the Outer Hebrides was not chosen at random. The Ministry of Defence did not put their hands into the hat and bring out the Hebridean site and say, "Right; that is the site for cur weapon range". To find a suitable site we searched far and wide over the territory which could possibly be used; and after most complicated examinations we came to the conclusion that this was the only, indeed the best, site possible for our purposes. It is the only suitable site there is. The third point that I should like your Lordships particularly to bear in mind is this. The Government are determined to trespass as little as possible upon the rights, privileges, pre-eminences, immunities, and advantages (to use an expression which I think will be familiar to your Lordships) of the people of the Hebrides. But some trespass is inevitable. I think this has been now loyally and fairly and fully recognised by most Hebrideans, and the consequences, not all of which are bad, are accepted.
My right honourable friend, the Secretary of State for Air and I discussed all these matters fully last week when we went up to the Hebrides. We discussed all these problems with the officials concerned. We also discussed them with the people whose lives and livelihood will probably be affected by the arrival of the Forces in their Island. We were struck by the extremely friendly and warm welcome which was accorded to us. As your Lordships know, the precise

219
affect of these proposals upon the lives and livelihood of the people is at the moment sub judice while the Land Court is discussing the actual details of the claims, the compensation for the land which will have to be taken, and many other details. This is the established procedure, and whatever our critics may say, I maintain—and I will fight this if challenged—that Her Majesty's Government have most scrupulously observed the whole properly established procedure; in fact, they have been at great pains to observe it. We have all along followed very closely and carefully the correct procedure. I am happy to tell your Lordships that the opposition, which at one time was strong, has now, if my judgment is right, almost subsided. I think that probably about 90 per cent. of the people at least accept the scheme; and many who have an eye to the realities of the economics of the Outer Hebrides actually welcome it.
That leaves 10 per cent. I hope that in due course the natural fears of the 10 per cent. of the people will prove unjustified. But I should not like your Lordships to think that the 10 per cent. of the people of the Outer Hebrides who still oppose the erection of this range are "cranks" and "hot-heads". The opposite is the truth. A lot of men of good feeling and good faith feel strongly about it, and we accept and thoroughly understand their feelings. The opposition, however, has been reduced as explanations have become more definite. The root of the trouble has been that until now, for obvious reasons, it has been impossible to be more specific. There are still a few details to be settled, but most of what we are seeking to do is now understood and appreciated.
I should like to dilate a little on this aspect, because we have been accused of keeping the folk in the dark and not telling them what we wanted. We have been told that if we had taken them more into our confidence this trouble would never have arisen. Naturally, if you suddenly find a lot of group captains, with theodolites, ready-reckoners and notebooks, in your back garden, you want to know what goes on. But the trouble is the overriding burden of security and the need for making up one's mind as to what is wanted. It makes it difficult to
220
take folk fully into your confidence as soon as you would like to do so. I hope that it is now clear to these folk that the areas which will be entirely lost to cultivation will be comparatively small.
Let me give to your Lordships as much information as I possibly can; I welcome this debate because it enables me now to do so. In South Uist, no more than 250 acres of crofting land will be lost, and altogether on the three major islands (of course, I speak subject to the decision of the Land Courts) no more than 750 acres will be lost. Therefore the nuisance is going to be a great deal less than was originally imagined. I am not for a moment saying that there will not be a nuisance—of course there will be. The loss of 750 acres in an area where rich pasture land is not over-plentiful is undoubtedly a nuisance—and more than a nuisance.
I should like to emphasise also, as this point has caused doubt in the past, that we are not building an operational base here. I stress that because in conversation with one crofter I was horrified to discover that he was firmly under the impression that we were likely to explode an H-bomb on the Hebrides practically every other day. That is nothing like what we intend to do. We are building a range to train Service men in the use of the weapons of the future. I have taken the liberty of putting on the Table in your Lordships' House a map, which I hope may be of some slight assistance to those not wholly familiar with the complicated geography of the outer Hebrides. I hope, also with your Lordships' permission, to put in the Royal Gallery or in your Lordships' Library in the near future a scale model of the whole range.
Let me describe the essential elements of the range, in addition to the areas at sea over which missiles will be fired. I should like to deal with this question because it has been the cause of trouble and doubt in the past. There will be a headquarters and main airfield on the island of Benbecula, which will be an extension of the existing airfield, which was an R.A.F. Coastal Command airfield during the war and which is now a British European Airways operational airfield. We intend to extend that considerably for our use as the headquarters airfield of the whole range. There will also be on the island of Benbecula permanent accommodation for about 1,000 people. There will

