Sitting of 4 July 1935

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
South Essex Waterworks Bill.
Southern Railway Bill.
Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
London County Council (Money) Bill. Read the Third time, and passed.
London Midland and Scottish Railway Order Confirmation Bill [Lords] (by Order).
Considered; to be read the Third time To-morrow.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  UNEMPLOYMENT.

    OVERTIME.
    Mr. RHYS DAVIESasked the Minister of Labour whether he has any information as to the increase or decrease in the overtime worked in any industry in this country?
    Mr. LAWSONasked the Minister of Labour what steps he is taking to ascertain the extent of overtime worked throughout industry?
    The MINISTER of LABOUR (Mr. Ernest Brown): The Department's information as to the extent of overtime worked is limited to particulars supplied by some firms in the wool textile, boot and shoe, pottery and brick industries, who furnish voluntary returns relating to the state of employment at their works in one week of each month. This information is summarised regularly in the "Ministry of Labour Gazette."
    Mr. DAVIES: Will the right hon. Gentleman keep his eye on the problem whether excessive overtime is not detrimental to the absorption of unemployed workers?
    Mr. BROWN: In the discussions that are going forward with the various trades with regard to the absorption of unemployed workers, this point is regularly brought forward.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are complaints in all the coal-mining areas about the excessive overtime that is being worked?
    Mr. BROWN: As the hon. Member knows, special inquiries are being made with regard to coal-mining, and questions relating to that industry should be addressed to the Secretary for Mines.
    Sir PERCY HARRIS: Could not the right hon. Gentleman collect, through the machinery of the Employment Exchanges, or through the employers and trade unions concerned, some fairly accurate information on this most important matter?
    Mr. BROWN: I have already said that I am discussing the matter with these various industries, and I should prefer to await information from them before proceeding further.
    Mr. LAWSON: Are we to take it that the only information that the right hon. Gentleman has on this matter is obtained from the employers?
    Mr. BROWN: That is the usual practice.

    AGRICULTURAL WORKERS.
    Mr. T. SMITHasked the Minister of Labour whether it is intended to introduce legislation during the present Session extending unemployment insurance to agricultural workers?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I am afraid I cannot add anything at present to the answer given on this subject by my predecessor on 16th May.
    Mr. SMITH: Are we to take it, then, that there is no intention on the part of the Government to introduce legislation this Session; and, if that be so, will the right hon. Gentleman say what the Government intend to do in regard to unemployment in agriculture during the coming winter?
    Mr. BROWN: If the hon. Member will study the answer to which I have referred him, he will see that a decision on, the principle has been made, but

    1983
    that my right hon. Friend then said—and I cannot add anything to it—that he was not in a position to say when legislation would be introduced.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this proposal has long been before the Ministry of Labour; and, if any decision is going to be taken on this very belated matter, will he tell the House when it is likely to be taken?
    Mr. BROWN: A decision has been taken.
    Mr. G. GRIFFITHS: Does not the right hon. Gentleman know that principle will not pay those people who are out of work?

    PIT-HEAD BATH ATTENDANTS.
    Mr. T. SMITHasked the Minister of Labour whether the Unemployment Insurance Statutory Committee has yet considered the inclusion of pit-head bath attendants as insured contributors to unemployment insurance; and, if so, with what result?
    Mr. E. BROWN: The inquiries which are being made with a view to submitting to the Statutory Committee the question of the inclusion of these workers (and certain other groups) in the unemployment insurance scheme are not yet completed, but no avoidable delay will occur in obtaining a report from the Committee.
    Mr. COCKS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many miners have lost their unemployment benefit, after having paid contributions for many years, as a result of the present situation?
    Mr. BROWN: The inquiry is nearly completed.

    SPECIAL AREAS (COMMISSIONER'S REPORT).
    Mr. GEORGE HALLasked the Minister of Labour whether he can now state when the report of the commissioner for the special areas will be published?
    Mr. LAWSONasked the Minister of Labour whether he can now state when the report of the commissioner for special areas will be available to Members of the House?
    Mr. E. BROWN: The Commissioner informs me that I shall receive the report this week-end. I propose to publish it without any avoidable delay.
    Mr. HALL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether we shall have the report in time for the debate next Tuesday?
    Mr. BROWN: The hon. Gentleman will see that, if I only get it this week-end, it will be quite impossible to print it in time for Tuesday's debate.

    WORK SCHEMES.
    Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKEasked the Minister of Labour what results have been obtained from experiments made in any district from sharing of work schemes?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on the 3rd April, 1935, to a similar question put by the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker).
    Mr. CROOKE: Will the Minister consider a scheme of this nature if I submit one?
    Mr. BROWN: I am always prepared to consider a scheme.
    Captain PETER MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether, in considering assistance to schemes for the provision of employment, he will bear in mind the desirability of taking steps to deal with erosion on many parts of the British coast?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the replies given by my predecessor on 15th May, and by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade on 8th May to the hon. and gallant Member for Blackburn (Sir W. Smiles). I am afraid that I have nothing that I can usefully add to these replies.
    Captain MACDONALD: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether he can amplify those replies?
    Mr. BROWN: I will do my best, but, as my hon. and gallant Friend will see, they are very long and full replies.

    INSURANCE FUND.
    Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKEasked the Minister of Labour whether he will consider the advisability of using the accumulated surplus of the Unemployment Insurance Fund in granting bonuses

    1985
    to all insured men and women on reaching the age of 65, providing they have drawn nothing from the fund during their period of insurance?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave on the 2nd July to the hon. Member for Plaistow (Mr. Thorne), of which I am sending him a copy.

    UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE.
    Mr. GRAHAM WHITEasked the Minister of Labour the practice adopted by the Unemployment Assistance Board in the relief of needs arising under hire-purchase agreements?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I understand from the Board that the practice adopted by it is based on the view that, as a general rule, an allowance under the regulations cannot properly be increased to enable the recipient to make payments under a hire-purchase agreement. In special cases, if hardship would result from failure to complete the agreement, the practice is modified.

    JUNIOR INSTRUCTION CENTRES (PROVISION OF MEALS).
    Mr. TINKERasked the Minister of Labour whether he has considered the resolution passed by the Association of Education Committees calling upon the Government to introduce legislation to enable local education authorities, if they so desire, to provide mid-day meals for necessitous unemployed juveniles attending approved full-time courses of instruction, and empowering the Ministry of Labour to bear the whole or part of the cost of providing such meals; and what reply does he intend to give?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I am not satisfied that a case has been made out for introducing the legislation which would be necessary to enable local education authorities to provide meals at junior instruction centres, but I can assure the hon. Member that the position is being, and will continue to be, carefully watched.
    Mr. TINKER: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries in the various localities and ask the authorities to send him cases in which it is felt that it is necessary that something should be done?
    Mr. BROWN: That has been done. If the hon. Member will consider the report of the National Advisory Council for
    1986
    Juvenile Employment in England and Wales, which is composed of representatives of the Associations of Education Authorities, the National Confederation of Employers' Organisations, the Trades Union Congress General Council, the teachers' organisations, and the juvenile advisory committees, he will find that that report, dated the 20th January, 1934, unanimously recommended against this course.
    Mr. TINKER: I beg to give notice that, as I am not satisfied with the reply, I shall call attention to this matter at the earliest opportunity.

    TRAINING CAMPS.
    Mr. McGOVERNasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that in Clydebank persons have been asked to go to training camps and, when they refused to go, an official of the Clydebank Employment Exchange informed unemployed men that the camps were good, and that three local Members of Parliament had visited the camps, one of whom was the Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) and that they had all recommended the camps; and whether he will make inquiry into this misstatement and prevent its repetition?
    Mr. E. BROWN: I am making immediate inquiry into this matter and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.
    Mr. McGOVERN: Will the Minister of Labour undertake to see that no mistakes of this kind are made in future?
    Mr. BROWN: I could not answer that question, but if the hon. Member will put down another question in regard to it I will have further inquiry made.

  HOURS OF WORK (DISTRIBUTIVE TRADES).
  Mr. RHYS DAVIESasked the Minister of Labour whether, in his negotiations for a shorter working week, he has made contact with the employers in the wholesale and retail distributive trades?
  Mr. E. BROWN: I have not yet issued invitations to representatives of the distributive trades, but I expect to do so at an early date.
  Mr. DAVIES: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to bear in mind the fact that this is the largest industry of all, and that it could afford, better than any other industry could, to reduce the hours of labour and absorb some of those people who are now unemployed?

  FACTORIES, GREAT WEST ROAD (INSPECTION).
  Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the number of factories inspected by his Department which have frontages to the Great West Road?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir John Simon): Thirty-three.

  EDUCATION.

    PRIVATE SCHOOLS (INSPECTION).
    Mr. MORGANasked the President of the Board of Education how many private schools have been inspected by representatives of local education authorities during the past 12 months, and how many such schools have been found to be inefficient?
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Oliver Stanley): The information asked for is not available in my Department.
    Mr. MORGANasked the President of the Board of Education how many private schools have asked for a visit from a representative of the board during the past 12 months and how many such schools have been certified as efficient?
    Mr. STANLEY: During the year ended 30th June, 1935, 17 private schools were declared open to the board's inspection under Section 147 of the Education Act, 1921, and in all these cases a satisfactory report was issued. During the same period 73 private schools applied for recognition as efficient, and of these 21 were so recognised. The remaining cases are either under consideration or are awaiting inspection.
    Sir P. HARRIS: Is not the trouble with the present system that the efficient schools ask for inspection, while the inefficient schools do not ask for inspection,
    1988
    and therefore escape coming under the supervision of the Board of Education?
    Mr. STANLEY: The hon. Gentleman will realise that the inspection referred to in the second part of the answer carries no legal sanctions.

    SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION, WARMSWORTH, DONCASTER.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMSasked the President of the Board of Education how long the wooden hut has been in use as an elementary school at Warmsworth, near Doncaster; and when a permanent building will be provided?
    Mr. STANLEY: The present premises of Warmsworth Temporary Council School have been in use since January, 1921. No proposals for replacing them by permanent accommodation have been submitted to the board.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these temporary premises bid fair to become permanent, and that they are wholly inadequate and unfit; and will he use his influence with the local education committee to have a permanent school erected?
    Mr. STANLEY: I am not aware that this building is so defective as to justify me in pressing the local authority on the matter. If the hon. Member has any information, I shall be glad to receive it.
    Mr. WILLIAMS: Will the right hon. Gentleman come with me to a public meeting, and sit on the platform for a few hours? Then he will see.

    SIZE OF CLASSES.
    Mr. MORGANasked the President of the Board of Education how many elementary school classes there are with more than 50 pupils on the roll; and what progress is being made in reducing this number?
    Mr. STANLEY: On 31st March, 1935, the latest date for which figures are available, there were 4,262 classes with over 50 children on the registers as compared with 6,194 on 31st March, 1934. These over-large classes have thus been reduced by 1,932 in the last year, or over 30 per cent. This follows on the reduction of 25 per cent. in the previous year, and these classes now form only 2.8 per cent. of the total number of elementary school classes.

  COAL INDUSTRY.

    DISPUTE, 1926 (RELIEF LOANS).
    Mr. GODFREY NICHOLSONasked the Minister of Health whether he will state the amount owing to local authorities by miners on account of relief granted during the 1926 strike; the number of miners involved; the rate at which these amounts are being paid off; and the cost of collection, including office expenses?
    The MINISTER of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): I regret that the particulars desired by my hon. Friend are not available.
    Mr. NICHOLSON: In any case, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability from every point of view of urging upon local authorities to wipe out such sums as are still outstanding?

    SOUTH WALES COALFIELD (DRAINAGE).
    Mr. G. HALLasked the Secretary for Mines whether he has received the amended scheme for the drainage of parts of the South Wales coalfield by means of adits which would carry the water to the sea by gravity; and what action is proposed by the Government concerning this matter?
    The SECRETARY for MINES (Captain Crookshank): I understand that a mining engineer was asked to advise the South Wales Drainage Committee on the suggested scheme and that the Committee promised the Commissioner for the Special Areas a report by the end of June. I have no later information than this.
    Mr. HALL: Will the hon. Gentleman inquire of the Commissioner for special areas whether a copy of the scheme has been received by him, and will the Department co-operate with the Commissioner in this very important matter?
    Captain CROOKSHANK: I think we had better wait until we know that the Commissioner has a copy of the report, and then, perhaps, we can ask him for it. Whether he will wish to give it to us, I do not know.

    SUNDAY WORK AND OVERTIME, SCOTLAND.
    Mr. LAWSONasked the Secretary for Mines whether there has been any improvement in the matter of Sunday work in pits in Scotland?
    Captain CROOKSHANK: I am making inquiries, but I am afraid I shall have to ask for longer notice. If the hon. Member will put down his question again in a week's time I hope to be in a position to answer.
    Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAMasked the Secretary for Mines whether the report of the inspectors appointed to inquire into overtime working in the Scottish mines has been completed; and, if so, whether it is to be published, and when?
    Captain CROOKSHANK: The answer to the first part of the question is "Yes." With regard to the second part, I hope that the report will be ready for presentation to Parliament, and publication, before the end of this month.
    Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Will these inspectors be permitted to make inquiries in all mining areas, or is it exclusively Scotland?
    Captain CROOKSHANK: This was a special inquiry into Scotland. The inquiry has been completed. This is only a question of the publication of the report.
    Mr. GRAHAM: Is it not the case that the hon. and gallant Gentleman's predecessor indicated that the question is still open for consideration for inquiry in other districts?
    Captain CROOKSHANK: Perhaps the hon. Member and the House would like to see this report when it is published, and then we can discuss the matter further.

  HOUSING.

    AGED PERSONS.
    Miss WARDasked the Minister of Health whether he can state in percentages the number, respectively, of rural district councils, urban district councils, and municipal corporations, which have built special housing for aged persons since the War?
    Sir K. WOOD: The percentages of local authorities who have built, or are building, accommodation specially designed for aged persons, are as follow: Rural district councils, 9 per cent.; urban district councils, 14 per cent.; borough and county borough councils, 31 per cent.
    Miss WARD: In view of the fact that great interest was expressed in this question at recent conferences of rural and district councils, and, in view also of the fact that there is not an adequate supply of houses for the old, would the right hon. Gentleman consider having a conference of local authorities and, if it is found satisfactory, encouraging them to include an adequate proportion of houses for the old in all future housing schemes?
    Sir K. WOOD: I shall gladly consider whether any further useful steps can be taken as the hon. Member desires.

    SURVEY.
    Mr. WESTasked the Minister of Health when he anticipates the completion of the survey by local authorities under the 1935 Housing Act?
    Sir K. WOOD: No, Sir. I am not yet in a position to make an announcement on this matter.
    Mr. WEST: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that several local medical officers of health are now claiming that the survey will last for as long as two years?
    Sir K. WOOD: I cannot say that.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICERS (SUPERANNUATION).
  Mr. T. SMITHasked the Minister of Health the number and names of the local authorities that have not put superannuation schemes into operation?
  Sir K. WOOD: The authorities who have not adopted the Act of 1922, or who have no schemes under local Acts are (apart from parish councils and a number of miscellaneous authorities):

  County Councils

  12

  County Borough Councils

  16

  Borough Councils

  132

  Metropolitan Borough Councils

  2

  Urban District Councils

  349

  Rural District Councils

  251

  I will send the list of names to the hon. Member.

  SCOTLAND.

    GLASGOW LOAN (CONVERSION).
    Lieut.-Colonel MOOREasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury
    1992
    whether his attention has been called to the fact that the corporation of Glasgow is proceeding to replace their £2,500,000 loan by the issue of mortgages; and what is the policy of his Department with regard to this scheme?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Duff Cooper): I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which was given to him by the Secretary of State for Scotland on 2nd July. With regard to the second part of the question, the scheme referred to lies outside the scope of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's public requests with regard to new capital issues.

    STRAYING DEER (DAMAGE).
    Mr. HENDERSON STEWARTasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has considered the protest from the Blackface Breeders' Association with regard to the damage done by straying deer; and if it is the Government's intention to take any steps to protect sheep farmers' crops and pastures from damage by these animals?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Skelton): The representation referred to has been received and will have the consideration of my right hon. Friend, but it is not possible to introduce legislation on the subject in the present Session.

    RATE DEFAULTERS, FIFE (IMPRISONMENT).
    Mr. ANSTRUTHER-GRAYasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is in a position to state in detail the circumstances under which three unemployed men were imprisoned for failure to pay rates to the Fife County Council; whether these men have now been released; and whether the rates have been or are now being paid?
    Mr. SKELTON: Decrees were given on 21st May, 1935, in the Sheriff Court, Dunfermline, at the instance of Fife County Council, against the three men referred to for failing to pay arrears of Fife county rates. The arrears dated from 1929–30, and the decrees were for amounts varying from £34 10s. to £39, plus in each case £4 17s. of expenses. Enforcement of the decrees was in due course instructed on behalf of the county council, the men being apprehended on the 17th June and committed to Perth

    1993
    Prison to serve six weeks' imprisonment under the provisions of the Civil Imprisonment (Scotland) Act, 1882. I understand that the county council have accepted guarantees signed by the men and their relatives for payment of the arrears of rates, and of current rates, by instalments and that in consequence the men were released, two on 27th June and one on 28th June.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is it not time that imprisonment for debt was abolished?

    SQUATTERS, HAMILTON AND LANARK.
    Mr. GRAHAMasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether any inquiry has been made by his Department into the position of the squatters in the burgh of Hamilton and the county of Lanark; and whether there is any likelihood of their being offered any kind of housing accommodation that will avoid further breaches of the law?
    Mr. SKELTON: Investigation is being made by an officer of the Department of Health, and I will communicate further with the hon. Member when I have received the officer's report.

    COUNTY COUNCILLORS, LANARKSHIRE (PROSECUTION).
    Mr. GRAHAMasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that the four Lanarkshire county councillors who were charged with fraud at the recent sitting of the High Court in Glasgow were after a trial lasting four days found not guilty; can he state at whose instance the men were prosecuted; whether the Procurator Fiscal of Glasgow was engaged in any respect in the case; whether he is further aware that in consequence of delay in the arrangements for the trial the counsel and witnesses for the defence had to be in attendance from the opening of the court until it closed; and, since the men affected are poor men who are unable to meet the heavy expenditure involved, whether he will consider the desirability of relieving them of the cost of the trial?
    The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Jamieson): Four Lanarkshire county councillors were indicted at my instance on separate charges of fraud at the recent sitting of the High Court of Justiciary in Glasgow. In the first case the trial lasted two days and the accused was by
    1994
    a majority found not guilty of fraud but guilty on a charge of uttering forged documents. The second and third cases together occupied two days. In one the accused was found not guilty by a majority. In the other after some evidence had been led the charge was withdrawn. In the fourth case the diet was deserted on account of the illness of the accused. The Procurator Fiscal in Glasgow in the ordinary course of his duties was engaged in the preparation of the cases. There was no avoidable delay in the hearing of the cases, which were taken immediately on the conclusion of a murder trial, at the same circuit. As regards the last part of the question there is no precedent for the Crown meeting the costs incurred by the accused in such cases.
    Mr. GRAHAM: Would it not be advisable to create a precedent in cases of this kind, and may I ask on what grounds the Procurator Fiscal of Glasgow appeared in a case outside his area? Further, may I ask whether it is not the case that the accused persons had to provide their counsel for two weeks before their case was heard. Is it unreasonable to ask that when the prosecution fails in a case of this sort they should be held responsible for the expenses?
    The LORD ADVOCATE: The Procurator Fiscal prepared the case as the alleged crime was said to have been committed in Glasgow. The offices of the County Council of Lanark are in Glasgow. As regards the other supplementary question, I see no reason to depart from the ordinary rules. As regards the question of delay, the cases were put down in the ordinary order in circuit courts.
    Mr. GRAHAM: May I draw attention to the fact that the Procurator Fiscal of Glasgow is an entirely different authority from an officer of the Lanark County Council, and will the Lord Advocate tell me on what grounds he interfered in a matter outside his own area?