221
be a subsidiary airfield at Sollas, in North Uist, for the operation of pilotless aircraft. There will be a range head from which weapons will actually be fired, at West Geirnish, on the west side of the island of South Uist. That will have two purposes. The first is for the firing of surface-to-air and surface-to-surface guided weapons; and, secondly, to provide an instrumentation centre for the control of operation over the sea "danger areas".
There will be outlying radar surveillance and instrumentation sites, chiefly at St. Kilda, Barra, South Clettreval, in North Uist, and also on the island of Benbecula. There will be a new harbour and jetty at Loch Carnan. I have made a thorough inspection of that site, and it may interest your Lordships to know that construction has been undertaken in conjunction with the advice and wishes of the local shipping people—MacBrayne's—so that, if needs be, the harbour can be used as a subsidiary mercantile harbour, as well as for our purposes of unloading all heavy stores for the range. That is what we contemplate. The work is in progress. It has been slow to start because of the necessity of going through the procedure of a fair hearing, on which we were determined, to ensure that it was right and proper to do so. We are now forging ahead, and I can tell your Lordships that the Army hope to fire their first missile, the "Corporal", by the autumn of next year, 1958. After that, the use and employment of the range will be progressively expanded.
Now a word as to the number of people to be employed. I readily appreciate that this is a most important point, for here we have a population of only a few thousand, and the impact of bringing in suddenly a large number of (to them) alien Service men, with their wives and children—quite apart from their weapons—is obviously something which has to be very carefully considered, The number of people to be employed, including permanent staff and visiting Service units, will be about 2,500. There will be about 800 permanent staff on the range head at South Uist: they will be housed at Ardnamonie. There will be 1,000 on Benbecula; 300 at Sollas; 25 on the island of Barra, and 30 on St. Kilda. To those numbers we have to add about 700 wives and families, so that the total (and I do not want to be tied
222
down to this figure: it is difficult to fix the number accurately) will obviously be well below the 4,000 figure which has already been given to the House.
I readily realise—and here I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Saltoun—that the sudden arrival of something under 4,000 people is bound to have very serious impact on the rather rarified economy and culture of the Western Isles, and on its religion, education and language. One island—North Uist—is strongly Protestant, while another—South Uist—is Catholic; and the Gaelic language has to be considered. Are the English-speaking children of Service men to be put into schools with Gaelic-speaking islanders? What will be the effect on their culture and religion? I mention these problems only to emphasise the fact that Her Majesty's Government are fully alive to them and are taking them most seriously. I have no facile solution to offer your Lordships to-day. All I can say is that the Ministry of Education, the Scottish Office and everyone concerned—particularly the Service Ministries—are fully aware of all these problems and, I repeat, are determined to trespass as little as possible on the Gaelic culture, education and history of the islands.
A great deal of preparatory work on the range has been done. Planning clearances have been obtained. Labour camps are going up in Benbecula and North Uist. Domestic accommodation and technical installations are being planned. Road improvements in South Uist and Benbecula are well under way. Loch Carnan harbour is pretty well completed. Water and electricity supplies are being expanded. All these works will be of great benefit to the islands, as well as serving the purposes of the range. Radar and instrumentation equipment siting has been planned. Here I should like to pay a tribute, not only to the co-operation of the people in the islands but also to the co-operation and help given by the authoriies, and particularly by the Inverness County Council.
There is a task force now on the isolated and remote island of St. Kilda who are preparing the way. My right honourable friend and I flew over St. Kilda and talked by wireless to the men on the island. It happened to be one of the finest days that the Islands have ever

223
known—and, personally, I should not like to see it in very rough weather. A great tribute is due to the R.A.F. personnel manning that remote, isolated spot in the greatest of possible good tempers. I hesitate to tell the noble Viscount, Lord Elibank, at what height we flew, but I may say, knowing him to be a bird fancier, that we flew at the right height to keep on good terms with bird-watchers, who do not like planes flying too low. I mention that point because we are most anxious not to run foul of those people in the area who naturally pay so much attention to its magnificent bird life. Some fool had shot a golden eagle on its nest on the day we arrived, which fact, fortunately, drew far more attention than the arrival in the island of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State and myself.
Doubt has been expressed whether rare birds and bird life generally will survive this "invasion". All I can say to those who feel doubt is that perhaps they underrate the toughness of Scottish birds, for the place is alive with plovers who walk over one's boots without as much as a "by your leave". Clearly, someone has given the plovers of South Uist full details of the provisions of the Third Schedule of the Protection of Birds Act, 1954. I also had the great privilege of seeing not only gannets diving but also two species of the red-necked phalarope, which is more than many of your Lordships will have done. I emphasise this to show how much attention we intend to pay to this question of wild life in the Hebrides, as we do to its archæology.
I am sorry that the noble Earl, Lord Haddington, is not present this afternoon because he particularly raised the question of wheelhouses. My noble friend Lord Saltoun also touched on that. I made a special journey to the one wheel-house which has been excavated—in fact, that was known as "operation Haddington". I, for my part, satisfied myself that everything was being done in a way which I am certain would have your Lordships' approval and that of the noble Lord, Lord Saltoun. The wheelhouses are all being marked, and either uncovered or covered and preserved in such a way that no serious loss can possibly take place. Moreover, the officials are in constant touch with the archæological
224
authorities. So that I feel I can set the mind of the noble Lord, Lord Saltoun, at rest on that point. I cannot go as far as the noble Lord in his remarks wished me to go, but I can assure him that the basis of what he said and the ideas are well appreciated. We shall certainly do everything we can to preserve the natural resources and the archæological wealth of the Western Hebrides.
My Lords, in my remarks I have again and again emphasised that it is our desire to do as little damage as possible, not only to the culture but to the delicate economy of the islands. I realise, of course, that the advent of these Service men is going to have a marked effect on the industries there, particularly the seaweed industry and the weaving industry—the "tweed and weed" as it is called there. These problems have not as yet been solved. Account must be taken of the possible effect upon wages of the people working in these two industries. It is felt that the contractors may, perhaps, pay much greater wages for a year or two, thus causing many people to leave the industries and work on the contract. Obviously, that might have a serious effect on these two industries. With my right honourable friend the Minister of Labour and his Parliamentary Secretary, I have given long and careful thought to this matter. We propose to set up on the spot a committee representative of the local industries, the contractors, the Ministry of Labour and the Air Ministry. I do not think that there is any ready or easy solution to this problem, but if there is a solution to be found, or a halfway house, we shall most certainly do our best to find it.
Other social problems will certainly have to be solved—particularly during the construction period. A number of "foreigners" will be employed on the construction work in the islands, and there are also the questions of Sunday work, wages and so on to be considered. It is the Government's job to deal with these matters and I pledge my word that we will do our level best to find a satisfactory solution of what, I am afraid, are bound to be difficult problems. We owe it to the people of the Hebrides, and we owe it also to the Service men who are going to live and work amonst them. It is the Government's job to see that when these Service men are finally posted to