    SENTENCES FOR PERJURY.
    Mr. McGOVERN(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is now in a position to state whether he is prepared to release Mrs. Kelly, who is an expectant mother and due to give birth to a child in five

    1995
    weeks' time, and was sentenced to six months' imprisonment for alleged perjury in the Garngad rioting case?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir Godfrey Collins): A medical report which I have obtained and examined shows that Mrs. Kelly's confinement is not expected until about the end of September and that she is well in good general health and doing light work in the prison, and as stated in my reply to the hon. Member yesterday she will be removed to a hospital outside the prison for her confinement. The doctor will keep her under particular care and she will receive special medical attention. In no case can I find that pregnancy by itself has been regarded as a reason for release from prison. Having given further consideration to this case I regret that I can find no special circumstances which would justify me in recommending the release of Mrs. Kelly from prison at the present time.
    Mr. McGOVERN: In connection with this case, is the Secretary of State aware that this lady's husband was sentenced previously at the same court for alleged perjury, and that as Mrs. Kelly is now in prison the children are deprived of their mother? Although there may be no precedent for the release of a woman on the ground that she is an expectant mother, is this not a case for clemency? Could he not exercise his clemency to the extent of releasing the woman, seeing that the husband is undergoing a term of imprisonment? The law is satisfied. Cannot he therefore release the woman?
    Sir G. COLLINS: I will certainly see that the woman is watched over and will make special inquiry into the case. Perjury in a court of justice is a grave crime, and in no case can I find that pregnancy by itself has been regarded as a reason for the release of an expectant mother.
    Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is not a woman in this state of health notoriously unreliable?

  TRADE AND COMMERCE.

    SAW MILLING INDUSTRY.
    Mr. BURNETTasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he
    1996
    is aware that a rebate of 10 per cent. is being refused on foreign pitch-pine decking for supply to local shipyards when it is cut in British mills, whereas in the case of the United States of America, decking cut in American mills for supply to local shipyards 10 per cent. rebate is given; and will he take action in the matter in the interests of the British saw-milling industry?
    Mr. COOPER: If my hon. Friend will give me particulars of the case he has in mind, I will have inquiry made.

    IMPORTED EGGS.
    Sir PERCY HURDasked the President of the Board of Trade the result of his representations to foreign Governments regarding their failure to observe the limitations of exports of food products to this country, as laid down in gentlemen's agreements; and whether, in the total shipments of the year, these limitations will be respected?
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Runciman): I assume my hon. Friend is referring to the arrangements in regard to imports of eggs in shell. I should explain that there are no definite quotas, but that, while the response of foreign countries to the request that they would limit their exports of eggs to this country voluntarily has not resulted in reduced imports in all cases, the imports of eggs so far this year from most foreign countries have shown a substantial reduction. As regards the last part of the question, every effort is being, and will be, made to secure a satisfactory response to the proposals made to foreign exporting countries.
    Sir P. HURD: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether we are representing to the Netherlands Government that this year should see the introduction of the quota which was voluntarily agreed to by them?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: I cannot say whether representations of that nature have been made, but communications have passed between ourselves and that Government.
    Sir P. HURD: Will the right hon. Gentleman make such representations so that the agreement can be observed?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: I will consider that matter.
    Sir GIFFORD FOX (for Mr. LENNOX-BOYD)asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what revenue would have been derived if an import duty of 4d. a pound had been imposed on liquid and frozen eggs from China during 1934?
    Mr. COOPER: It is impossible to estimate what effect so heavy a duty as 4d. per pound would have had on imports of liquid or frozen eggs, or on the revenue derived from them.

  AGRICULTURE (CROWN FARMS).
  Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Agriculture what is the total acreage of farms administered by the Crown Lands Commissioners which are at present without tenants, and over what counties this acreage is distributed?
  The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Elliot): Including certain holdings which are likely soon to be let as a result of negotiations now proceeding, the total area of the farms now in hand is approximately 9,300 acres, distributed over the Kesteven Division of Lincolnshire, the East Riding of Yorkshire, and the counties of Bucks, Kent and Leicester.
  Mr. SERVINGTON SAVERYasked the Minister of Agriculture if he will state the number of Crown farms in Holderness which are now without tenants; and what steps are being taken to secure suitable farmers to work them?
  Mr. ELLIOT: Seven Crown farms in Holderness are at present without tenants and are being farmed by managers appointed by the Commissioners of Crown Lands. The farms, which are mostly large arable farms requiring a considerable amount of capital, are being advertised in the papers, and all the usual steps have been taken to bring them to the notice of possible applicants. Negotiations are now taking place for the letting of one of the farms.

  BEET-SUGAR SUBSIDY.
  Mr. LEONARDasked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that the representatives of the beet-sugar
  1998
  industry were informed in 1930 or 1931, on behalf of the Treasury, that the beet-sugar subsidy would have to be brought to an end as soon as possible, and whether he will take this fact into consideration in forming his future policy?
  Mr. ELLIOT: I am not aware of the communication to which the hon. Member refers, but he can rest assured that all relevant considerations will be taken into account before a decision is reached on future policy in relation to the beet-sugar industry.
  Mr. LEONARD: If I make representations to the right hon. Gentleman in furtherance of the details in the question, will he go into the matter?
  Mr. ELLIOT: I shall be very glad to examine anything the hon. Member sends me, but I think, so long as there is no public statement on the matter, We must treat it with a certain amount of reserve.
  Mr. LOUIS SMITH: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it would be quite impossible in 1930 to forecast the very heavy depreciation in the value of sugar in this country and that the great majority of those interested in the industry are of opinion that it is better to protect the industry by way of duty rather than by subsidy?
  Mr. MALLALIEUasked the President of the Board of Trade what answer he has returned to the representations recently made to his Department by the Shipowners' (Parliamentary Committee, urging that His Majesty's Government discontinue its assistance to the beet-sugar industry on the grounds, inter alia, that such assistance would stultify the broad lines of policy placed by His Majesty's Government before the World Monetary and Economic Conference and injure British shipping and hinder the restoration of world trade?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: In so far as the Shipowners' Parliamentary Committee are able to adduce any new facts they were informed that their representations would have consideration.
  Mr. MALLALIEU: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his views on this question of financial aid to this industry have undergone any change since he joined the Ministry?

  TRANSPORT.

    OMNIBUS AND TRAMCAR STOPPING PLACES.
    Mr. H. WILLIAMSasked the Minister of Transport whether he has given any further consideration to the traffic congestion and consequent danger arising from omnibus and tramcar stops being located on the near side of traffic lights; and whether he has any statement to make on the matter?
    The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Hore-Belisha): Yes, Sir. A practical examination has been made, and the conclusion reached, from close observation, is that it is better to site stopping places before the crossing of a junction, and the reason is that it is more expeditious as well as safer to avoid the necessity for tramcars and omnibuses which have been stopped by signals having to stop again for passengers after crossing the junction, thereby holding up traffic which has been released by the signals and blocking the cross-roads.
    Captain Sir WILLIAM BRASS: Would it not be possible to have stopping places some way before the light signals?

    LAMBETH BRIDGE (REBUILDING).
    Mr. G. R. STRAUSSasked the Minister of Transport what is the approximate total sum payable to the London County Council from the Road Fund in respect of the rebuilding of Lambeth Bridge, and how much has been paid?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The answer to the first part of the question is £413,800, and to the second £372,420.
    Mr. STRAUSS: Will the right hon. Gentleman agree with what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport stated in the House on 3rd June that the London County Council had not applied for money in respect of this bridge and that he was therefore not justified in using this argument to support the raid on the Road Fund?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The answer is in the negative.

    MOTOR VEHICLES (LIGHTS).
    Sir G. FOXasked the Minister of Transport whether he has in mind any regulations to deal with the question of lights at abnormal levels at the front and rear of motor vehicles?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Yes, Sir. I am to-day circulating to representative organisations for their comments draft regulations which provide, inter alia, that front lights shall not be more than five feet above the ground and that red rear lights shall not be more than three feet six inches above the ground unless a red reflector and white patch are also carried. The regulations also contain provisions to mitigate the danger of dazzle.
    Sir G. FOX: Will this also apply to Post Office vans?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Yes, Sir.

    MOTOR CAR REGISTRATION (HOVE).
    Sir COOPER RAWSONasked the Minister of Transport whether he can make any statement with regard to the proposal to amend the motor car registration methods at Hove to enable the owners and residents of Hove to register their cars at Brighton instead of at Lewes, which involves a journey of 20 miles and considerable and irrecoverable expense and loss of time to motor car agents and other traders?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: If a vehicle is sold by a dealer in Hove which is in the East Sussex County Council area, it can be driven, if so desired, under trade plates to Brighton and registered and licensed there. Applications for renewals would of course be directed to the East Sussex County Council. There is no need for a personal application.

    PROPOSED NEW LONDON-BRIGHTON ROAD.
    Sir C. RAWSONasked the Minister of Transport whether he will consider exercising the powers inherited by him from the Road Board under the Act of 1910 to build and maintain, entirely at the cost of the Road Fund, a new road, free from ribbon development, from London to Brighton, in view of the fact that the major portion of the traffic originates in London and terminates in Brighton?
    Mr. HORE-BELISHA: In addition to the fact that the Southern Railway have provided a regular, frequent and fast service of electric trains from London to Brighton, grants have been and are being made on a considerable scale to improve and in some places to by-pass the existing highway, and in these circumstances

    2001
    it would seem at the present moment uneconomic to embark upon the construction of an entirely new road.

  PEACE BILL.
  Mr. MANDERasked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to grant facilities for the further stages of the Peace Bill?
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): In view of the state of public business, I can hold out no hope of facilities being given for the further stages of this Bill.
  Mr. MANDER: Am I right in assuming that, apart from the question of time, the Government are quite sympathetic towards the objects of the Bill?

  CHAIRMAN AND DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES.
  Mr. MANDERasked the Prime Minister whether he will consider taking steps to see how far agreement could be reached between all parties in the House that when the next vacancies occur the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of Committees shall be elected by the free choice of the House itself regardless of party considerations?
  The PRIME MINISTER: The hon. Member's suggestion is noted.
  Mr. MANDER: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to consider the question some time before any vacancy is likely to occur, or before the dissolution?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I do not think that anything is likely to occur before the dissolution, and anything beyond that is hypothetical.
  Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Has my right hon. Friend thought of the possibility of lending this building to the Council of Action?

  ANCIENT BUILDING, ACTON BURNELL.
  Mr. MANDERasked the First Commissioner of Works whether he will take steps to preserve the remains of the ancient building at Acton Burnell in which Parliament sat in 1283?
  Commander SOUTHBY (Lord of the Treasury): It is assumed that the hon. Member refers to the two detached gable walls some distance from the northeast corner of the castle. So far as can be ascertained, the building of which these remains formed a part was of no earlier date than the castle, which was certainly not begun until after the year 1283. The castle is already under the guardianship of my right hon. Friend's Department, but all other buildings are maintained by the owner.
  Commander MARSDEN: Would not this building be more suitable for the Council of Action than the House of Commons?

  AUSTRALIAN AIR ROUTE.
  Captain P. MACDONALDasked Secretary of State for Air whether he is now in a position to make any statement in regard to the outcome of the negotiations which took place between the British delegation which visited Empire Governments and administrations on the Australian air route during the early part of the current year; and whether he can now state by what date it will be possible to inaugurate the scheme for more frequent flights over this route with reduced charges for mails?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Philip Sassoon): Discussions are still proceeding, and I regret that I am not yet in a position to make any further statement or to give a firm date for the inauguration of the scheme.

  MERCANTILE MARINE.

    LOSSES AT SEA (INQUIRIES).
    Mr. LOGANasked the President of the Board of Trade whether the evidence and findings of the inquiry into the loss of the "Blairgowrie," "Usworth," "La Crescenta," and "Millpool," presided over by Lord Merrivale, will be presented to Parliament?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: The reports of the court on the loss of each of the ships in question will be published by the Stationery Office in the usual way, and will be obtainable through the Vote Office. The report on the "Usworth" was published yesterday.
    Mr. LOGAN: Will they be presented to Parliament in view of the importance of this investigation?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: I think that the report is available to any Member of the House who cares to ask for it.

    BRITISH OFFICER'S IMPRISONMENT, PALMA.
    Vice-Admiral CAMPBELLasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information concerning the case of Captain A. W. Kane, the master of the British steamer "Brompton Manor," who was recently sentenced to imprisonment at Palma, Majorca?
    The MINISTER for LEAGUE of NATIONS AFFAIRS (Mr. Eden): Yes, Sir. Captain Kane was sentenced to two years and eleven months' imprisonment on a charge of assaulting the police. An immediate appeal is being lodged against the sentence, and Captain Kane is provided with good legal advice. Pending the result of the appeal the case is still sub judice, but the British Vice-Consul at Palma is in touch with Captain Kane, and my right hon. Friend is also in communication with His Majesty's Ambassador at Madrid.
    Mr. CHURCHILL: Is he still in prison or has he been allowed out on bail?
    Mr. EDEN: I am not certain of that, but I have received a telegram from His Majesty's Ambassador since I came into the House, saying that he has communicated with the Spanish Government and hopes that a solution will be found whereby, whilst respecting Spanish law, any undue severity will be mitigated.
    Sir HUGH O'NEILL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Captain Kane was arrested as the result of some small fracas in a cafe, and is not a sentence of two years' imprisonment for an offence of that sort extraordinary? Is he still in prison, and will the Government take every possible step to secure that the appeal is brought on as quickly as possible and that the best legal aid is given to Captain Kane in order to enable him to vindicate his character?
    Mr. EDEN: The answer I have given shows that we have already taken steps in this case.
    Mr. CHURCHILL: Will the right hon. Gentleman address himself also to the question of bail, pending a further decision?

  BRITISH SOMALILAND.
  Mr. DICKIEasked the the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will lay upon the Table the text of our treaties between 14th July, 1884, and 27th January, 1886, whereunder, on the withdrawal of Egyptian protection from Somali territory, the leading Mohammedan chiefs and inhabitants expressed voluntarily their desire to place their territories under the protection and jurisdiction of Her Majesty the Queen Empress; and whether he will state what negotiations, if any, have taken place between the governor and the inhabitants of those areas which it was proposed to transfer to another sovereignty?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Malcolm MacDonald): The texts of the treaties in question are contained in Volumes 76 and 77 of the State Papers, but, for the convenience of the House, I have arranged for a memorandum containing the texts to be placed in the Library. As regards the second part of the question, no such negotiations took place having regard to the tentative nature of the suggestion made by my right hon. Friend the Minister for League of Nations Affairs to Signor Mussolini.
  Mr. DICKIE: Am I to understand from the reply that the powers claimed by the Foreign Secretary for the Executive extend not only to the cession of British territory without the consent of this House, but also to the transfer of peoples, whom by treaty we have undertaken to protect, to another sovereignty, and further, what would happen if these people refused to be transferred?
  Mr. MacDONALD: I have explained that, the special circumstances described were on account of the tentative nature of the suggestion made. With regard to the question of transferring territory, it would not be necessary to have the consent of the tribes concerned, but, of course, we were bound to consult their interests and their interests would have been consulted by us if the suggestion had gone any further.
  Mr. WISE: Is the right hon. Gentleman perfectly certain that we can violate these treaties at our own will without consultation with those concerned?
  Mr. MacDONALD: There is no question of violation of treaties.
  Mr. DICKIE: Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman has acknowledged that these people have not been consulted. Had this proposal gone through, would the British Government have been expected either to have left them to their fate or, by force if necessary, to have driven them out of an agreement voluntarily entered into?
  Lieut.-Colonel Sir ARNOLD WILSONasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he took steps to ascertain the views of the Muhammedan inhabitants of Somaliland before assenting to the proposed transfer of territory, including the principal port, to another sovereignty?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: No, Sir. As has already been explained to the House, the suggestion referred to was a tentative one. I might add that the principal port of British Somaliland is not Zeila but Berbera, which was, of course, not involved in the suggestion.
  Sir A. WILSON: May I ask my right hon. Friend whether before giving his assent to this tentative suggestion for and exercise of the Royal prerogative, His Majesty's pleasure on the subject was ascertained?
  Mr. MacDONALD: I understand that the information of my hon. and gallant Friend as to the circumstances in which such a suggestion could have been put into practice is out of date.
  Mr. WISE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the intense feeling which was aroused on a previous occasion when we transferred Somali subjects, this time to the Italian Government, and will he take into very serious account the possible effects on all the native populations in that area if any suggestions are made even tentatively in the future?
  Mr. MacDONALD: All those points were taken into consideration, and I would point out again that there never was any suggestion that any territory should be handed over unconditionally. There were certain conditions on which we would have required satisfaction.
  Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: Are there any other tentative suggestions of the same kind under consideration?
  Mr. SANDYS: Will the right hon. Gentleman make his statement regarding the consultation with His Majesty more clear?
  Mr. MacDONALD: I am advised by a high authority that the position which was suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend with regard to His Majesty's prerogative does not hold to-day as it did in the fairly recent past.
  Captain P. MACDONALD—
  Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot discuss the question now.
  Sir P. HURDasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the size and character of the territory in British Somaliland which was offered as an inducement to Italo-Ethiopian concord; how many inhabitants would have been affected; and whether any means were taken to ascertain their wishes?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: It was contemplated that the Port of Zeila might, subject to certain conditions, be ceded to Ethiopia, together with a corridor of territory roughly 50 miles long by 12 miles wide, linking it to that country. The number of inhabitants fluctuates according to the season; in Zeila itself it varies from about 3,000 in summer to about 7,000 in winter. There are no permanent inhabitants in the hinterland, which is only visited at certain seasons by nomadic tribesmen. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer to my reply a few minutes ago to Question No. 53 put by my hon. Friend the Member for Consett (Mr. Dickie).
  Sir P. HURD: Are offers of this sort conditional on numbers of people, and the character of the territory, or is it sufficient to say that it is under the Crown and that therefore certain steps should be taken?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: All the relative factors concerning the number of people and the character of the territory naturally enter into any consideration.
  Captain P. MACDONALD: Before making any further tentative suggestions on these lines, will the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues seriously

  2007
  consider the disquieting effects that such suggestions are going to make on the minds of native tribes throughout the British Empire?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: I can only repeat what my right hon. Friend the Minister for League of Nations Affairs made clear in his statement the other day, that one of the conditions attaching to this tentative suggestion was that the grazing and watering rights of the tribes throughout British Somaliland where they exist outside our territory should be completely guaranteed.
  SEVERAL HON. MEMBERS—
  Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot further discuss the matter at Question Time.
  Sir A. WILSONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in order to maintain the principles of the Covenant of the League of Nations, he will in future, in considering the transfer of territory from British to alien sovereignty, provide for the transfer to be made by means of a mandate of the League of Nations, thus ensuring periodical reports and supervision in the interests of the inhabitants?
  Mr. EDEN: I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that in considering any such proposal His Majesty's Government would naturally satisfy themselves that the action contemplated was consistent with the terms of the Covenant.
  Miss RATHBONE: Is it the view of the right hon. Gentleman that he cannot better serve the principles of the League of Nations than by endeavouring to prevent war between two of its members?
  Sir P. HURDasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give an assurance that in any negotiations with foreign Powers which involve an offer of territory, mandated or otherwise, the House will be informed before any such offer becomes effective?
  Mr. EDEN: Yes, Sir, I can assure my hon. Friend that it is the consistent policy of His Majesty's Government to keep the House fully informed in such matters. My hon. Friend no doubt has in mind the suggestion recently made by His Majesty's Government to Signor
  2008
  Mussolini as regards the cession to Abyssinia of a small strip of British Somaliland, to which I referred in the House last Monday.
  This suggestion represented an effort to reach an agreed settlement of a situation which His Majesty's Government regard with grave concern. It was put forward solely in order to find out from Signor Mussolini whether, should His Majesty's Government make a formal proposal on these lines it would be likely to commend itself to the Italian Government as a constructive contribution to the settlement of the dispute between Italy and Abyssinia. For that reason, as the House will appreciate, it could not be published in advance of its preliminary communication to Signor Mussolini. But, had the suggestion been favourably received, a full explanation of it would at once have been given to the House with opportunity for full discussion.
  I would like further to make it clear that, had this tentative suggestion been favourably received, His Majesty's Government would at once have entered into consultation with the French Government as co-signatory of the 1906 Treaty, and with the Ethiopian Government.
  Sir P. HURD: In view of the speech reported to have been made yesterday by the President of the Board of Education, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the principles that he has now enunciated will be followed in any further tentative offers of this kind?
  Mr. EDEN: My answer is quite clear. I began it by saying "Yes, Sir" to my hon. Friend.
  Mr. PETHERICK: In view of the grave danger that this tentative proposal may be taken by certain Foreign Powers as a precedent, will the right hon. Gentleman make it perfectly clear that His Majesty's Government will not try to induce Foreign Powers to keep the peace by the transfer of British territory?
  Mr. EDEN: Yes, Sir, but I would remind my hon. Friend that there are always grave dangers in any positive action.
  Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether Signor Mussolini was informed that this offer was conditional on the assent of the people in

  2009
  Somaliland, with whom we had entered into treaty? Was it tentative in that sense?
  Sir A. WILSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many British-protected persons domiciled in Somaliland are serving in the Royal Navy and the Royal Indian Navy?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Sir Victor Warrender): The number of natives of British Somaliland now serving in the Royal Navy is 142. As regards the Royal Indian Navy, I understand from my noble Friend that there is no information available in his Department, but if my hon. and gallant Friend desires, inquiries will be made of the Government of India.
  Sir A. WILSON: May I ask whether the natives of Somaliland are, in fact, British-protected persons or not?
  Sir V. WARRENDER: The hon. and gallant Member asked for some figures and I have given them. If he wants further information, perhaps he will put a question down.
  Sir A. WILSON: The question asks "How many protected British persons are domiciled in Somaliland?"
  Sir V. WARRENDER: The question was interpreted as closely as possible, and it was taken that what the hon. and gallant Member desired to know was how many Somalis are serving in the Royal Navy; and those are the figures I have given.

  KENYA.
  Captain P. MACDONALDasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can make any statement as to the floating of the new Kenya loan, more especially in regard to its amount, its interest, and its uses?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: No decision has yet been taken as to raising an additional loan for Kenya. I have received certain proposals which are now under consideration.
  Captain P. MACDONALD: Will the right hon. Gentleman see to it that the existing loans, which are a great burden upon the taxpayers of this Colony, are dealt with before new loans are entered into?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: That is one of the matters which I hope to consider in connection with the proposal.
  56. Mr. BANFIELDasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the increased revenue from the native taxation in Kenya Colony, there is any proposal to reduce it?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: I have not received any information that revenue from native taxation shows an increase. I have seen in the Press a statement attributed to the Acting Governor of Kenya that considerable arrears of taxation from last year have now been paid, but that does not justify any revision of taxation, and I have had no proposals to that effect.

  ZANZIBAR (CLOVE INDUSTRY).
  Mr. PALINGasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received any comments from the Government of India following the report of the special officer sent by that Government to report on the recent clove legislation and other matters?
  Mr. M. MacDONALD: Yes, Sir, comments from the Government of India have been received, and I shall shortly enter into discussion on these with my Noble Friend the Secretary of State for India.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. ATTLEE: May I ask the Prime Minister what the business is for next week?
The PRIME MINISTER: Monday: Committee stage of the National Health Insurance and Contributory Pensions Bill.
Tuesday: Supply (11th Allotted day), Committee. The Opposition Vote of Censure on unemployment and distressed areas will be debated instead of a Supply Vote.
Wednesday: Supply (12th Allotted day), Committee, Class 1, Vote 4, Estimate for the Treasury and subordinate departments, and a Supplementary Estimate which includes provision for a Minister without Portfolio. This Vote will be disposed of at 7.30 p.m., and questions affecting the Irish Free State will be raised on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

2011
Thursday: Supply (13th Allotted day), Committee, Class 2, Vote 1, Foreign Office Vote.
The business for Friday will be announced later.
On any day, if there is time, other Orders may be taken.
Mr. CROSSLEY: May I ask the Prime Minister if it is his intention to proceed with the Cotton Spinning Industry Bill this Session?
The PRIME MINISTER: Only if we can obtain general agreement throughout the House. The Bill has been introduced, and has been circulated, and we may get some information as to the support it will receive.
Mr. CHURCHILL: With regard to the debate on Wednesday evening on the Irish Free State and the recent developments which have taken place owing to the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, I presume it is the Prime Minister's desire that the debate shall be general and enable the question to be freely ventilated?
The PRIME MINISTER: Yes, that is why we have arranged, by agreement, to take it on the Motion for the Adjournment.

BILLS REPORTED.

  PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDER (SCARBOROUGH) BILL.
  Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Order confirmed].
  Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

  SWANSEA TRAMWAYS BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with an Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  SOUTH SUBURBAN GAS BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with Amendments.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  BOSTON CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  URMSTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  NOTTINGHAM CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
  Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

  LAND DRAINAGE (GREAT OUSE) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  Reported [Provisional Order not confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—
Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Guildford) Bill.
Sheffield Corporation (Tramways) Provisional Order Bill.
Portsmouth Corporation (Trolley Vehicles) Provisional Order Bill, without Amendment.
West Hampshire Water Bill, with Amendments.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order of the Ministry of Health relating to the borough of Watford." [Ministry of Health Provisional Order Confirmation (Watford) Bill [Lords.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (WATFORD) BILL [Lords].
  Read the First time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 105.]
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.
Report from the Committee, with Minutes of Evidence and Appendices, brought up, and read; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

  SCOTTISH STANDING COMMITTEE.
  Mr. William Nicholson reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had added the following Ten Members to the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills (in respect of the Public Health (Water and Sewerage) (Scotland) Bill and the Criminal Lunatics (Scotland) Bill [Lords]): Mr. David Adams, Sir Reginald Blaker, Mr. Bracken, Mr. Chorlton, Major Despencer-Robertson, Captain Elliston, Sir Francis Fremantle, Sir Ernest Graham-Little, Mr. Perkins, and Mr. Ross Taylor.
  Report to lie upon the Table.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY.
  [10TH ALLOTTED DAY].
  Considered in Committee.
  [Sir DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair].

  SUPPLY.
    CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1935.
      CLASS III.

        POLICE, SCOTLAND.
        Motion made, and Question proposed,
        "That a sum, not exceeding £899,488, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1936, for the Salary and Expenses of the Inspector of Constabulary; Grants in respect of Police Expenditure and a Grant in Aid of the Police Federation in Scotland." [NOTE: £225,000 has been voted on account.]
        3.40 p.m.
        Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: Would it not be advisable and for the convenience of the Committee to take together the Votes for the Police and for the Prisons, as they are related? It might save the time of the Committee. Otherwise the two debates would probably overlap.
        The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir Godfrey Collins): I very readily rise to support the suggestion of the hon. Member. It would indeed be rather difficult to have a debate solely on the Police Vote, and I think it would be for the general convenience of all who are interested in the subject if we discussed the two Votes together, as they are so interlocked.
        3.41 p.m.
        The CHAIRMAN: The discussion of the two Votes together can be done only with the general assent of the Committee. After what has been said by the representative of the Opposition and by the Secretary of State the Committee will probably think that that would be a convenient course, and in that case I raise no objection to it. If that be the general agreement it will, of course, be understood that when the discussion has resulted in a vote being taken on the first Vote, a decision will be taken on the second Vote without any further discussion. I assume that that is the general sense of the Committee.
        3.42 p.m.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I am anxious, in view of your ruling, to give to the Committee a survey of the position of the Police Forces in Scotland as well as of the Prisons Department. During the past 12 months there has been much Parliamentary anxiety on certain matters which have been raised by way of question and answer. I will touch on several points of administration which have been dealt with during the past year. First, we have realised that we would like to have more direct knowledge of the exact situation in our prisons in Scotland. We are indeed fortunate with our Governors and with the officials responsible for the Prisons Department of Scotland, but in order to secure more first-hand, day-to-day knowledge we have appointed an Inspector of Prisons, who will visit the prisons and report direct to the Secretary of State as well as to the head of the Prisons Department. Our prisons in Scotland are administered under a number of regulations which go back many years. During the last year my hon. Friend the Member for St. Rollox (Mr. Leonard) has drawn my attention to one aspect of these numerous regulations. It was in connection with the censoring of Sunday newspapers. As soon as he put that question on the Paper I looked into the matter, and I can assure him that Sunday newspapers will be received by untried prisoners on the morning of issue. My attention has also been drawn to the question of the inspection of bedding. Any question on the Order Paper directs my attention to these matters, and I make an immediate investigation. And I can give an assurance to the Committee that all these regulations, which are numerous and go back many years, are to be completely reviewed in the light of modern thought and modern outlook, at the same time safeguarding the interests of the people for whom they are made.
        Then the question of privileges arose, as to whether certain privileges should be continued in one prison when they are not granted in another. That matter also is being completely reviewed so as to secure some degree of symmetry and more definite and direct control over the customs which have grown up during many years in our Scottish prisons. We have also directed our attention to the question of the employment of prisoners in prison, to see whether something could

        2021
        not be done to secure more and better facilities for men and women, so that when they leave prison they may become more fit subjects of the State. We have appointed an industrial adviser who will go to the prisons and make a close inspection of the work done by the prisoners, so as to secure that their efforts will not only be useful to-day but will be of greater use to-morrow.
        I have had several questions put to me as to Borstal prisoners being completely separated from adult prisoners, and the question of the Duke Street Prison has also arisen. It is indeed true that the prison is out of date and in many respects redundant. It is also true that the accommodation for warders is insufficient and not up to date. As a matter of fact this very week we are examining alternative sites in different parts of Glasgow, and when a suitable site is secured we shall erect a modern building, with proper accommodation not only for the warders but for the prisoners. Though I cannot make the definite statement that Duke Street Prison will be closed and sold, yet we realise to the full that the prison is completely out of date and that the sooner it is closed and a modern prison with proper accommodation erected in its place, the better it will be.
        Mr. MAXTON: What about the site?
        Sir G. COLLINS: The site is all right, but there are certain advantages in getting a site further out. We are examining alternative sites to see if we can get a better one. It will be remembered that during the early part of the year there was some disturbance at Barlinnie Prison. I am glad to say that since the new Governor took charge the discipline in the prison has been satisfactory. I have given orders for the accommodation at Barlinnie to be examined. There, again, the accommodation is not satisfactory either for warders or prisoners, and we are taking steps to see that proper accommodation will be erected in due course. Then there is the prison at Perth. An hon. Member opposite has on several occasions addressed questions to me about that prison. The Committee know that we are buying or securing a site near Carstairs for a modern criminal lunatic building, and when that building is erected there will be a big transfer of criminal lunatics from Perth Prison to
        2022
        the new accommodation. I have made inquiries as to whether the accommodation left, after that takes place, will be up to date and sufficient for the warders and prisoners. Undoubtedly much of the accommodation of the Perth Prison has been out of date and not in keeping with modern needs. I am assured that there will be sufficient modern accommodation for the warders who will be left there after the criminal lunatics have been moved to the new asylum near Carstairs.
        The statement that I have given is brief, but it covers a wide number of subjects—inspection, regulations, privileges, the employment of prisoners, the question of the Borstal prisoners and the accommodation at Duke Stret, Barlinnie and Perth. I think it indicates that we are trying to bring a modern outlook into the prisons administration in Scotland, while maintaining that discipline which is necessary. I took the opportunity a short time ago of examining Peterhead Prison. I went all through that prison and I had an opportunity of testing the food and satisfying myself that it was of good quality and sufficient for the needs of the prisoners.
        Mr. MAXTON: But there is a lack of variety in it. It is all right for one day but not for six months.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Perhaps it was specially prepared for the right hon. Gentleman.
        Sir G. COLLINS: No, I can assure my hon. Friend that when I visit these places I make sure that I am not on a personally conducted tour.
        Mr. MAXTON: And make sure that you do not stay too long.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I am only anxious to make myself acquainted with the conditions applying to these people whose lot must, at all times, excite the sympathy of those of us who are more fortunate. I hope the Committee will excuse me if I have not gone more fully into these matters, but, as hon. Members know, we have been working at high pressure on other subjects during the last few days.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Has the right hon. Gentleman anything to say about how the trouble arose in Barlinnie—about the question of smoking?
        Sir G. COLLINS: That is related to the question of privileges. My hon. Friend will remember that at the beginning of the inquiry it was thought that a great deal of the trouble in Barlinnie had arisen because people in the prison had seen untried prisoners smoking, but I think that statement on investigation was found not to be correct. That is one of the subjects which I include in the consideration of privileges because the right to smoke is a privilege which may be granted in some cases and not do others. As I have said, we are trying to evolve a uniform system so as to avoid the possibility of creating any sense of unfairness. Nothing annoys men more, whether they are in prison or out of prison, than a sense of injustice.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I thought that the trouble had arisen in connection with smoking and I wondered whether there was any proposal that all prisoners including those who are serving terms of imprisonment, should get the privilege of smoking.
        Sir G. COLLINS: That is one of those questions which will arise on the consideration of the reports, which are at present being prepared, as to the exact situation in the different prisons so far as privileges are concerned. I mention these matters to show that we are really examining all these aspects of prison administration. We realise that the light that has been shed on these matters by means of questions and answers in the House has shown the necessity for investigation. I have nothing to hide from any hon. Member on these points and I am indeed grateful to any hon. Member who at any time directs my attention to what may appear at first sight to be weaknesses of administration, in connection with any of the activities which centre round the Scottish Office.
        I now turn to the police administration. There has been considerable activity in this branch of administration during the past 12 months and we have had the initiation of several important experiments. It will be within the recollection of hon. Members that we arranged some months ago for the issue of a Scottish "Police Gazette" for the purpose of the rapid circulation to all police forces in Scotland of information regarding persons wanted by the police, or property stolen in various police districts. Responsible as we are for police
        2024
        and prisons administration, we are also responsible for seeing that the interests of the subject are safeguarded and I think the publication of this gazette will assist our police in different parts of Scotland. There has also been a development in connection with police wireless. In March of this year the experiment was started of police wireless installation to be operated by the Edinburgh and Glasgow police forces. These are to be available for the transmission of police wireless messages in certain areas in the neighbourhood of those two cities. Regional schemes of this kind are essential, I understand, because of the limited number of wavelengths available for use. Although this is only an experiment, the indications at present point to the experiment being a distinct success and, if it be a success, the system will be generally applied throughout Scotland.
        I need not do more than refer to the restoration of the cuts in police pay which unfortunately had to be made under the 1931 Emergency Act. It was a very unpleasant task I am sure to my right hon. Friend the Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair) to impose the first cut, and I had the unpleasant task of imposing the second cut. I am glad to state that those cuts have been restored in full this month. We have also given our attention to the condition of the police stations and during the last 12 months upwards of 50 new stations and houses have been approved and alterations have been sanctioned to 102 stations and houses. That means to say that a survey has been made of the police stations throughout the length and breadth of Scotland and that in upwards of 152 cases, either new stations have been approved or considerable changes and improvements have been effected in existing cases. That shows that we have had regard to the interests and well being of the police constables and sergeants who are entrusted with the duty of protecting the community.
        During the past year questions have been asked on the possibility of making compulsory the employment of police women by police authorities. After careful consideration I did not feel justified in making such an order compulsory. It is a deep principle in British law and British justice that police authorities must be left to determine

        2025
        these matters for themselves in the light of their own local conditions and it seems to me fit and proper that the custom which has come down to us through the ages, of entrusting police authorities with large discretion in local matters, should be continued and should apply to the question of the employment of police women. But I asked local police authorities to keep this matter in view and to consider favourably, where the conditions in their district justify it, the introduction of police women or where police women are already appointed, an increase in their number. I thought that was as far as I could reasonably go at the moment. I have received more than one deputation on the subject, and I know it excites some interest in the minds of hon. Members. That is why I mention the subject this afternoon. These are some of the matters which have engaged our attention during the last 12 months. I have also here some figures as to the actual daily number of prisoners in our prisons during the last five years. The number of convicts, I am glad to say, has decreased, but there has been a slight increase in the daily average number of ordinary prisoners in our prisons during the last five years. The numbers are not large, but they show, unfortunately, an increase, though at the same time the average daily number of convicts has shown a decrease.
        These, then, are the tasks which our police forces and our prison department have to undertake. I have sketched out to the Committee very briefly the many activities which have taken place during the last 12 months. We are hopeful that during the current 12 months we can bring to fruition a complete review of the regulations which govern the administration of prisons, and which affect the lives of thousands of our people, and we hope to review in a proper spirit the privileges which exist. I have already stated the large changes which are taking place, or are about to take place, in the prisons of Scotland, so that it can be said in future that our prisons in Scotland are in keeping with modern thought, and in touch with the sentiments of the House of Commons.
        4.3 p.m.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: The Secretary of State for Scotland, in his review of the work of the prisons department and the constabulary of Scotland, has indicated very clearly certain reforms which are to be made both in regard to the constabulary and also in regard to prison discipline and prison administration generally. I am certain that everyone in the House will be glad to learn of the proposals he has made regarding the administrative reforms in the prisons, because in many quarters, not only in the House but outside as well, following upon the disturbances which took place in Barlinnie Prison and at Peterhead, fears were expressed as to what was being done and what were the causes of those disturbances. The inquiry which followed, while it may not have been satisfactory to everyone who has read the report, will at least have served its purpose if the reforms which have been indicated by the Secretary of State are carried out with all the thoroughness with which we are certain he will do the work, and if they enable those persons, who have been sentenced for misdeeds of which they have been guilty, to have some chance of redeeming and developing their characters to such an extent that once they get outside they will not return to those paths which, in the first place, took them to prison.
        I am sure that everyone in the House will be glad of that, but there are certain matters with regard to our prisons in Scotland and our procedure which are in very real need of reform. I have had to take up with the Secretary of State cases of young lads who have been sent to prison at a very early age—17 years—who have not been treated properly. It is the only thing I have to hold against the Secretary of State for Scotland, that he has not in the cases I have placed before him moved with that sympathy which I know is a part of his being. There must be something behind it, from my knowledge of the family of a lad concerned, and also the knowledge of the circumstances of those other people whose cases I have placed before the right hon. Gentleman from time to time. In the report of the Prisons Department, page 48, we find that certain prisoners were certified under the Mental Deficiency and Lunacy (Scotland) Act, 1913, during

        2027
        the year 1934. The number includes quite a number of youths as well as men. There is one case in which I was interested, and which I placed before the right hon. Gentleman. It is an outstanding case. A lad of 17 years of age was sentenced, in lath April, 1934, to 60 days imprisonment, and was transferred to Stoneyetts certified institution on 17th May in terms of an order by the Secretary of State under Section 10 of the Act to which I have just referred.
        I have had communications with the Secretary of State regarding this case, and I wish to recall one or two particulars about it. It is the case of a lad who may, perhaps, lack intelligence, but is by no means mentally defective. He was treated in one of the special schools in Glasgow. He was found trespassing upon some property, and was taken before the sheriff on an accusation of stealing some small articles. The family were sufficiently interested in the innocence of the youth to engage legal defence, but although the lawyer intimated to the procurator-fiscal that he had been engaged to defend the case, no notice was sent to him of the day of the trial. The young lad was brought before the sheriff with no one to defend him. None of his relatives had any knowledge or intimation that the trial was to take place on that day, and he was sentenced to 60 days imprisonment. Before the 60 days were completed, he was examined under the order of the Secretary of State, and it was considered that he was mentally defective. They sent him from prison to Stoneyetts certified institution, and, to the best of my knowledge, he is still there on this day of July, 1935.
        I have submitted the case to the Secretary of State for Scotland, and have endeavoured to obtain the lad's release, but have not obtained it—at least, no information has been sent to me that he has been released. I do not wish to mention the lad's name, because names mentioned on the Floor of this House get into the Press, and though it may mean the bringing to light of what may be considered an injustice, it very often has the effect that the relatives are brought before the public eye, and feel their position very clearly when they consider that other people are whispering that the case has been raised on the Floor of the House of Commons.
        2028
        Therefore, I leave out the name, but I think the Secretary of State knows the case without my mentioning the name. I want to know what has been done in that case; why a case of this character has been managed in the way it has; why the lawyer who was engaged for the defence; and notified the procurator-fiscal, received no information that the trial was to come on at a particular date so that he could be present in court; why the relatives were not notified that the lad was being brought up on that particular day, and why, when the relatives, on the expiry of the 60 days, went to the prison to which the lad was committed they were told that he was not due to be released, that he was no longer in prison, but had been transferred to a certified institution under a, Mental Deficiency Act as a lunatic? I should imagine that, to a certain degree, the lad is looked upon by the Scottish Office as coming within the category of a criminal lunatic. This lad having been deprived of his defence by some carelessness, perhaps, on the part of some official in the courts, is sent to prison, and then again, perhaps owing to some carelessness on the part of prison officials, his relatives are not notified of the change in his condition, that he is to be examined by doctors, and then he is transferred to another institution without any intimation being given to his relatives.
        I would like to know what is being done with regard to that case, what inquiries have been made into it, and whether they intend to release this lad, if he has not been released? Although the lad may be, as we say in Scotland, "slow in the uptake," he is by no means deficient so far as mental capacity in other things is concerned. There is no incapacity in the family. The father is a decent, respectable working man in the shipyard in my own constituency, capable of stating a point clearly so that one can understand it thoroughly as he states it. The lad's brothers are the same. They come to me and I say, "Yes, it is high time this sort of thing should be inquired into." I hope it is only one individual case, and that no other similar cases have arisen or will arise in the history of our procedure in Scotland. I trust, therefore, that the Secretary of State, or whoever may reply