225
the Hebrides they will settle down happily and will find themselves among friends—not among hostile people who feel that they have been ill-treated, that justice has not been done to them, or that their culture has been ridden over and that an alien, non-Celtic and non-Gaelic Government has disregarded their rightful prejudices and ambitions. We are doing all that we can, by forethought and planning, to make certain that the people of the islands accept these Service men and that when the Service men get there they will be given the friendly reception which they deserve. And, my Lords, from what I have seen of the Hebrides, I am sure that they will get it.
4.3 p.m.
VISCOUNT ELIBANK: My Lords, before I refer to the speech which has just been made by the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, may I just say this with regard to what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Raglan. We were, I believe, at cross purposes. I think he will find that that is so if he reads Hansard to-morrow morning. I do not wish to cover any of the ground that I covered before. I wish to say only that I feel sure that the House is deeply indebted to the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, for the adequate and comprehensive survey that he has given of his visit to these Hebridean Islands. So far as I am concerned, I am deeply grateful for the great interest which the noble Lord has shown in the many problems, social, cultural and otherwise, that he has found in the Islands. Perhaps it is not inappropriate to mention in that connection that he was credibly reported to have said—and I think this is the case also with the noble Earl, Lord Selkirk—that he does his best work when he is listening to a recording of the pipes. So perhaps, that being so—
LORD MANCROFT: I really said that I never heard the skirl of the pipes during the whole of the time I was in the Hebrides—much to my grief.
VISCOUNT ELIBANK: —the report I spoke of did not refer to the pipes on the Island but to a recording of the pipes played in the noble Lord's own home.
So I would say that I feel sure that not only we in this House but these Hebridean Islanders, who, of course, have
226
been, if I may use a colloquialism, "in a dither" over much that has happened, will be really grateful to feel that their interests are in the hands of one who has as much sympathy as has been shown today by the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, and by his colleague the Secretary of State for Air. I thank the noble Lord again for that interest which I know is a continuing interest and which will solve many of the problems which still exist and also the problems which are bound to arise in greater number in the future. I now ask leave to withdraw my Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
4.6 p.m.
EARL FORTESCUE: My Lords, I have to inform your Lordships that the noble Lord, Lord Birdwood, has postponed his Motion which was down for tomorrow to a later date, and Lord Ammon and Lord Killearn have postponed their Questions until Thursday. This House will therefore not meet at all to-morrow.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH: My Lords, before we adjourn on that statement, may I say that I think it is rather disastrous that we should be put in a position of having a blank day intervening in our Parliamentary work before Whitsuntide. So far as I can ascertain, the Opposition had no notice of this up till last Thursday evening. Apparently, it was not the special desire of Lord Birdwood to postone his Motion. It has probably been clone because it has been found that to-morrow would not be a convenient time for the matter to be discussed. That reason I can well understand. But surely the Opposition might be consulted before we have a blank day. There are fifteen Motions down in the names of noble Lords, with no date named, and others are probably in prospect. It may be therefore, that later in the Session we shall find it essential to suspend Standing Orders to get Government business put through. It seems to me a pity that in these circumstances we should now have a blank day. It is not the sort of thing that is calculated to evoke very favourable comment about Parliament.
EARL FORTESCUE: My Lords, in reply to the noble Viscount I would inform him that we heard from the noble Lord, Lord Birdwood, only at the last moment that he was going to take his Motion off the Order Paper. There was not time to inform the noble Viscount earlier that there was to be a blank day. I apologise to the noble Viscount and I hope that this sort of thing will not occur again.

FINSBURY SQUARE BILL [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.

UNIVERSITY OF EXETER BILL
Reported, with an Amendment.
House adjourned at nine minutes past four o'clock.