        2029
        later on, will make some statement to the Committee.
        I have several cases which bear some resemblance to this case, and I entertain grave feelings about what is likely to happen if the Secretary of State obtains the further powers for which he is asking under the Criminal Lunatic Bill which is passing through the House. I shall watch it on the Committee stage to see that sufficient safeguards are put in to prevent cases of this kind arising in future. I hope that the Secretary of State will be able to give me an assurance that this case, which I consider to be a case of grave maladministration of justice, will end at once by the release of the lad, and that an inquiry will be made into the reason why no intimation was sent to his relatives or the lawyer who was engaged to defend him, so that he had to appear alone and helpless in a court of law; and also why he was asked to plead guilty and found himself separated from his family and friends at 17 years of age for a theft for which, as a first offender, he should have been placed on probation.
        4.17 p.m.
        Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: It is a long time since we had an opportunity of discussing this important Vote, and we are indebted to the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean) and his friends for this opportunity. The speech of the Secretary of State confirmed the impression, which is conveyed by the report of the Prison Commissioners, that the difficult problems which arise in the administration of His Majesty's Prisons in Scotland are receiving his earnest study. There are only two to which I would refer. The aspect of prison administration which most concerns those who have studied it is the reformation of the prisoner and the opportunity of giving the prisoner a chance to regain his character and to start earning his living afresh in civil life. That is, and ought to be, the chief object of our prison administration. The report of the Prison Commissioners refers to the extreme difficulty of the problem, particularly in times of unemployment as grave as these. It also refers to the fact that a departmental committee has been appointed and is studying this very question. I would ask the Secretary of State whether he could give us any information about it. Has that committee yet reported, and can he give us an assurance that, pending the
        2030
        report, he is giving the fullest possible support to the Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, which, in circumstances of great difficulty, are doing their best to fulfil this vitally important function of giving these unfortunate men and women the chances of regaining their self-respect and the respect of their fellow citizens.
        The other aspect of prison administration about which I would say a word is that concerning the question of privileges. Public opinion in Scotland has been mildly shocked by a series of unfortunate outbreaks at more than one Scottish prison within the last year or two. The suggestion has been made, and it is made in the report of the investigator who inquired into the outbreak at Barlinnie, that some of the prisoners believed they were not being justly treated. Obviously, justice must be the foundation of prison discipline, and the rigid discipline which is necessary in prison must not only rest upon justice, but it must clearly rest upon it. I am sure that there is a misconception among the prison population of Scotland, and I hope that the inquiry into the question of privileges will be rigorously pressed and that the regulations will be drafted so as to give to every class of prisoner an assurance of fair and equal treatment.
        With regard to the police grants, I see that there is an increase this year of £20,000 in expenditure, and that there is a total increase for the last two years of £54,500; indeed, that brings us to a figure which is £15,000 in excess of the Estimate for 1931. There are some factors which make for increases in that Vote and certain others which, I would suggest, make for decreases. The first of the factors which make for increases is the restoration of the cuts in pay. The Secretary of State referred to the fact that I was responsible for the imposition of the first cut and that he was responsible for the imposition of the second, but that that was an inheritance which he had received from me; it was a damnosa hereditas for which he was not responsible, but to him has fallen the lot of restoring the cuts. I told the men when I felt it my duty to impose them that the financial measures which we would have to take would result in the restoration of the cuts at no distant future. I am glad that that is being done, and I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on being able to

        2031
        do it. That restoration would account for a considerable part of this increase.
        Among other factors, there is the provision of equipment which is necessary to keep pace with the modern scientific criminal. Then there is the necessity for bringing police stations up-to-date and making them efficient as headquarters of the police organisation and adequate for the accommodation of the policemen themselves. That is a proper direction for expenditure at this time of unemployment, and if the Secretary of State would tell us that he had, say, a three or four-year plan for overtaking the arrears of work on police stations, I should certainly be disposed to support him. His Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary for Scotland draws attention in his report to the inadequacy of this accommodation, and I think that it is of importance that this work should be undertaken at this time when there is so much unemployment and when money is cheap. Now is the opportunity. Let the work be done in the next three or four years, and let economies be made at a time when prices are rising and rates of interest are higher.
        Another factor making for increases is the necessity for supplying telephones in police stations. The Inspector of Constabulary makes a particular point of that, and recommends that a telephone should be installed in every police station, and he puts the word "every" in italics. This is a time when that policy could be actively pursued, because under the Jubilee concessions which have been made by the Postmaster-General, the telephone is being taken to every post office in the country. It is obviously to the rural districts that His Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary referred, because I cannot doubt that in the towns every police station must have its telephone. Now, when gangs of men are out in the country districts, when the material is collected there and the work is going forward under the Postmaster-General's scheme to supply telephones to all the post offices in country districts, is the time to undertake the installation of telephones in police stations.
        If these are the factors which make for increases, there are a number which make for decreases. There is, for example, the amalgamation of forces which has been going on slowly during the past four
        2032
        years. Although modern equipment may be expensive, its installation does result in economies. For example, the telephone box system in the towns is resulting in considerable economy in personnel in those large towns and cities which are actively adopting it. A number of towns and cities, however, are hanging back, and His Majesty's Inspector says that he feels this system might be and should be still further developed. I hope that the Secretary of State will see that it is pressed on with. Then there is the question of the provision of motor cars for the patrolling of the roads under the Road Traffic Act, and these enable economies in personnel to be made, at any rate, in country districts. That should be a matter making for reduction in expenditure. Traffic lights ought to be used far more extensively than they are for the control of traffic in the towns. His Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary states that a disproportionate amount of the time of the police is still taken up by traffic control duties, and that in his opinion many constables could be relieved of this work by the installation of automatic or electro-magnetic control signals. I ask whether action is being taken in this matter, as it would result in increasing the efficiency of police work and at the same time bring about a substantial saving in the cost of the police. Apart from this, I am sure we are all glad to know from the Secretary of State that all is well with the police forces of Scotland. They are splendid forces, with a morale and a high character which give the people of Scotland the most complete confidence in them.
        4.31 p.m.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I must say that I am unable to agree with the concluding statement of the speech made by the right hon. and gallant Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair). It is true that in all police forces there are men who are to be trusted, whose word can be taken and whose actions may be just, but I certainly do not agree that that applies in all areas in Scotland. I wish to offer some criticism of police forces in certain areas and to ask the Secretary of State, after he has heard the case which I shall present, whether he is prepared to have an inquiry into the action of the police in those areas. I wish to begin with a reference to the conditions in Glasgow police stations. It has been said by the

        2033
        right hon. Gentleman that prisoners have a right to decent treatment. In Glasgow persons arrested are frequently held in custody without being allowed bail, in many cases on only trivial charges. I take it, as has been stated by the Lord Advocate in previous discussions, that when a person is arrested on a charge of a trivial nature the only question in considering bail is that of ensuring the presence of that person at the police court on the following morning. If the person arrested is a citizen who has a home, and perhaps a job, a position, surely we are entitled to expect that he should be allowed to proceed to his home. In many cases men and women have been afterwards found not guilty of the offences with which they were charged, yet they have been detained unnecessarily in the police cells over night, when they had a home to go to and when there was a guarantee of a practical kind that they would turn up at the police court in the morning. I ask the Secretary of State to see that the police officers in charge of stations in Scotland do not go out of their way, in an inhuman manner, to demand large sums of money as bail, often at times when the money cannot be procured, and if bail is not forthcoming to detain persons unnecessarily in the cells.
        I also wish to raise the question of the accommodation provided in the cells. There is at the Glasgow Central Police Station and at other police stations a bare cell, a very large cell, and individuals who are arrested, men and women, are compelled to lie on a concrete floor throughout the night. I know what the official answer will be—that there is a bed. Let me describe the bed. The bed is a concrete platform rising from 6 inches up to 15 inches, with a pillow made of concrete. That is termed a bed. They are given blankets, which are generally what we call in Scotland "lousy." I have put questions on the subject in this House on two occasions, and I was told that there was a complete furnishing of the cells—that there was a bed, a chair, a table and a mirror. I have been in three of these police cells myself, and I never found any furnishing of any kind. I had to spend three nights in Glasgow Central Police Station cells, and I could only rest by sitting on the lavatory in the corner. That is extraordinary treatment for men and women
        2034
        citizens of Glasgow, whether they are guilty of an offence or not.
        People are amazed at the official statements which have been made in this House. Many men have been arrested when gambling clubs have been raided and have been taken in batches to the police station and thrown into the cells. When they read these official answers about the bed and the furniture in the cell they say, "What is the Scottish Office thinking of? What is the Secretary of State thinking about?"—because a statement has been made which everybody who has been in those cells knows is positively untrue. After being kept in the cells I was removed to Duke Street Prison, and it is a strange thing that a man who is found guilty and sentenced finds himself more comfortable in prison than a man who may be innocent and is kept in the police cells. Frequently men who have had experience of the Glasgow police cells say, "If I am to be detained, Mr. Stipendiary, please send me to prison and not to the police cells." The sheriffs have asked why it was that prisoners ask to be detained in prison instead of in the police cells. I want the Secretary of State to investigate this question, because if men and women are kept in the cells they ought to have as much comfort, if not more, than they have in prison after they have been found guilty.
        I want to go into another question. I shall not deal with anything done by the bench, because that would be out of order in this House, but in my division of Glasgow recently the home of a man was searched because, as the police officer stated when searching it, he was suspected of stealing a large sum of money. No money was found in the house; the allegation was found afterwards to be entirely wrong. The house was entered by the police without a warrant in an illegal way. In view of the advertisement he had received as a suspected person the man sought to obtain the redress which every citizen in the land is entitled to claim. He wanted to go to the courts and to sue the police constable for a breach of duty in entering his house in this illegal way. The legal agents of that man went to the chief constable to ask the name of the police officers who had made the raid, but they were consistently refused the names, and

        2035
        at considerable expense the man was compelled to appeal to the courts that the names of the police officers should be divulged to him. The courts decided that the chief constable was wrong and must disclose the names of the constables, so that the man could have an opportunity of taking them to court.
        I am referring to the chief constable of Glasgow. I have nothing to say against the chief constable of Glasgow. I have met him, and I think he is a fairly decent type of man. He is responsible, of course, for all that goes on under his charge, although I do not believe that he would willingly agree to anything that is wrong being done. I say to the Lord Advocate and to the Secretary of State that it ought to be an established rule that if an illegal raid takes place, if the police are prepared to take the risk of entering the home of an innocent man in the dead of night without a warrant, they ought to take the consequences. Instead of the aggrieved citizen being compelled to spend vast sums of money in going to court to get a decision it ought to be the rule that he should have the opportunity of getting the names of the constables making the raid and, if necessary, taking action against them.
        Another subject I wish to raise is the police terrorism in the Garngad district of Glasgow which has resulted in a large number of people being brought before the court. I do not intend to comment on the decisions of the court, except to say in passing that we intend to take other measures. We intend to put down a Motion for the removal of the sheriff who tried the case, because of the biased and prejudiced statements he made during the course of the proceedings, in which he used some of the most violent expressions that I have ever heard and I was present in court. Let me recount some of the happenings. In that district, on the 26th May, seven persons were arrested charged with various breaches of the peace. When they were brought before the court they were found not guilty of any offence. Following on this rebuff the police, on the following Saturday evening, instituted a system of beginning with the assumption that there were bound to be people arrested in that area and they brought a "Black Maria" into the area before disturbances of any
        2036
        kind had taken place. It is a serious thing, after men have been before the court and have been found not guilty, that this action should be taken by the police. It was prejudging the situation to move a police patrol van into this area and to assume that there would be trouble there on that Saturday night.
        Mr. MACQUISTEN: The police were taking reasonable precautions.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Reasonable precautions or anticipation. If everybody had wings sprouting out of their shoulders it would not be the earth they were walking on. This patrol van was moved into the area and then there was a breach of the peace. We find that one man was arrested for throwing a bottle at the police patrol van. I am not judging what took place. My job here is not to judge that. The man was found guilty and sentenced to eight months. Then others were arrested; five of them, Coughlan, Shields, Kane, Hackett, Hetherson, were sentenced to 12 months. A man named Kerr, 71 years of age, a blind man of indifferent health, was arrested for taking part in the rioting mob. He was sentenced to four months' imprisonment. This man of 71 was an inmate of the mental ward, and he is still there, months after the sentence has expired, and seems, according to my information, not likely to be restored to ordinary civil life again. Then there was another young man, Kerr, a cripple with only one leg. He was charged with waving his crutch in a threatening manner against the police. Another man, aged 69, McGlennon, was sentenced to four months' imprisonment.
        There were 70 people who were all prepared to swear, when a dispute arose as to whether the arrests took place in a certain street or not, that the arrests were not made where the police said that they took place. The allegation was that there had been indiscriminate arrests of men who had got together in the area because of the rebuff that took place a week before in the discharge of the prisoners by the sheriff. I heard the cases tried, and I know something about them. Men and women were arrested because they gave evidence that the accused were not arrested in a certain street but in another street, and other people who had come forward to give evidence were also arrested. A system of terrorism was set up as the result of which a large number

        2037
        of people who could give evidence said they were not prepared to go to the court because the police had made it known that everybody who dared to swear against the police would be arrested for perjury. That is a serious state of affairs which arose from an ordinary case of breach of the peace. Wholesale arrests have gone on in this area, arising simply out of the original discharge by the sheriff, in a proper manner, of a person found not guilty. Whether the Secretary of State for Scotland, the Lord Advocate or any other official of the Scottish Department has an official answer for Glasgow or not, in connection with these cases, there should at least be not an inquiry held by the people responsible for the administration of the police force in Glasgow, but an outside inquiry, in order to satisfy the minds of Glasgow citizens who believe that police terrorism is being instituted in the city.
        There are cases entirely outside Glasgow which I have pressed in a large number of questions in this House, but I was confined within narrow limits. They are in connection with the Lanarkshire police. The Secretary of State for Scotland has had a document placed in his hand from Lieut.-Detective Anderson who is now outside the Lanarkshire police force, and who, in that document, calls for an inquiry into the police administration of Lanarkshire. I have been asked to present a petition to this House by thousands of citizens in the Cambuslang area demanding an inquiry into the administration of its court and Chief Constable Keith who is responsible for the administration. The first case I would mention is that of two constables who were alleged to have batoned and brutally maltreated a man, Frank Hillhouse, in the Cambuslang area. I did not know that this Vote was coming on because I wanted to have the papers before me.
        In this case Sergeant Craig was alleged to have batoned a man. It arose in this way: Sergeant Craig and a constable came along when Hillhouse was on the road with a motor car outside the Employment Exchange, and they placed a label on the windscreen of the motor car to say that they had examined it. Hillhouse objected that they had no right to interfere with the car. They immediately seized him and took him to the police station. They say that he resisted
        2038
        arrest, and he was taken to court. His statement was that he was brutally maltreated in the cells. Immediately after release he went to a Justice of the Peace in the area, a county councillor, and to a doctor who examined him and found him to be suffering from very severe wounds and bruises, which he alleged were inflicted when he was batoned in the cells by Sergeant Craig and the other policeman. The case went to court because of the protest which had been made, and the sheriff decided that Hillhouse ought never to have been arrested and had some very startling observations to make regarding the action of the two police constables. He said that, in his estimation, there was something seriously wrong, and he called for an inquiry into the state of affairs at the Cambuslang police station.
        Hillhouse then took action in the court. The case came to the court, and I want the Secretary of State for Scotland to remember the stand he has taken for the last two days in this House in regard to perjury. I want to know whether there is one law of perjury for the police and another for the citizens. I have, beyond a shadow of doubt, established a case in the statements I have made in this House. Sergeant Craig and the other policeman went into the witness box, when Hillhouse was charged with a breach of the peace and resisting arrest, and swore that they had never placed any label on the car. Hillhouse stated that the label was placed on the car and was initialled by Sergeant Craig. Hillhouse sent from the court to the garage for the windscreen of the motor car with the ticket on it, and there was then a hurried consultation between the Procurator-Fiscal and the bench. The Procurator-Fiscal deserted the charge and asked that Hillhouse should be admonished on the charge and found "not guilty." I have in my home at the present moment the label that was placed on the motor car and signed by Sergeant Craig. The two policemen undoubtedly swore on oath that they did not place the label on the windscreen of the motor car. I have asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to take action for perjury against the two policemen, and I would remind him that to-day, at Question Time, he said that perjury is a serious crime; it must be as serious for the police as it is for the individual. I am not inclined

        2039
        to allow any person in this House to ride on their high horse, in a case in which poor persons are defending themselves in a case of perjury, because of the position of privilege occupied by police officers and because the Lord Advocate has failed to take action in a case of this kind.
        That is not the end of this case. Sergeant Craig and the other constable were removed from their duty for two months by the chief constable of the area. They were suspended, and they both received civilian jobs, driving a motor car. When I was asking questions in this House about this case, I received information that Craig took his car into a garage, and, when the man in the garage asked him to remove the car to a certain place, Craig responded with most abusive conduct. I received a communication from the garage man in respect to Craig's conduct, even in his second employment, saying that no man of that character ought to be employed in the police. I placed the letter in the hands of the former Lord Advocate, to show that, while the other case was pending, there had been further conduct by Sergeant Craig of an abusive kind, indicating that he was an irresponsible character. Immediately the man's letter was placed in his hands, the Lord Advocate said that inquiry would be made. Inquiry went to the garage, and a week later I received a letter, not written by the man, but typewritten, and containing the statement that he apologised for his previous statement which he had made, and he signed the letter. On inquiry, I found out that the man had been told that unless he signed this statement he would be discharged from his occupation. Pressure was being put from the police authorities over the head of the proprietor of the garage to get at the man. Actions of that kind are intolerable in this country.
        I do not care what the motives of Lieut.-Detective Anderson may be, but his document asks for an inquiry. He makes allegations against a large number of people in the area and says, for example, that the chief constable has policemen engaged as domestic servants in his house, that they are paid from the police roll, that they clean windows, keep the fires going, do the work and are employed in driving his wife and friends
        2040
        round the country in a motor car and that stolen goods have been used for the motor car, and he makes other wholesale allegations of the most horrible kind. I submit that an inquiry ought to be made into these allegations, even though they come from an ex-member of the force who has now retired on salary. There was also the question of the surroundings of the house. Many people are involved, such as procurators-fiscal and town clerks. An inquiry ought to take place. I am not prejudging the issue, because I do not know whether the allegations are true or false, but they are made by a man on pension who had a standing, and they are put down on paper. A former Lord-Advocate when allegations of graft had been made, said: "Reduce your charges to writing, and we will have an inquiry." In turn, I say that to the Scottish Office. The allegations have been put on paper and we are entitled to have them examined at the earliest possible moment, in order to clear the chief constable, if he is unfairly charged. If he is found guilty, he ought to be cleared out lock, stock and barrel from the Lanarkshire police force, as an undesirable person.
        I admit the necessity of administration and of a police force, but a police force ought to be above suspicion. I know there is provocation at times. An officer may have a bottle or a brick thrown at him, and because he is like any other human being he will resent it in the course of his duty, and may even take action in a fit of temper at any moment that presents an excuse, because of something that had occurred; but a cold-blooded line of action is persecution. Let me tell the House of a case I remember a number of years ago. There was a policeman in the Shettleston area with whom I had crossed words because of some of his actions, and he had said that as far as he was concerned he would always attempt to get one back against any person who came as a witness against him. He was reduced from the rank of sergeant to constable because witnesses had testified to his brutal action against a man who, it was stated, had never attempted to raise his hand against the officer in any way, and after the sheriff had dealt with the case the officer was reduced to the rank of ordinary constable. In telling me that story, the constable said: "I kept that in my mind

        2041
        for a time. One evening I was going through Glasgow Green, and was passing along with my mate in the gloaming. I saw a young man and a young woman, and after I had passed them I began to think I knew the young man's face. I suddenly remembered the individual as the one who had given evidence against me. I went back with my mate, and charged them both with immoral conduct, and they were brought up to the court and fined £5 each." He said: "I got my own back on them." That kind of conduct is not conduct that any individual in this House or in this country can justify. I want to hold the scales evenly between the people who may be termed the criminal classes and those who have to look after them. There can be respect even between the so-called criminal and the policeman who is doing his duty in a just and proper manner, because respect can even be had from the very lowest in the land if they feel that a man is carrying out a difficult task in the best possible way.
        I put this case to the Secretary of State for Scotland and ask that an inquiry should be held into the administration in Lanarkshire, because no reply has been made to it. He did say that an inquiry was a matter for the Lanarkshire magistrates, and if he tells me that it, is their job and that he can do nothing, and if he says it is a case for the Glasgow magistrates to inquire into the conduct of the police in the Garngad area, then we shall require to press for it elsewhere. But I believe that the right hon. Gentleman's position is to see that justice is meted out to all classes of the community and that nothing unfair is done. I therefore ask that in the Garngad area, in connection with this whole problem, an inquiry should be set up, and that in connection with the police administration of Lanarkshire, when there have been so many far-reaching complaints and when there is so much unrest throughout the area, there is need for a searching inquiry as to whether the allegations made in a wholesale manner throughout these areas are justified or not.
        5.3 p.m.
        Mr. LEONARD: I want to make some observations with reference to His Majesty's prisons and in particular reference to the prison that I live close to. But may I first of all thank the Secretary of State for Scotland for the manner
        2042
        in which he has responded to some of the points I have put to him through the medium of public questions? There will be special appreciation of what he has done with regard to the issue of Sunday papers to untried prisoners who are in custody, and that appreciation will also extend to the relatives who have gone to so much trouble to get the papers and to see that they are delivered. I am pleased to hear that the regulations are to be under scrutiny in the near future, and I want to introduce some points which I should like to be taken into consideration when those regulations are under review. I realise to the full that the regulations will have to ensure the good conduct and the sequence of duties in prison, but I think that can be done without endangering or taking away the comfort of the prisoners themselves.
        I want to return to a point upon which I have touched already in a question, with regard to the sequence of events that take place when a person is introduced into prison, and particularly into Barlinnie Prison. I understand that the formalities are that a person receives a badge and other things connected with his admission into prison, but he is not immediately put into the cell that he may have to occupy. I am informed that he is not put into a cell in the proper sense at all, but that he is put into what I will call a reception box. I am not sure that that is the proper term, but I am informed that, so far as dimensions are concerned, they are not much more than boxes. In one of those detention cells he has to wait for a medical examination, and I am informed on good authority that the period between his being put into the reception cell and the time when the medical examination takes place is sometimes an extended period—say, one hour or two hours—and that the conditions under which the prisoner is in that cell are anything but comfortable. In addition to that, we have to visualise the possibility of the man having had a rather warm bath and being taken from the bathroom and placed in this detention cell to await his medical examination. I am informed that the result is that, because of the wait between the initial formalities of the reception and the medical examination, on a number of occasions men get into their proper cells shivering with cold.

        2043
        There is another point on which I wish to touch, and that is with regard to the food of men who are received in prison. I am informed, also on the same authority, that sometimes it is possible for a man to be received in prison immediately after the prison meal has been finished, and occasions have been known when an individual has received nothing to eat until the next meal. That might not have been much of a hardship to bear if we could receive assurances that the prisoner had had a meal at the place from which he came immediately prior to being received into the prison. I therefore trust that if that has happened in the past, as I am assured it has, steps will be taken to see that no prisoner who is received in any prison immediately after a prison meal shall be kept without food the length of time that ensues between that meal and the next.
        I also want to refer to the question of men working outside in fields and quarries. The Secretary of State has already courteously informed me that efforts are made to keep in a fit state the water that is necessary to quench the thirst of these men, and he has agreed to look into the matter of installing adequate tanks, if not in the fields where work takes place, at least in quarries; and I press that something should be done in this matter. I know for a fact that the receptacles that contain that water are not always all that they should be. They are not even enamelled, I am informed, but are ordinary tin receptacles which contain considerable rust, and in addition they cannot be kept as clean as they should be kept for men who require to quench their thirst under the conditions applying especially to quarry work.
        Now I want to touch on what I believe to be a most important matter, and that is the question of the medical inspection of prisoners. I received from the right hon. Gentleman in reply to a question a list of the duties of medical officers, and Rule 225 (8) states:
        "A medical officer shall see every prisoner at least once a week, so as to ascertain his general state of health, physical and mental, and whether he is clean in his person and free from disease, and if his clothing and bedding are sufficient, and shall record the results of his inspection in the journal."
        I think that rule is quite explicit, easily understood, and commendable, but I am
        2044
        informed that these things cannot be done by any medical officer if the practice that holds good in Barlinnie Prison is the practice that is adopted in prisons elsewhere. I am informed that this weekly inspection is somewhat in the nature of a single-file parade past the medical officer, and if that be the case, it is totally inadequate, and no medical officer, in my opinion, irrespective of any ability that he may have, is capable of attending to the details in the rule to which I have referred by such a cursory survey of the people under his charge. Therefore, if the regulations are not sufficiently explicit as to the method by which these details are to be ascertained, I trust it will be made clear to medical officers that details of this character, which are so necessary, can only be performed by visiting the prisoners, not as they pass by in single file, but under conditions which, if not possible in their own cells, will give more time than that.
        I notice that in the report there is a statement taken from the medical adviser to His Majesty's prisons. I will not say anything about some of the details, except that I think they are very comprehensive and well put together, but I notice that it states:
        "With regard to food, there is a total absence of complaints. Occasional grumbling does occur, but it is usually by prisoners who make a practice of complaining without any sufficient reason."
        I hope that does not display a tendency to pay no attention to prisoners just because they seem to be grumblers. Even a chronic grumbler can grumble about the right thing at times; furthermore, there is a reluctance on the part of prisoners to complain of anything, in the hope that somebody else will do it for them, and generally the person who does it for the communal well-being, so to speak, is the man who is ultimately called the chronic grumbler.
        With regard to complaints, I wonder if it would not be possible to devise a better method of gathering complaints, because I remember on one occasion, when I was a, member of the Glasgow Corporation, accompanying a visiting committee to Barlinnie prison. I am not aware of the details of their duties, but apparently a part of the duty was to receive complaints, if any, and I was amused, though rather perturbed, at the perfunctory manner in which this duty was performed.

        2045
        All that happened, so far as I could see in the various buildings that we went into, was that the person in charge of the building uttered some formula which was less understandable than the usual command from a sergeant-major. The result was that there was a clattering of feet on the stairs, and eventually a number of men farmed up in a straight line. The person in charge said, "Any complaints?" and immediately a man turned and, saluting the visiting committee, said, "No complaints, Sir." That is not a condition under which complaints can be voiced by individuals, and while I know that factors of time and discipline must come under review, I trust the present Secretary of State for Scotland will see to it at least that those possibilies of misunderstanding and of a sense of injustice creeping in shall be eliminated as far as possible from the new regulations that are coming under review.
        5.14 p.m.
        Mr DUNCAN GRAHAM: I do not think the Members of the Opposition on this occasion can be accused of failing to fulfil their function as an Opposition as they appear to be almost the only Members taking part in this Debate. There seems to be a very curious silence from the Government Benches. I do not know much about prisons, and the only thing I know about Barlinnie is that I see it occasionally from the outside. There was a very eminent Member of this House, now Lord Tweedsmuir, who had the quality of being able to write poems. He has written one poem in particular that fits the present case, and, while I have not the gift of memorising poetry, the last couplet in that poem remains in my memory:
        "There is nae man deid honest,
        I ken by ma'sel."
        Few of us will agree that it is due to anything more than mere mischief that many of these lads are in reformatories or prisons. The case which has been raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean) is expressive of that fact, and I am inclined to believe that the vast majority of juvenile, offenders, particularly in the industrial centres of Scotland, are offenders through mischief and not through vice, and that in general character they are not very different from other lads who
        2046
        manage to keep clear of these offences. I suggest to the Secretary of State that it would be very much to his credit and to the credit of the Department over which he presides if they would adopt some method by which it would be possible to dispense with sending lads of tender years either to prison or to a reformatory. I am not able to say what line should be taken, but I believe there is sufficient capacity in the Department to find means of dealing with this question.
        I would like to put one or two points to the Secretary of State with respect to the position of the people who are known as squatters. According to an answer which I received from him a week ago, 39 persons have been charged in the courts with this offence. Thirty of them have been convicted, and of that number 16 have had to go to prison, while 14 have the fear of prison hanging over their heads. These men, until comparatively recently, were decent, capable citizens of the community in which they live. They were guilty of no ordinary crime; they were merely in a state of poverty. They were out of work, and, because they were out of work, they were unable to pay their rent. Because they were unable to pay their rent, the landlord took them to the sheriff's court. I make no complaint against the sheriff; I recognise the difficulty of his position as well as that of the poor men whose case I am trying to put before the Committee this afternoon. The sheriff in such cases has no choice but to make an eviction order. Most of these men are married, and most of them have fairly large families. I would ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, and his supporters in the Government, what would they do if they were placed in like circumstances, with a wife and children dependent upon them, and were turned out of their house with no place to go to?
        I take some pride in the fact that I am descended from people who a few generations ago were described as caterans. I do not know that they had very good houses to live in, and I am not sure whether they were any better than they should be, though possibly they were as good as the vast majority of the people who inhabit Scotland at the present time. A great many very prominent persons in this country to-day, and in the Government of the Empire, are

        2047
        descended from people of the same type, and only a few generations ago their ancestors were living in black houses. If their character were to be decided by the kind of house they occupied, their descendants would never have reached the high and responsible positions which they now occupy. I suggest to the Secretary of State that many of these men who are in the unfortunate position of not being able to pay any rent, and are therefore unable to secure accommodation for themselves, have absolutely no choice but to take shelter wherever they can get it. The Town Council of Hamilton and the County Council of Lanark have been compelled, because of the quite necessary legislation which has been passed during the time of the present Government, to make closing orders with respect to quite a number of houses that are now more or less derelict, and these people, deprived of the right to get a house for themselves, and being unable to get any house from the local authority, went forcibly into these derelict houses. In doing so they were guilty of a crime, which again brought them before the Sheriff, but I am sure no one would say that it was an immoral act on their part to attempt to find shelter for their wives and families. They were, however, guilty of a breach of the law, and again the Sheriff had no choice but to fine them or send them to prison. It is no use fining these men. I understand that only one of the 39 persons referred to in the reply to my recent question has been able to pay a fine; the others have either been sent to prison or have the threat of prison hanging over them.
        Cannot the Secretary of State take some action to ensure that these people will get the offer of a house, either from the local authority or from some other source which may be within the knowledge of the Department, though certainly it is not within my knowledge. I agree that in the existing circumstances no landlord, knowing that these men are unemployed and have practically no income other than what they draw from public asistance or unemployment benefit, can afford to let his houses to them. The result is that these men are being sent to prison, and their wives and families are being separated all over the place, some of the children in one house and some in another; and, if they try to keep
        2048
        in direct contact with their own families, they can only do so by breaking the law. That is an impossible position for these men, and I hope the Secretary of State will be able to give us some assurance that it will be remedied. He has told me in answer to a question that inquiries are being made, but I hope there will be more than inquiries—I hope there will be an assurance that these people will be provided with accommodation which will make it unnecessary for them to be brought before the Sheriff and threatened with imprisonment. The only cure that the Sheriff can offer is to increase the sentence. I am not casting any reflection whatsoever on the Sheriff, because, as I have already said, I quite appreciate the difficulty in which he is placed in cases such as I have described; but I want to impress as strongly as I possibly can on the Department and on the Secretary of State that these men are in that position, not because of any criminal tendencies on their part, but because of unfortunate circumstances that might happen to many thousands of men who at the moment are free from that particular difficulty.
        With regard to the matter which was raised by the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern), who wants an inquiry into the administration of justice in, I think, both Lanarkshire and Glasgow, I would include in any such inquiry the question whether the procurator-fiscal in Glasgow is the authority for both Glasgow and Lanarkshire, or whether he has any right to interfere in the administration of justice in an entirely different area from that over which he himself presides. I would like also to know whether private individuals have the right to institute criminal prosecutions against anybody whom they may personally dislike or against whom they may have some political prejudice. I am particularly interested in this point, because I am sure that the prosecution to which I am referring was the result of political prejudice on the part of political opponents, and I do not think that the administration of justice should be mixed up with a matter of that sort.
        The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Jamieson): Surely the hon. Gentleman does not suggest that, in giving instructions regarding the prosecution in question, I was in any way animated by any political prejudice at all. I gave my instructions

        2049
        because I thought that the prosecution ought to take place.
        Mr. GRAHAM: If there is, in anything that I have said, any suggestion that the Lord Advocate was in any way responsible, I unhesitatingly withdraw it. As a matter of fact it was only due to his action that these men were not kept in prison until they were tried, because the procurator-fiscal of Glasgow, in fixing the bail on which these men could be set at liberty, fixed the impossible sum of £200, and it was only the action of the Lord Advocate, for which we are extremely grateful to him, that led to the bail being reduced to a reasonable amount which made it possible for the men to be released until their case was tried. The point that I am anxious to impress upon the Scottish Office is that here are four men against whom, when they go to trial, there is no evidence upon which a jury can convict. It will cost these men £200 or £300 to defend themselves. They are ordinary working men. I submit that there is a case for an ex gratia payment to cover their expenses. I should like to know whether there is any change in the method of administration of the law, because I have always understood that a procurator-fiscal was the only person who could institute a criminal charge, but this procurator-fiscal is in an entirely different area. He gets no information from the responsible authorities of the other area, and he must have taken up the case on private information supplied to him by someone who had an interest in the matter. If it had been in England, the accused would have been entitled to take proceedings for defamation of character and might have got some solatium for the loss that they have sustained. For days newspapers all over the country exhibited on their posters and their front pages the charges against these men, but when it comes to court the Procurator-Fiscal of Glasgow cannot produce evidence to obtain their conviction. I consider that method of administration absolutely scandalous, and I sincerely hope that the inquiry will be wide enough to include the functions of these individuals so that they will be made to mind their own business. The police administration should be as nearly as possible in blood relationship to Caesar's wife. It should be free from any suggestion of partiality or favouritism or
        2050
        anything of the sort. Unfortunately that is not the case. I am sorry that it should be necessary for me to raise this matter, and I hope that this will be the last occasion on which the Glasgow authority will endeavour to override an authority which is as capable of doing its work as the Glasgow authority itself.
        Finally, I appeal to the Secretary of State to give serious consideration to this matter of the squatters and to see whether it is not possible for him to exercise clemency in that case, so that the men who are in prison can be released and this inquiry that is being made may produce some method by which the whole question of squatting shall be removed from the position that it now occupies and these men may be free from the constant apprehension of a sentence of imprisonment or a fine which is far beyond their means.
        5.35 p.m.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. Gentleman has made a somewhat severe attack on the Procurator-Fiscal in Glasgow, and although, strictly speaking, that has nothing at all to do with the police administration, I should like to be allowed in fairness to the Procurator-Fiscal to answer what has been said. The Procurator-Fiscal is concerned with criminal administration in Glasgow, but he acts directly under the instructions of the Lord Advocate. The prosecutions which have been referred to were taken, as I told him in answer to a question to-day, at my instance, and I take full responsibility for having instructed them. In all that he did the Procurator-Fiscal was acting under the instructions of myself or those in my Department.
        Mr. GRAHAM: Was it not on information that he himself had supplied to you?
        The LORD ADVOCATE: Certainly. I do not get the information myself. The information has to be supplied by procurators-fiscal throughout Scotland and, after due consideration, instructions are given as to whether a prosecution is to be taken or not. With one or two minor exceptions, all prosecutions other than prosecutions in a police court are taken at the instance and on the instructions of the Lord Advocate or at the instance of procurators-fiscal. In this case the matter was carefully considered before any prosecution was ordered, and it was only after it had been fully considered

        2051
        that instructions were given and proceedings were taken.
        Mr. GRAHAM: Will the Lord Advocate address himself to the position I took up, which is that the Procurator-Fiscal of Glasgow had nothing whatever to do with the administration of the law in Lanarkshire. He occupies an entirely different position. Surely the Lanarkshire procurators-fiscal are capable of doing their own work without being interfered with by an outside authority.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: The Procurator-Fiscal of Glasgow is Procurator-Fiscal for the Middle Ward of Lanarkshire. The alleged crime was said to have been committed in Glasgow, in the offices of the County Council of Lanarkshire. It was, accordingly, the duty of the Procurator-Fiscal in Glasgow, acting on the instructions of my Department, to investigate the alleged crime, and that is what he did, and for all that he did I take full responsibility.
        5.39 p.m.
        Mr. BURNETT: I had not intended to intervene, but I was interested in what the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Graham) said in connection with juvenile delinquents and the advisability or otherwise of sending boys and girls from the police courts to reformatories or approved schools. The question is a very difficult one. I had occasion not long ago to put a question with regard to the treatment of a boy who had been sent out on licence from one of these approved schools to a farm, where he was ill-treated. In the course of the inquiries that I made I called at the approved school, and I should like to say how much impressed I was with the system of education and with what I saw there. The whole idea of treatment in these schools seems to have changed very much from what it was 35 or 40 years ago when terror formed so great a part of it. Now they appear to try to draw out and reform the boys. I went over the punishment books and read a good deal of correspondence which boys have had with the school and which showed how they regarded it as a home and how they came back to see it after they had left.
        At the same time, the question of these schools is a very difficult one, for, on the one hand, we get boys sent to them
        2052
        from the police court who have a considerable police record, and on the other hand, boys who are more or less mentally defective are sent to them, and to have these two classes mixing with one another is not always for the best, and it is a matter that should have very serious consideration. But, apart from that, I think these schools are doing a great work and great care is being taken when the boys leave school to see that they are put into some occupation where they will get on. The system could be developed a good deal, but it has that one defect which has to be considered, that boys are sent there from the police court and, if there are boys who are in any way mentally defective, the atmosphere of the school may do them harm and not bring about the result that is intended. The whole question of juvenile delinquency is one in which we are developing very much. It is a great work which will mean much in connection with the future of prisons and the future of boys who are beginning to drift into the police courts and whom we want to keep away from them so that they may have a useful future as citizens of the Empire.
        5.43 p.m.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I am sure that those who are in charge of the approved schools will be glad to hear of the hon. Member's unsolicited testimonial to their work, and it will be an encouragement to them to proceed along the lines that they have been so successfully following. If any Members of the House are interested in these activities of the State and would like to visit any of these institutions, I will very readily provide facilities, and I am sure a visit would be greatly appreciated by the managers of the institutions. The hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Graham) asked me what I would do in certain circumstances if I happened to be in the unfortunate position of a squatter. I am afraid I shall have to fall back upon the proper Parliamentary answer, that the question has not yet arisen. He stated with truth that many of our juvenile offenders are often led astray not through vice but through mischief. Let me remind him that in the treatment of such individuals the courts who hear the cases send them to approved schools which have been so well spoken of just now, or, as is sometimes

        2053
        said, to a course of institutional treatment. This shows that the treatment of juvenile offenders is connected with modern thought, and I hope that the methods which are being adopted to-day may be more fully adopted in the future. No doubt it is the first step which leads people astray, and yet after the first fatal step is taken, if other influences can be brought to bear upon them, the lives of these people can be much improved in the future.
        The hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. Leonard) asked several questions as to Barlinnie Prison and the way prisoners are treated on their arrival. He also directed my attention to the quality of the food, to the time which elapses between meals, and to the working conditions which exist outside. He read accurately the regulation which the medical officer is supposed to carry out. I am grateful to him for having directed my attention to certain aspects of administration. He cannot expect me to-day to answer the detailed questions which he has put to me, but I assure him that they will be examined. The scrutiny will be applied firmly in dealing with the practical administration of Barlinnie Prison, for in this matter we wish our prisons and their administration to be beyond reproof and in keeping with the desires of all parties in this House.
        The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) has raised several points of large issue this afternoon, though the first point was a relatively small one. He spoke of the condition of Glasgow police cells, but from information which I have received, they are comparatively modern and are kept quite clean. I will, however, direct the attention of the proper authorities to this matter forthwith so as to make sure and to satisfy hon. Members that what I have stated this afternoon is in keeping with their desires.
        Mr. McGOVERN: It is the question of the opportunity for the individual to have a night's rest. Surely, the right hon. Gentleman will take it from me that, if the only place on which a prisoner has to sleep is a concrete floor or a lavatory seat, it is not a desirable state of affairs, and I ask that it should be remedied.
        Sir G. COLLINS: Without knowing anything about that matter, I readily agree that no person at any time should
        2054
        be allowed to sleep on a concrete floor, and, as the hon. Member has described it, with a concrete pillow as well. That should not be allowed to continue. The hon. Member raised large issues as to the character of the police in Glasgow and Lanarkshire. As he knows, the Secretary of State is not responsible for the discipline of the police forces. Parliament has entrusted that responsibility to the police authority in each area, and these authorities are responsible for the discipline of the police. In addition, if any subjects think that they are unfairly treated by the police, they have the right of bringing a civil case against the police. These police forces are under the responsible authority of the chief constables. Knowing many of these men as I do, I am convinced that if at any time any constable exceeds his authority and is unfair to the subject, the chief constable will deal justly with that man and will not allow any conditions to continue which are not in keeping with British justice. The hon. Member referred to the Lanarkshire police, and, as he knows, I have referred the allegations against the chief constable of the maladministration of this force to the police authorities of Lanarkshire.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Who are they?
        Sir G. COLLINS: The local authority. In Glasgow it would be the Glasgow police authority, and in certain other areas it would be the police authority in those areas. It would depend upon the area concerned as to whom the exact police authority would be.
        Sir PATRICK FORD: Will my right hon. Friend tell us how this authority is appointed, who is responsible for its appointment and so on; and is there any overriding authority on the part of the Secretary of State?
        Sir G. COLLINS: The Statute has laid down the geographical area of the police authorities and the composition of those bodies. That, I think, answers the two points put by my hon. Friend the Member for North Edinburgh (Sir P. Ford). In Lanarkshire it would be the county council which would be the police authority for the county. I understand that that police authority are awaiting the result of a civil action between the Chief Constable and another party which has a bearing on the allegations before

        2055
        deciding what they will do. It seems, therefore, that steps are being taken to clear up the alleged maladministration of that force. No doubt in the course of time, after decisions have been given, should they not be agreeable to the hon. Member or to others in the authority, the ratepayers in those areas will have the right and power of bringing pressure to bear upon the police authority which is the county council in the area, and I have no doubt that that will be done.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: Did not the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) yesterday suggest that that would be corruption?
        Sir G. COLLINS: No words of mine would ever suggest that actions which ratepayers are entitled to take would at any time be corruption. I do not think that my right hon. Friend conveyed the thought of corruption in the sense suggested by the hon. Member.
        Mr. MACLEAN: The right hon. Member for Hillhead yesterday suggested that influence brought to bear on representatives by any particular constituency amounted to corruption.
        Sir G. COLLINS: Not corruption. I am responsible for my own words, and I have tried to interpret the words which my right hon. Friend used yesterday afternoon. This is my answer on the general issue.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Before the right hon. Gentleman leaves that point, I would remind him that I have given him another very definite case. I gave him the case of two police constables who went into the witness box and committed perjury in an attempt to get a conviction against a civilian. Here is my point. The allegations which are made against the chief constable are also made against the procurator-fiscal, and I want to know if that procurator-fiscal is to have the right to refuse to proceed against these two constables upon a clear case of perjury? The Lord Advocate and the right hon. Gentleman take a very high stand when civilians are prosecuted on the same sort of issue, and I want to know whether there are two laws, one law to allow police to commit perjury and another law not to allow citizens to commit perjury. I have raised this issue by questions from time to time, I have been raising it for
        2056
        12 months, and I have no opportunity of putting my point except in Debate, and if I am not to receive a proper answer then this House becomes a farce.
        Sir G. COLLINS: The issue really between us is this. The hon. Member suggests that the course of justice is applied unfairly.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I have proved it.
        Sir G. COLLINS: The hon. Member may prove it to his satisfaction, but the law is put into force in Scotland only by the Lord Advocate, and he has this afternoon, in connection with another case, clearly shown that no such thought ever entered his mind, and that he judges things entirely on their merits. It is immaterial to him whether they be peers of the realm, or private individuals or policemen, either in Lanarkshire or wherever they may be. The law of the land is enforced fairly without fear or favour by the Lord Advocate, and if he at any time deviated from that narrow and straight course which has always characterised justice in these matters, he would be unfit to hold his office, and he would be quickly seized upon by the House of Commons as unworthy of the high office he holds.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I want to be quite straight in this matter. I have given a specific case here, and I have put it to Members of this House fairly. I have raised the matter from time to time by asking questions. Here are two policemen who go into the witness box. I have an actual document in my possession in respect of which they swore on oath that they placed no label on a motor car. I have the label signed by the policemen and the date on which they attached that label to the car. I say that the procurator-fiscal should have made the charge against the two policemen who committed perjury. It is nonsense to say that he could not establish his case. It is no use the Lord Advocate shaking his head. I know the facts of the case. I am not going to be diverted in any way. When the Secretary of State says that justice is carried out equally in regard to all citizens, I say that here is a specific case for inquiry. If the Secretary of State is prepared to say that the Lord Advocate will have an inquiry made I shall be satisfied. If I cannot get satisfaction the proceedings here will be a complete farce.

        2057
        I am only demanding justice in this House.
        Sir G. COLLINS: The hon. Member very properly represents the interests of those with whom he has come in contact, and he thinks that the course of justice has not been carried out.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I know.
        Sir G. COLLINS: He knows; he is so sure.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Yes.
        Sir G. COLLINS: The hon. Member is positive in his statement this afternoon, but he may be mistaken.
        Mr. McGOVERN: No, I cannot be mistaken; the sheriff admitted it.
        Sir G. COLLINS: The Lord Advocate, I feel sure, would have put the whole force of the law into effect if he had thought that a case had been made out. It is easy sometimes to see one side of the case from one point of view and not from the point of view of those who are responsible for the administration of justice, and I think that we must leave it there. I suggest to the Committee that the Lord Advocate would have put the law into force against those constables or anybody else if he thought that a clear case had been made out, and that, having put the law into force, a conviction could be secured.
        Mr. McGOVERN: Might I ask the Lord Advocate to give us an answer? Has he inquired into this case? No answer has been given. This matter has been treated in an abominable fashion. Is the Lord Advocate satisfied that there is no ground for a charge being made against these two constables?
        Sir G. COLLINS: I have no desire to shirk the issue. My right hon. Friend will reply later. I have in my hand the reply to a question by the Lord Advocate on 25th June, and his answer concludes with these words:
        "An allegation by Frank Hillhouse shortly after the trial that the police officers had committed perjury was fully investigated at the time, and it was found that there was no ground for prosecuting."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 25th June, 1935; col. 952, Vol. 303.]
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: It is impossible to give full facts in reply to a question, and the House would be interested to
        2058
        know by whom the investigation was made and what was the nature of the investigation. Until the House knows that, I am sure that it will not be satisfied that a full inquiry has been made.
        Mr. McGOVERN: There is a feeling abroad that the police can ride away and do anything they like in Lanarkshire. I have drawn attention to the fact that the procurator-fiscal charged Hillhouse with a breach of the peace and resisting the police. When he placed his two witnesses in the box they stated that they had not placed any ticket on the motor car, but Hillhouse proved his case, and on the windscreen of the motor car it was found that tickets had been placed. It was also found that tickets had been issued. Thereupon, the procurator-fiscal hurriedly withdrew the charge and the prisoner was found not guilty. The procurator-fiscal who had initiated the charge against Hillhouse ought to have proceeded with a charge of perjury against the two policemen, but he failed to do that. Therefore it was not the Lord Advocate but the procurator-fiscal who was the responsible person, and who made the inquiry.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I will ask my right hon. Friend to answer the hon. Member when I sit down. I will turn to one or two questions which were put to me by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair). His first question was as to the second report of the Committee on the Employment of Prisoners which dealt with the subject of employment on discharge from prison. It is true, as my right hon. Friend said, that the report has been published, the recommendations of which are being actively considered in consultation with the Prisons Department and the Scottish Central After-care Council. The report is critical of the existing arrangements in Scotland and is probably resented by the members of the After-care Council. The report will be very closely examined, and we must have regard not only to those who prepared the report but those who have experience of these matters throughout Scotland. My right hon. Friend also directed attention to the necessity for telephones at police stations in Scotland. Wherever the Postmaster-General instals a postal telephone service we will secure that the

        2059
        telephone service is available at the police station as well.
        My right hon. and gallant Friend also referred to amalgamations of police forces. I was questioned about the amalgamation of police forces last year, and I decided against it on the general ground that although in some cases amalgamation might lead to efficiency yet, on the other hand, it would tend to undermine the authority and power of the local authorities in Scotland. The Government value the public spirit which is being shown by the different burghs in administering so many of their services, and we think that it would be unwise to take away from them the control of the police forces in their areas.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: I did not wish in the least to criticise the right hon. Gentleman on that point. I knew that there had been some amalgamations carried out in recent years, and I mentioned it as one factor which tended towards economy. I know that in some cases where there is a good case for amalgamation there are difficulties. I did not mean to criticise my right hon. Friend for not carrying out amalgamations more quickly.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I hope that I did not indicate that I thought my right hon. and gallant Friend was criticising me. I referred to the matter in order to make some remarks on the larger subject. My right hon. Friend also asked what steps the Government were taking to secure modern traffic control by lights rather than by the police. We will encourage that in every way possible so as to divert the police from that service to their proper business of safeguarding the interests of the public in other ways.
        Now I come to the question addressed to me by the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean). He referred to an individual, whose name we agreed should not be made public, who pleaded guilty in Glasgow to a charge of theft. It is undoubtedly true, and I regret it, that intimation of the removal of this young lad was not sent to the relatives by the prison governor, and we have taken steps to see that such a thing will never occur again. I do not think, however—at least I hope not—that the interests of this particular individual suffered. Maybe they did. During the last few
        2060
        months I have made thorough inquiries to find out whether he could be released, but my present information is that it would not be in his interests to release him. While I am speaking on these matters I should like to make a confession to the Committee. It is my most difficult task among all my various tasks to adjudicate on the question of letting people out, whether from Borstal institutions or from approved schools or prisons. I try to hold the balance fairly, and I endeavour at all times to approach these problems with an unbiased mind, and to deal justly with the cases put before me by hon. Members in all parts of the House. If I have refused their requests it has not been from any lack of sympathy with their cases. With regard to the case to which the hon. Member for Govan referred, I will consult an outside doctor completely untrammelled by departmental influence, so that he may give a decision. I tried that principle in a case two months ago. It is immaterial what the case was. I thought that the man should be let out, and I applied the principle of employing a doctor who was outside the Government service and outside any of its institutions, so that he might bring a fresh mind to bear. I sent him specially to investigate the case, and he confirmed the judgment of my own advisers.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: That was not my particular case.
        Sir G. COLLINS: No. I will, however, make further inquiries and find out whether this young lad can be released.
        Mr. MACLEAN: May I put this to the right hon. Gentleman, with due respect, that this case has been mismanaged from the commencement by the authorities. His agent was not notified that the case was to come on, and therefore he did not appear. His relatives were not informed that the case was coming up, and, therefore, they did not appear. This young lad of 17 years, who is made out by the department to be mentally deficient, had to stand alone, helpless, in court, and was asked to plead guilty to a crime which, so far as we know, he may never have committed. If he is mentally deficient, who is to judge whether he knew what question was being directed to him? The whole matter from the very beginning has been a scandal and it must be gone into, otherwise it

        2061
        will be raised here until justice has been done.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I have read the case again this afternoon, and from all accounts it appears that the lad should be still retained, but I will give my hon. Friend the assurance that I will employ a completely detached individual to make an examination and to report.
        Mr. MACLEAN: May I ask that the medical individual or individuals whom the right hon. Gentleman intends to ask to examine this case should do so away from the environment of Stoneyetts Certified Institution; that they should be asked to certify free from the surroundings of a lunatic asylum? Will the right hon. Gentleman remember that I put before him very definitely the fact that this lad has relatives who are prepared to give every guarantee that would be required by the Department to ensure that proper guardianship by his relatives was exercised over him? He is not a criminal lunatic. He is only a helpless, light-minded individual.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I will have inquiries made, but I must not be taken as agreeing that the inquiry shall be outside a particular place.
        Mr. MACLEAN: Will it not be prejudiced if the examination is made in the mental institution?
        Sir G. COLLINS: Everything will be done over and above board to inquire whether this youth should still be retained where he is. I think I have shown a real desire to approach this matter from a humane point of view. With regard to the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern), I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Lord Advocate will be very glad to have an opportunity of dealing with the case that he raised.
        Mr. LEONARD: There is one point in regard to the police to which I should like to draw attention. In the report of His Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary there appears the following statement:
        "I should like to emphasise once more the fact that there are police stations still without telephones."
        I feel strongly on this point. I think it is a great reflection on our prison administration that telephones should still be wanted.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: The right hon. Gentleman has not dealt with my point regarding the renovation of police buildings to which His Majesty's inspector refers in his report; particularly in the country districts.
        Sir G. COLLINS: In my opening remarks I dealt with new police stations and alterations, and with the question of improved accommodation for the police which is engaging the attention of the police authorities. I hope that by next year we shall have been able to cover the whole organisation and to have made the internal accommodation of these police stations adequate to meet modern requirements.
        6.16 p.m.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) raised a question of very considerable importance and, although it does not affect the Vote under consideration, I crave leave of the Committee to give an explanation with regard to it. The facts of the case are these. As far back as 2nd October, 1933, one Frank Hillhouse was arrested by the police on a charge of committing a breach of the peace. He was taken to the police office, and he alleged that when there he was assaulted by the police. The charge did not come under the Lord Advocate's department, it was a matter which was dealt with in the local courts, and he was tried in the justice of the peace court on a charge of breach of the peace. There was a conflict of evidence as to whether a breach of the peace had been committed, and in view of this conflict of evidence the justice of the peace fiscal—the hon. Member must not confuse him with the procurator-fiscal—suggested to the magistrate that he should find the charge not proven, and that was done.
        Mr. McGOVERN: In the middle of the case.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: After evidence had been taker. I do not know whether there was any more evidence to be taken.
        Mr. McGOVERN: You can take my word for it.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: There was a conflict of evidence as to whether a breach of the peace had been committed, and in view of this the justice of the peace fiscal suggested that the magistrate

        2063
        should hold the charge not proven. Following that, a complaint was made that Hillhouse had been assaulted while in the police office. That complaint was investigated by the procurator-fiscal, and on the information which was supplied by him my predecessor in office gave instructions that these two members of the police force should be charged with assault. They were so charged and tried before the sheriff substitute. The sheriff substitute held the charge not proven. There was also a complaint made by Hillhouse that in the course of the trial in the justice of the peace court these two policemen had committed perjury. As I informed the hon. Member in answer to a question on the 25th of last month, that complaint was fully investigated at the time by my predecessor—
        Mr. McGOVERN: I know the Lord Advocate says that technically it was investigated by his predecessor, but I say that all that was done was that the fiscal in the area was asked, and he decided that there was no case for a prosecution.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: I must beg leave to contradict the hon. Member. When last month he put down the question to which I have referred, I sent for the papers from the Crown Office, and on these papers I saw a note of my predecessor. It was considered by him, along with myself. We had to consider whether or not, assuming that the police had falsely stated that they did not attach a label to the car, it would constitute the crime of perjury. In order to constitute the crime of perjury, the false evidence which is given must be evidence which is material to the question which is being tried. In the justice of the peace court Hillhouse was being tried on a charge of breach of the peace, and the view, after full consideration, was taken that the question whether or not the label had been attached to the windscreen of the car was not material to the issue as to whether or not Hillhouse had committed a breach of the peace. It may have been that the attaching of a label to the windscreen was illegal, but that is not the question. It may or may not have been illegal, but it was not material to the question as to whether or not there had been a breach of the peace; it was not material to the question which was being tried. For these reasons, while instructions were given to prosecute the
        2064
        men for assault it was considered that no charge of perjury would lie in law, and because of that no prosecution was undertaken. The hon. Member has suggested that proceedings will be taken against one class of person and not taken against another; that they will be taken against persons in the Garngad part of the town and will not be taken against persons because they happen to be members of the police force. I hope the Committee will take it from me that that is not the way in which the criminal law is administered in Scotland.
        Mr. MAXTON: It is not the way in which it should be.
        The LORD ADVOCATE: It is not the way in which it is administered. I have not been a Law Officer very long, but I can assure the Committee that my predecessor took me fully into his confidence with regard to most of the work which passed through his hands, and that since I have been a Law Officer, whether as Solicitor-General or as Lord Advocate, I do not take into account the position of any person who is accused of a crime, but consider whether or not a crime which ought to be punished has been committed and, if so, give instructions for a prosecution to take place.
        Mr. McGOVERN: I did not attempt to cast any reflection on the Lord Advocate or his predecessor, as to their being influenced by the position of a person, but I did say that in connection with this case—and this is my final word—that undoubtedly in the police court false testimony was given by the two policemen of not having attached this label to the motor car. I have the evidence given in the court and the label in my possession, and I say that, wriggle out of it as you like, the two policemen went into the box and influenced the magistrate, and that they were not prosecuted on what was a 100 per cent. case of perjury. I say that they were treated differently from the people of Garngad.
        Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

      CLASS V.

        COMMISSIONER FOR SPECIAL AREAS (SCOTLAND).
        Motion made, and Question proposed,
        "That a sum, not exceeding £90, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the

        2065
        year ending on the 31st day of March, 1936, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Commissioner for Special Areas (Scotland) and the Expenses of the Commissioner under the Special Areas (Development and Improvement) Act, 1934, including Grants in Aid."—[NOTE: £10 has been voted on account.]
        6.27 p.m.
        The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Skelton): I am glad of the opportunity of giving the Committee some account of the work which the Scottish Commissioner for the Special Areas is carrying out. We have not yet received a report from the Commissioner and I regret that the Vote has to be taken before his report is in the hands of hon. Members. I, therefore, propose to confine myself to a statement of the actual activities on which the Commissioner has finally decided to spend money, and the amount which will be needed. I think it is better that I should confine myself to the projects which have actually been decided upon or begun, and not attempt to deal with anything further. The amount of the Estimate is £493,250, but without the Commissioner's report I cannot say how much will be spent in the present financial year. I may say, however, that the schemes which have already been decided upon involve an expenditure out of the income of the Commissioner of £750,000. Many of the Commissioner's expenses are combined with those of local authorities, and the total expenditure involved would be about £1,500,000.
        Mr. HENDERSON STEWART: Can the Under-Secretary say the total sum allotted to the Commissioner for the special areas of Scotland?
        Mr. SKELTON: The total sum allotted for the special areas was £2,000,000. The Commissioner has already decided definitely on a greater sum than that actually voted. But that will be allowed for. The total is not exceeded in this year's Estimate; it is £493,000. It is important to get a correct picture of the Commissioner's activities up to date. The expenditure that he has undertaken amounts to £750,000. I wish to divide the activities of the Commissioner under two main heads.
        Mr. LAWSON: We have been continually asking for reports about the Commissioners. Do I understand that the amount of this Estimate for "works" is £750,000?
        Mr. SKELTON: My hon. Friend will find it more convenient if, when someone else is giving figures, he listens to the recital of them. The figure in the Estimate is £493,000. There should, of course, be the fullest publicity given to the activities of the Scottish Commissioner. I was dividing his activities under two main heads: First, activities directed towards improving and assisting the day-to-day life of the people of the area; and, secondly, activities which would improve the economic, amenity and health conditions in the area, or assist in the economic rehabilitation of the unemployed. The first is social, for social well-being. These are schemes of a less permanent range and scope. Under the first heading is an arrangement for model occupational centres, for which the Commissioner has earmarked £36,000. One or two have already been started, and it is intended that there shall be model occupational centres in a long list of places with which I shall not weary the Committee.
        Mr. MAXTON: I wish the Under-Secretary would do so. I do not want to burden him by asking him to give facts which he feels are unnecessary, but I would like to have at the end of his statement some idea in my mind of the geographical distribution of the different schemes.
        Mr. SKELTON: I will do that. I understand the Commissioner proposes that there shall be model occupational centres in Kilwinning, Kilbirnie, Galston, in Ayrshire; Port Glasgow, Greenock, Paisley and Barrhead, in Renfrewshire; Alexandria and Kirkintilloch, in Dumbartonshire; Airdrie and Coatbridge, Motherwell, Hamilton, Wishaw, Bellshill and Cambuslang, in Lanarkshire; and Bathgate in West Lothian County. That is the first head. The second relates to health camps for women and young persons. The Commissioner proposes to give to the Scottish Council for Community Service a sum of £5,000. Out of that it is hoped to purchase a permanent site and ground. The third heading is assistance to district nursing services, for which the Commissioner has already given £1,200. It is interesting to note that this grant of the Commissioner to the local nursing services has had the effect of increasing the local contributions. The fourth heading is assistance in the

        2067
        development of recreational and cultural facilities by various youth associations among unemployed adolescents of both sexes. The amount that the Commissioner proposes to spend in that way is, for boys £15,000, for girls £10,750. The organisations include the Boys' Brigade, The Boy Scouts, the Girl Guides, Y.M.C.A., Scottish Association of Boys' Clubs and the Scottish Association of Girls' Clubs.
        The next item is that, by arrangement with the Ministry of Labour, the Commissioner is to carry on physical training centres, to which purpose he is devoting £8,500. The centres will be at Hamilton, Motherwell, Wishaw, Uddingston, Kilmarnock, Kilbirnie and District, Kilwinning and District, Irvine and District, Greenock, Paisley, Port Glasgow, Alexandria, Dumbarton, Bathgate and District, Shotts and District, Kirkintilloch and District. The Commissioner has purchased the house and grounds of Carfin Hall for general recreation and social service purposes. Some 500 or 600 people are already taking advantage of this scheme. The cost is £4,000. That completes very briefly the first heading of activity. For that the rough total of expenditure earmarked is £75,000.
        I turn now to the larger schemes, the object of which is to improve the economic, amenity and health condition of the area, or to assist in the economic rehabilitation of the unemployed. First of all I will deal with the activity in regard to the land. To give the Committee a proper picture I must recall to them the activities which are normally carried on by the Department of Agriculture. Ordinary land settlement is carried on by the Department, and that ordinary land settlement means settlement on holdings of economic size of men who have the necessary resources and experience. The second normal activity with regard to the land is a novel one. It is the development of plots, which are parcels of land from half an acre to an acre in extent, to be given to the unemployed men. Having these two normal activities in mind what does the Commissioner propose to do? To use a common phrase, he is filling a certain number of gaps. He is going to assist unemployed men who have made good as
        2068
        plot holders to get into an ordinary smallholding. He has on the stocks an experimental scheme whereby certain plot holders at Auchenheath in Lanarkshire are to be moved to neighbouring ground belonging to the Department of Agriculture at Stonebyres, and there to be set up in smallholdings.
        Save in very exceptional cases you cannot, without assistance, set up an unemployed man who is without resources, even if he has been a successful plot holder for a year or two. The Commissioner proposes to give assistance in the transference of these men. He proposes to pay the first year's rent of the plot, to provide fences, to finance stock, seeds and equipment, and he is to do that by a sum of money which is 50 per cent. grant and 50 per cent. loan, repayable over a period of 10 years. That is a very important experiment indeed. The £750,000 includes provision for 70 men being thus transferred.
        Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: From where are the men to be drawn? Why should not a small holding system be established?
        Mr. SKELTON: These are men who have been plot holders for some time and who want assistance to become settled as smallholders. That will be the first example of activity in helping unemployed plot holders to take the step over and become smallholders.
        Sir JOHN WALLACE: When plot holders are allocated plots by the Commissioner are they to be granted on the same financial terms as those of the Department of Agriculture?
        Mr. SKELTON: I have not said that the Commissioner is to grant plots. I have said that the Commissioner's activities are to include the removal of men from plots to smallholdings.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: This is the first time we have been able to discuss the activities of the Commissioner, and it is all new and strange to us. I thought the Under-Secretary said that the Commissioner was to give assistance to plot holders.
        Mr. SKELTON: I must be allowed to deal with one thing at a time. I am going on to deal with the assistance that the Commissioner will give to plot holders. Establishment and assistance

        2069
        are two different things. I have dealt with the Commissioner's proposed activities with regard to the transfer of plot holders to smallholdings. That is not the end of his activities in regard to the land. He proposes to give assistance to plot holders who are established by the normal activity of the Department. There are in fact at the moment 1,000 plot holders in the special area and the assistance which the Commissioner proposes to give is under the following heads. He proposes to give repayable advances of £10 to selected men who have successfully cultivated their plots for a year or more in order to help them with stock or seed or manures or whatever it may be, and he also proposes to assist in the provision of communal huts and other equipment. He allows a sum of £5,000 in that connection.
        I ought to say that the interventions of some of my hon. Friends earlier when I was discussing the Commissioner's activities in regard to smallholders, led me to omit one fact. I told the Committee of the assistance that was to be given for the first year. In addition to that financial assistance they are to get assistance and instruction with regard to the development of their smallholdings, and for that purpose extra instructors are being appointed by the two agricultural colleges in the special area, and the Commissioner will pay part of the salaries of those special instructors. To return to the question of the assistance which is to be given to the plotholders, I think that assistance which I have indicated will prove valuable to the plotholders in the special area. I would also mention that in regard to other areas, although the Department cannot see its way to give extra loans, arrangements have been made with the Joint Committee of the Society of Friends and the National Union of Allotment Holders who look after allotments and give some assistance to plotholders elsewhere.
        That is not all that the Commissioner proposes to do on the land side. He proposes to earmark money for the purpose of an experiment in what is called home-crofting, an experiment which has not been made hitherto in Scotland, though I believe there are already one or two examples in England. He proposes to allot in all £30,000 for this purpose. I think the Committee is
        2070
        familiar with the general idea of homecrofting. It is the establishment of a small community of people, placed upon the land, who are if possible to be self-supporting in their economic activities. He also proposes to have, as an experiment, an ordinary farm run by co-operative methods. I cannot give the Committee more details about that, but we shall all await with great interest the Commissioner's report to see the full details of the experimental farm, for the purchase of which he has allowed £25,000. That completes my review of the Commissioner's activities on the land side, and I think the Committee will agree that these proposals are interesting, valuable and to a large extent novel. I leave it at that, only saying that the initial expenditure on land schemes will total over £90,000.
        The next question is, what else is the Commissioner doing apart from activities connected with the land? He is giving great assistance to water schemes and sewerage schemes. Schemes of sewage purification will require for their completion an expenditure of £1,088,000 and the Commissioner proposes to find £490,000 of this sum. Scottish Members of the Committee will be interested to hear the places where these sewage purification schemes are. They are Larkhall, Newarthall and Carfin, Motherwell, Hamilton, Irvine Valley, Garnock Valley, Blantyre and Bothwell, Holytown and New Stevenston, Uddingston, Stirling, Armadale, Dumbarton, Bathgate and Lanarkshire (Shotts and Dykehead). He is also giving assistance by way of grants in aid to two schemes of water supply—Bathgate and North Ayrshire. This will involve an expenditure in the case of Bathgate of £1,800, and in the case of North Ayrshire of £9,600, a total of £11,000. In addition to the money to be spent upon these purposes he is giving assistance with regard to the provision of public parks and open spaces.
        Mr. MAXTON: Are these to be loans or grants?
        Mr. SKELTON: These are grants.
        Mr. D. GRAHAM: Both the sewage purification schemes and the water schemes?
        Mr. SKELTON: Yes, both. As I say, there are also to be grants-in-aid of public

        2071
        parks and open spaces for amenities in the area, and for this purpose the commissioner has estimated a cost of £68,000. I may mention some of the items under this head. First there is the scheme which I think has already been mentioned in the newspapers of a promenade along the right bank of the Clyde, which will have the advantage of preserving that part of the river bank for all time in the same way as the Aberdeen planning scheme has safeguarded the banks of the Dee. That will involve £60,000. Then there is a recreation ground for Hamilton. My hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) will have more knowledge than I have of the actual physical conditions in connection with that scheme, but I understand that it takes the form of reclaiming some land by the river with a retaining wall and making it suitable for recreational purposes. This will involve a cost of £5,250. There is a public park for Airdrie in connection with which the Commissioner is providing £3,400 out of a larger total the balance of which will be supplied by the local authority.
        Apart from the material activities there are the more imponderable efforts which are being made to assist in propaganda with regard to the special area. For that purpose the Commissioner has undertaken to grant £22,500 to the Scottish Development Council for intensive propaganda, and on the strength of that, the Council has formed a special section to deal with the matter. There has already been an exhibition in London to illustrate the products and resources of the special area. I cannot deprive myself of the pleasure of saying how glad I am that the Commissioner has called to his aid in this matter of propaganda the Scottish Development Council. It is a body which is doing most excellent work and is well fitted to help the Commissioner as he is well fitted to help it.
        Mr. MAXTON: Who are its members?
        Mr. SKELTON: I do not think my hon. Friend will wish me to read through the list of names, I am sure with his knowledge of what has happened in Scotland, he appreciates—[Interruption.]
        Mr. MAXTON: I am sorry. I did not intend to interrupt the hon. Gentleman
        2072
        again. I was replying to a remark from an hon. Member opposite.
        Mr. SKELTON: I am afraid the temptation to join in general conversation on this occasion seems to be irresistible, and I hope it has not developed from anything I have said.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: The hon. Gentleman has not mentioned research.
        Mr. SKELTON: I should have said that the Commissioner is also devoting a sum of £800 to research into the possibility of obtaining oil from certain classes of local coal. That is being done in connection with the Department of Scientific Research, which has been carrying on for some years an exhaustive survey in that connection. This is local research, and for fuller details of it we must await the Commissioner's report. I have tried to sketch the main activities of the Commissioner so far as they have reached the stage of having money allotted to them or of having final decisions taken upon them. I wish in conclusion to say that the Commissioner has been most active in getting into touch with the local authorities, and I think the local authorities have been very responsive to him in his efforts. I wish also to express to this Committee my sense of the tremendous field that Sir Arthur Rose has covered in his most important work. It may be said and no doubt will be said that more might have been done, but more might be done by almost every agency in the world. These activities, accompanied as they are by a flow of money into the special areas, must be of a stimulating and encouraging nature. Both in brightening the day-to-day lives of the inhabitants and in the long-range policy of recruiting the economic and health conditions of the area the Commissioner is doing good work. I submit that his efforts, so far, fully justify the language which I ventured to use upon the Third Reading of the Bill dealing with this matter, when I said that the institution of Commissioners for these special areas was a real enforcement of responsible government.
        7.0 p.m.
        Mr. D. GRAHAM: The report which we have just had from the Under-Secretary makes perfectly plain what the position is in regard to Sir Arthur Rose. I do not think that the House will object to the

        2073
        expenditure of money, providing always that it puts men in employment. I agree with the statement made by my hon. Friend that Sir Arthur Rose appears to be confining his attention to the counties which are really affected by unemployment. When I saw this list of works, I was rather inclined to think that he was spending his money over a greater area, and I am glad to find that he is confining his attention to that part of the country where the depression really exists. I cannot understand why £95,000 of the money should be spent on boys' and girls' organisations, experimental farms, physical training, and district nurses, as against £36,500 for plots and smallholdings. What advantage is there to be in these holiday camps for the people in the area which I represent? I should say that district nursing is the duty of the local authority rather than the work of the Commissioner. Personally, I take exception to any money that is being administered by the State for the provision of work for the unemployed being handed over to boy scouts and girl guides, and all that kind of tommy rot which exists to such a large extent in this country to-day.
        Mr. MAXTON: It is subsidising all the reactionary organisations.
        Mr. GRAHAM: This money is not going to put anybody into work. Why cannot the promenade which is proposed go further than is suggested? The Clyde as a river is much more beautiful from Motherwell Brig than it is in the upper reaches. In any case, I think that there is a right of way already on the right side practically down to Motherwell. I think that he very well could have extended that promenade. I was interested in the proposal as to smallholdings being set up in the constituency of the Noble Lord the Member for Lanark (Lord Dunglass). That is where they started the plots and that is where most of the plots are. Now smallholdings are to be started there, but the division which he represents is not as bad as some others.
        Mr. SKELTON: There is nothing sinister in this, in spite of the fact that my Noble Friend is good enough to be my Parliamentary Private Secretary. It is solely due to the fact that the Department of Agriculture already possesses land there. The plotholders there, as my hon. Friend knows, are anxious to get any larger holdings.
        Mr. GRAHAM: I have no objection to the expenditure as far as smallholdings are concerned.
        Mr. SKELTON: I should be out of order if I recounted to the Committee on this Vote the difficulties which the Department of Agriculture has had in finding suitable land. My hon. Friend knows the difficulty, but 1,000 out of the 1,600 plots in existence are, in fact, in the special areas.
        Mr. GRAHAM: I do not wish to pursue the matter further. There are any number of men for whom a plot is of comparative unimportance. They are fully qualified to take over reasonably-sized smallholdings. A larger proportion of the money might have gone to the provision of smallholdings. I should like to know whether men who have already acquired land for themselves, and who are using it as a sort of smallholding, but who have not sufficient capital to enable them to build a house, can be helped, and whether Sir Arthur Rose can be called upon to be favourably disposed towards granting them some portion of the money. There are some men who themselves can get smallholdings but who, because of lack of capital on the one hand, and inability to provide houses for themselves on the other, have been held up. I want to know whether it will be possible for Sir Arthur Rose to make any grants for that purpose.
        Mr. MILNE: Is the hon. Member referring to plotholders outside the distressed areas?
        Mr. GRAHAM: I mean men inside the distressed areas who are capable of taking plots.
        Mr. SKELTON: I think that my hon. Friend means something bigger than plots.
        Mr. GRAHAM: Yes, smallholdings. I am very pleased about this portion of the money which is to be utilised in providing a breakwater at Hamilton. It is a very necessary expenditure, and I hope that the money suggested will be sufficient. I am very pleased that that is to be taken into consideration by Sir Arthur Rose. I wonder whether he has considered the advisability of spending some money on afforestation. I do not confess to be acquainted with the particular

        2075
        science of forestry but, knowing as I do, that the land that is being utilised in the North of Scotland is much higher above sea-level, I am rather inclined to think that it would be possible for some afforestation scheme to be set up there, and I am srprised that Sir Arthur Rose made no reference to it. It was one of the suggestions which was made to him.
        Mr. SKELTON: I think that Sir Arthur Rose will refer to that later in his report.
        Mr. GRAHAM: I do not think there is anything further I can say on the matter except that I hope Sir Arthur Rose will get sufficient money for the purpose of making greater experiments and aiding the local authorities in this particular locality. Speaking for myself, I am not satisfied with the manner in which it is proposed to allocate the money. It should be allocated in a way that would give more men employment. There is part of a road from Tolcross to Mount Vernon which skirts a deep quarry. There is considerable traffic on the road, and in the event of a driver making a mistake a serious accident might occur. It has been suggested to the Special Area Commissioner that some money might be used for improving that road so as to do away with the danger of accidents at that spot. Perhaps the Under-Secretary will give us an indication whether the Commissioner proposes to deal with it. At the moment it is not possible to discuss the report further, and my chief criticism is that schemes have not been devised which will provide more work.
        7.17 p.m.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: The Under-Secretary, perhaps partly because of, and perhaps as he would suggest in spite of, the assistance offered by some Members of the Committee, including myself, succeeded in giving us an admirable and lucid account of the work of the Special Area Commissioner in Scotland, so far as it has gone. I would like to put a question to him about finance because, like the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) I am not quite clear on that point. The original estimate given when the Act was going through the House was that £500,000 would be placed at the disposal of the Commissioner
        2076
        in Scotland for expenditure to the end of the financial year, that is, March of this year, if he required it. Will the Under-Secretary tell us how much of that money was spent? For the current financial year we are voting a further £490,000, but the Under-Secretary tells us that the Commissioner has made plans involving the expenditure from State funds of £750,000. Does that include the amount of money spent in the last financial year, and the amount which we are voting for this year, or does it exceed the sum of those two amounts? If so, I presume that the Under-Secretary will tell us that in due course there will be a Supplementary Estimate. I should be obliged if he would confirm that. He told us that the Commissioner has made plans for the expenditure by the State of £767,000, which will attract an equivalent provision by the local authorities, and that therefore, in accordance with the plans prepared by the Commissioner, there will be a total expenditure in the depressed areas of £1,500,000.
        It is important for the Committee to know when that money is to be spent. Will it be spent this year, or will it be gradually dribbled out over the next two or three years? If that be the case, it will make very little effect on the unemployment problem in the depressed areas of Scotland. Indeed, the work upon which this money is to be spent, useful as I believe it is, and interesting as many of the objects are which the Commissioner has selected for his experiment, is not work by any means which will give a large measure of employment proportionate to the expenditure involved. The hon. Member for Hamilton pointed out such items as district nursing. I do not wish to question the judgment of the Commissioner on a point like that, and it may well be that there is a case for giving that assistance to district nursing. Obviously, however, it will not give very much employment.
        Mr. SKELTON: It may be due to a defect of my opening statement that this point has twice been made. May I recall to the Committee that the functions of the Commissioners as laid down in the Statute are
        "the initiation, organisation, prosecution and assistance of measures designed to facilitate the economic development and social improvement"

        2077
        of the areas specified. It was repeatedly said in Parliament when the Act was going through that these were the main objects, and that the expenditure of money by the Commissioners was not to be judged solely by the number of men employed.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: I agree with the Under-Secretary that the expenditure has not to be tested solely by the number of men employed, but he will agree that it is one of the tests which we must apply.
        Mr. SKELTON: I thought that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was making it the sole test.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: I am not making it the sole test. It is true that I am now applying that test to the plans of the Commissioner, but I am entitled to do that and to ask how much work these plans will give. The Under-Secretary is justified in pointing out that that is not the only test, but it is certainly a most important test, and one which will be applied, not only by Members of this House, but undoubtedly by people in Scotland. I hope that the Under-Secretary does not think I am condemning the assistance given to the district nursing scheme; I said that I would be prepared to defer to the judgment of the Commissioner, but I am entitled to point out that it will not give very much employment. Nor will the purchase of a holiday camp, which, I dare say, is a useful object and justifiable on social grounds. It is right to consider the social requirements of these deeply depressed areas, but, there again, do not let us suppose that much of that money which is going to the purchase of the title deeds of this camp is going to create employment. I think it is fair to ask how much employment will be given by this £1,500,000. If it were all spent on works which have a high employment-giving capacity, it would be equivalent to 6,000 man years, but I should doubt whether it is equivalent to 3,000. There are 330,000 unemployed people in Scotland. I agree that the Under-Secretary is entitled to say that that is not the only test, but it is a very important test.
        Mr. SKELTON: The two tests are, economic development and social improvement. A bigger employment will be involved in the schemes for economic development, while social improvement
        2078
        will involve only a small amount of employment.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: That is true. Now the Under-Secretary and I are about quits. We have interrupted each other about the same number of times, and we agree on the point that these are the tests to be applied. The Under-Secretary will appreciate that there is a difference between the character of the criticism I am directing against the Commissioner's scheme and that of the hon. Member for Hamilton. I agree with the Under-Secretary that these are factors which have to be taken into account, but I say that the test of the employment-giving capacity of the schemes is most important, and is one that will be applied by Members of Parliament and the public.
        I want to ask how many of these schemes are actually being put into operation now? The Under-Secretary did not distinguish between schemes which are actually in operation, schemes which are to be put into operation in the near future, and schemes which are merely recommended.
        Mr. SKELTON: The schemes I gave are those finally decided upon.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: They are schemes that have been finally approved, but some have not been started yet, while others, no doubt, are in operation. Will the Under-Secretary tell us how many of the schemes are now in operation and how quickly he hopes to get the whole of them into operation? Obviously, £1,500,000, if it is to be spent in 12 months, will produce a far greater effect than if it were dribbled out over a series of years.
        With regard to the actual proposals, I wish to dissociate myself from the criticisms of the hon. Member for Hamilton as to the expenditure on these boys' and girls' organisations. I have the honour to be associated, in an honorary capacity, with the Boys' Clubs of Scotland, and only wish that I could give more time to that work, but, unfortunately, I pass most of my life in London, and when I go home I am at the other end of the country. But I am filled with admiration for the work which these young university students are doing among the boys, and I am sure that if the hon. Member would only go

        2079
        to some of these clubs—I do not know those in Lanarkshire, but I know them in Edinburgh—and see the work done and the admirable way in which these young men devote themselves, single-mindedly, sacrificing their time and their leisure, to the interests of these boys, he would not be talking about political or any other ulterior motives. He mentioned Boys' Brigades and the Boy Scouts. I know them well in my own part of the world, and to suggest that they go in for militaristic training is absurdly erroneous. The men who are doing such excellent work among the boys and girls in Caithness and Sutherland would feel insulted—it is the only word I can use—if it were said that they were trying to train them on militaristic lines. Up there we loathe war, and the ministers, the teachers and the others who are doing this fine work there would revolt from the suggestion that there is anything militaristic in the training.
        Mr. MAXTON: Then what is the idea of forming fours?
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: I do not want to be drawn into a discussion of the training, but if the hon. Member wishes to have any information about it I can supply him with ample literature, or I can discuss it with him; but I would say, briefly, that the idea is to inculcate discipline, wholesome, healthy discipline, without any suggestion or intention of training for war. Then I see that among the other objects of the Commissioner is the promotion of physical training, to which £8,500 is devoted, but only 2,000 men are to benefit. Physical training is an admirable thing, and I hope that it will be given greater encouragement from the Commissioner throughout the whole area. A good deal of employment could be found in the construction of the necessary halls, because in Scotland we cannot always undertake physical training out of doors, certainly not in the winter months. There is great need in Scotland for halls for physical training.
        I was very much interested in what the Under-Secretary told us about moving the plot holders on to smallholdings. He will appreciate that that proposal makes a very great appeal to me. It is the old idea of the agricultural ladder, to which the party to which I have the honour to
        2080
        belong has always attached the greatest importance—the idea of a man moving up from a plot to a smallholding, then to a larger smallholding, and so on to a larger farm. I know people who have mounted practically all the steps of that ladder, and I hope the experiment will be pushed on. There is another point, but as I know that the hon. Member for Dunfermline (Sir J. Wallace) is going to address us on it I will not say much about it. Broadly speaking, it is a proposal for helping plot holders who have no capital to tide over the necessarily difficult initial period by letting them off the rent for the first year and giving them other help in the equipment of their holdings. It is an admirable idea, and seems to be likely to be most fruitful, and it is capable of wider application. I feel that the hon. Member for Hamilton was a little mistaken in deprecating the experiment in home-crofting. It is an interesting experiment and one which is well worth undertaking. The Under-Secretary referred to water supply schemes. I cannot help thinking that it is unfortunate that these schemes should be undertaken in those parts of Scotland where there is least need of them and where the rateable value is such that there is least difficulty in providing them. I ask him to consider whether, seeing that under the Special Areas Act, it is possible to undertake work outside the special areas if employment is thereby given to people inside those areas he could not provide us with water supplies where they are so badly needed, in the Highlands of Scotland, working under the terms of that Act?
        The provision of parks and amenities form another item of the work which the Commissioner is doing. I see that no less than £60,000 is being devoted to a promenade on the Clyde. I leave it to other Members who know the Clyde better than I do to eulogise that scheme, but it seems a large amount of money to apply to that purpose. I should like to have seen larger provision made for playing fields. In these modern days they are a necessity. People are realising more and more how important it is to have a proper equipment of playing fields in every part of the country. The work of levelling playing fields is just the sort of work for which these unemployed men are most admirably qualified. It is

        2081
        work which is being undertaken by the unemployed in many parts of the country with great keenness. It will be more difficult to find playing fields in the future, after so much suitable land has been built over under the Government's building scheme, and now is the opportunity to make this provision. There are two or three big omissions from the list of works contemplated by the Commissioner. Among the recommendations which the Commissioner made in considering work on which the unemployed could be engaged were land reclamation and land drainage. He said:
        "I believe there are districts in Scotland—one or two in Lanarkshire have been carefully surveyed—where it might be possible, at a reasonable cost per acre, to reclaim land and make it suitable for the smaller type of smallholdings and perhaps also, for the half-acre to two-acre plots suggested above."
        If that scheme were undertaken it would be possible, perhaps, to make arrangements in the constituency of the hon. Member for Hamilton and other hon. Members in Lanarkshire. The Commissioner mentioned land drainage. There are two kinds of land drainage, first of all arterial drainage. It is only a few weeks since we passed a Land Drainage Bill for Scotland, and we were told by the Secretary of State that it was being introduced at the express request of the Commissioner.
        Mr. SKELTON: I am sorry to interrupt again, but I did say that I was going to confine myself to schemes which had been put in hand and leave anything further to be said about the Commissioner's report to the Secretary of State.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: We may conclude that these arterial drainage schemes are under contemplation, because the Secretary of State told us so when the Land Drainage Act was before us, but that the schemes had not been finally approved.
        Mr. SKELTON: The fact that I did not mention them does not mean that they are turned down.
        Sir A. SINCLAIR: So much for arterial drainage. Then there is hill and pasture drainage. I am surprised that there is no mention of this in the Commissioner's report. On ordinary works of national development we agreed a few minutes ago that 4,000 men, get employment
        2082
        for every £1,000,000 spent, and that means that four men are employed for every £1,000 spent, so there would be 16 men employed for every £4,000 spent; but on hill and pasture drainage for every £4,000 spent, of which only £1,000 comes from State funds, 33 men are employed directly and 11 men indirectly, making 44 in all. As far as I know, there is no work which has such a high employment value, and I ask the Secretary of State whether provision for hill and pasture drainage will be included in the Commissioner's plans. But the most important point which I make, to which I have already referred, is that we should be told whether this £750,000 will be granted in full as soon as the work can be undertaken, and whether, at the same time, the Government are pressing the Commissioner to go forward and find other employment for the people in the depressed areas. I agree with the hon. Member for Hamilton that the account which the Under-Secretary has given us of the doings of the Commissioner does show that he is getting to work, and has suggested a number of schemes which are of great interest, the progress of which we shall all watch with close attention; but I must say again that the employment test—among other tests, I quite agree—must be applied to the plans of the Commissioner, and that by that test those plans will not yield results which can satisfy the Committee. I can speak only for myself, of course, but they do not satisfy me. When the plans are approved they ought to be undertaken quickly, and real drive ought to be put behind them, and the Commissioner ought to be urged to provide fresh plans and, if possible, plans which, while paying attention to the other factors to which the Under-Secretary drew attention, will have a higher employment-giving capacity than those which we are discussing.
        7.45 p.m.
        Sir ADRIAN BAILLIE: In his opening statement the Under-Secretary said that the experiments of the Special Commissioner for Scotland were in the two directions of economic development and social improvement and betterment. From that statement I gather that the only way in which Sir Arthur Rose has been able to apply the experiment to the County of West Lothian has been on the social side, represented by the training centre in Bathgate. The Under-Secretary

        2083
        and the Committee may remember the profound disappointment which was experienced in West Lothian, and to which I gave voice, when, on the publication of the Special Commissioner's recommendations, it became known that in specifying particular parishes of West Lothian, he had omitted to include two or three of the areas, which are suffering the greatest amount of concentrated unemployment, such areas as Bo'ness and South Queensferry.
        Mr. SKELTON: My hon. Friend may not have been present to hear me say that besides the central areas there was a sewage purification scheme in Bath-gate and that the total cost was £7,150.
        Sir A. BAILLIE: I am very grateful to the Under-Secretary for bringing out that point, but that is not the point which I am making. When it was known that the Commissioner was to be appointed to investigate conditions in the distressed areas of Scotland, it was accepted that the whole County of West Lothian was one of the two depressed counties in Scotland. In one of the most depressed parts of that county, in the Borough of Bo'ness, the town council wisely decided to lose no time in preparing schemes to submit to the Commissioner at the appropriate time. To my mind, their schemes were well worthy of consideration upon an economic basis, as it provided for land reclamation and the improvement of the Port of Bo'ness.
        When Sir Arthur Rose's recommendations were made known, it became apparent that Bo'ness, which had not been included among the special areas specified by Sir Arthur Rose, could not submit their draft schemes. I discussed the scheme with the town council, and I succeeded in inducing the Commissioner to receive a deputation from that borough. The argument adduced at the meeting was that if assistance were given by the Commissioners for the improvement of the port and dock facilities of Bo'ness, the chances of employment around Bathgate, Armadale and Whitburn, which are colliery districts or districts interested in iron and steel operations, would be improved. The Commissioner was not able to see that point, and the sound schemes drafted by the town council of Bo'ness were turned down. I wish to ask the Under-Secretary
        2084
        if there is any way in which the Commissioner can rectify in the near future the original error which he committed in omitting this really distressed area.
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain Bourne): I must remind the hon. Member that the areas are fixed by Statute, and that amendment of them would require legislation. That cannot be discussed in Committee of Supply. So long as the hon. Member confines his observations to what can be done under Section 1, paragraph (6), his speech is in order.
        Sir A. BAILLIE: I am sorry I have transgressed the rules of this Debate. Would I be entitled, having drawn the attention of the Under-Secretary to the requirements of the Borough of Bo'ness, to inquire whether the Government themselves could give assistance?
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Not under this Vote.
        Sir A. BAILLIE: If I can keep myself within the limits of the Debate I will draw attention to one further point, which is that a factory for the manufacture of explosives has been situated for some time in the town of Linlithgow, and has for some time now been taken over by Imperial Chemical Industries. Notice was given to me many months ago that Imperial Chemical Industries, in the use of that double-edged sword of rationalisation, proposed to close down the factory and to concentrate their production at Ardear. Evacuation of the factory has commenced, and at the end of the year the factory will be empty. Is there no way in which the Commissioner could be of assistance in attracting industries to the vacant factory which is in every way up to date and to and from which transport facilities could not be more excellent? I bring this matter forward because it might be within the power of the Under-Secretary to call the Commissioner's attention to it. The situation which will arise at the end of the year will be of great gravity to Linlithgow, and will cause anxiety to a large number of highly skilled men who will find themselves suddenly out of employment. The town council of Linlithgow, still more so the men who will lose their employment, and myself, would be most grateful to the Under-Secretary if he could be the means of providing assistance.
        7.53 p.m.
        Sir J. WALLACE: I rise simply to ask from the Under-Secretary a question that arises out of the statement he made regarding plotholders. I wish the position to be specifically cleared up. If I heard him aright, he stated that the Commissioner had arranged to give £10 to the small plotholder who did well for the first year. If that be the case, why should there be any difference of treatment between plotholders in the distressed areas and others who are not in the so-called distressed areas, but who are doing the same work, are the same class of unemployed man and are equally deserving? They hate idleness, and desire to have the opportunity of cultivating their plots in their own way. When we had a Debate upon agricultural employment last Friday, I raised this question, and the Secretary of State for Scotland mentioned in the close of his speech my application for better treatment for the plotholders of Fife, and said:
        "In these matters I am a convinced believer that if these schemes are to succeed and to stand the test of time, they must in the long run stand on their own feet. They should not be subsidised in this way. Neither do I believe that the men themselves desire these free grants from many quarters."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 28th June, 1935; col. 1500, Vol. 303.]
        I speak at first hand on this subject and from the first hand testimony of the plotholders themselves. I was surprised to hear the Secretary of State for Scotland say that he did not imagine these men wanted assistance.
        The specific point upon which I wish to have an answer from the Under-Secretary is this: Is the Commissioner, in his administration of the finances of the plotholders, more generous than the Scottish Office, and if so, why? I would like him when he replies also to give the Committee the figures of the allowances made to plotholders by the Department of Agriculture and of the financial assistance given by the Commissioner, Sir Arthur Rose. It is very important that men who have a chance of training on these plots, and who are looking forward to becoming holders of much larger areas, should be given all the assistance that a National Government can well give. Rightly or wrongly, I feel that the Department of Agriculture have not looked upon the venture of the plotholders in the generous way in which they might have done, and
        2086
        which the men expected. I appreciated the clear statement made by the Under-Secretary, but I hope that at the end of another financial year we shall have a proper report from the Commissioner dealing with the different departments of his activity.
        Mr. SKELTON: I have pointed out that the Commissioner will issue his report for the first six months up to 17th June. I believe my hon. Friend put a question in the House three or four days ago.
        Sir J. WALLACE: I am much obliged to my hon. Friend. I was absent from the House during the few minutes of his speech. It is of the utmost importance that there shall be a clear statement of the activities of the Commissioner, which are much appreciated by us, because he has tackled a difficult and complex matter with the enthusiasm which we all expected from him. I would associate myself also with the attitude taken up by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair) towards the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham). I believe that the money is well spent on those organisations mentioned in the Commissioner's statement, of boys and girls in Scotland, and that the training which they receive is extremely useful, from the mental and physical points of view.
        8.0 p.m.
        Mr. MAXTON: I am glad my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline (Sir J. Wallace) asked for a report from the Commissioner.
        Mr. LAWSON: We have been asking for a report for several weeks.
        Mr. MAXTON: I understand that we on this side who are from Scotland have asked for this particular day for Scottish Estimates, and that it is two or three days too soon to make it possible for us to have a report from the Commissioner. It is not often that Scotland is in advance of the times, and you must excuse us for the one occasion on which we have gone too fast, but, undoubtedly, if we get an opportunity at an early date, I hope it will be taken for discussing not merely the Scottish position, but the comparative positions as between all the different areas and the work of the different Commissioners. I hope the fact

        2087
        that we have discussed this one to-day with rather insufficient information will not be used as an excuse for excluding us on a future occasion when all the information is available. The hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary of State was handicapped considerably in his statement of the operations of the Commissioner by the temporary nature of the information that he has in his hands. We are more handicapped still, because we could only grasp in a very casual way how these various schemes are distributed over the country. Like the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Sir A. Baillie), I did not grasp the fact that Bathgate was getting more than its share. I gather that Barr-head is going to be a model educational centre.
        I was originally very sceptical about the whole Commissioner system, and I still am very sceptical, but I must admit that I was wrong in one aspect of my scepticism. I took the line when the Bill was before the House that the money would not be spent. Now I see that it is being spent, and spent at a somewhat speedier rate than I anticipated. Therefore, I have to withdraw my criticism along that line. But when I begin to examine how it is spent, I begin to think I shall have to go on to the side of the niggards and object to the amount. I understood the idea was that the Commissioner was not normally to take on schemes which would be carried out in the ordinary course of business by local authorities or by Government Departments, but in so far as anything practical is being done, it is precisely work that local authorities or Government Departments would normally do. All the agricultural plot-holding side of it is definite work of the Department of Agriculture—all the smallholdings, plots, allotments, additional agricultural instructors, and so on. That all belongs to the Department of Agriculture or the Education Department. Occupational centres, camps, etc., are definite functions of the Minister of Labour. Sewage purification, water supply, parks, and amenities are all normal operations of local authorities and are under the direction of the Minister of Health.
        There are two new principles in the operations of this Scottish Commissioner which I feel would have to be watched in very great care, or vicious principles
        2088
        would arise in our public life. The one of these is that, while normally a local authority would have to find the where-withal to develop sewage purification schemes or water supply schemes, here we have some areas which will go forward and get a substantial amount as a free grant. I have been agitating in the country for years that money should be provided free of interest for the construction of houses. I have always been told that that was a bad and a vicious principle, but now money is being provided for sewage purification and water supply schemes out of the national Treasury to certain local authorities. One has to watch that new principle established by this man without any real legislative sanction. We appointed him with a very free hand to encourage schemes, but the Minister must realise that this Commissioner, by giving grants in these cases, is upsetting the normal financial relationship that exists between the Treasury and the local authorities responsible for carrying out these works. That is a principle I say that would have to be watched with the very greatest care.
        The other principle is this: I see tremendous grants for holiday camps, for district nursing, for boys' and girls' organisations. The Minister did not make it plain under whose auspices Carfin Hall was going to be run.
        Mr. SKELTON: I understand, by the Commissioner, under the direct control of the Commissioner.
        Mr. MAXTON: That is very interesting. I gather that the information we have had to-day is that Carfin Hall has been bought by the Commissioner for the sum of £4,000. Doubtless it is a fine estate and a fine house, though I do not know the place myself. It is a bit of Scotland that wise politicians steer clear of, but it is a fine hall and a good estate, and I feel that the Commissioner has got a good bargain so far as the price is concerned. Probably the seller feels he has got rid of an incubus also. I do not know enough to say; but £4,000 is obviously merely a first cost. Now the Under-Secretary of State tells me that the Commissioner is going to run it.
        Mr. SKELTON: I understand he is going to run it in the meantime, and possibly finally he may find it suitable for voluntary organisations to take over.
        Mr. MAXTON: He is putting in officials?
        Mr. SKELTON: So I understand.
        Mr. MAXTON: That will involve an annual charge, a standing annual charge, but I am glad he is doing it directly rather than handing it over to voluntary organisations, because that is the point that I am coming to. There is so much for physical training. Then later on there is so much for homecraft, to voluntary organisations, and for industrial propaganda and research, some £22,000, again to a private organisation. This is the principle involved. It is all very well for hon. Members to say we all appreciate the good work of boys' brigades and boy scouts and all the rest of them. That is too easy a statement, because we do not all appreciate it. It is all very well to say that their purpose is only good, but we on these benches take the view that all these organisations that are so widely applauded by hon. and right hon. Members opposite are organisations which are subsidiaries of their own political and social points of view. We take that view very definitely, and our experience in practice bears it out. But in general these voluntary organisations of benevolent-minded people anxious to do something for the poor poor or the poor poor's children are homes of the political and social philosophy of the hon. Members opposite, and I question very much the propriety of any Government passing Treasury money into the funds of voluntary associations in which they are personally interested.
        Put the boot on the other foot. Just swing it round, and imagine my hon. and right hon. Friends above the Gangway on this side coming into office and passing over tens of thousands of pounds of public money into social organisations of a voluntary nature which are in the same relation to their politics as these organisations are to the politics of hon. Members opposite. Let me put this specific question to my hon. Friends opposite. I am keenly interested in the organisation called the National Unemployed Workers' Movement. My party assists that organisation in every way it can, and that movement has got a political viewpoint to my own. I wonder if I suggested that the Commissioner might quite well grant substantial sums out of
        2090
        the money at his disposal for holiday camps, for boys' and girls' organisations, for model occupational centres, to be spent and directed by the voluntary association called the National Unemployed Workers' Movement, which has a more closely defined relationship to the unemployed than any one of those to whom you are handing over money. There would be an outcry.
        Mr. H. STEWART: And quite right.
        Mr. MAXTON: Why quite right?
        Mr. STEWART: My hon. Friend does not seem to realise that associations such as we support, boy scouts and boys' brigades, and so on, have nothing what-even to do with politics. Never in all the time I was in the Scouts, a matter of eight or nine years, was politics mentioned, but in the organisation of which the hon. Member speaks politics is always being mentioned.
        Mr. MAXTON: The hon. Member says that the National Unemployed Workers' Movement is political, but that movement declares, just as he does for his organisation, that it is non-political.
        Mr. STEWART: That may be, but that, association expresses constantly, repeatedly, political views, whereas the boy scouts and boys' brigades and so on never express any political views at all.
        Mr. MAXTON: I will tell the hon. Member what the politics of the National Unemployed Workers' Movement is. It is to do everything they can to improve the lot of the unemployed. That is their politics, and surely an organisation of that description is just as entitled to have the handling of public funds for the benefit of the unemployed as these other organisations which have, as the hon. Member says, no politics, no interest in politics, but are completely detached. One of the major political problems of this country is to be handed over to organisations which have no interest in and no knowledge of politics, and do not care about politics at all.
        Mr. SKELTON: The money given to these organisations is for educational purposes, not for dealing with the unemployed.
        Mr. MAXTON: The sole purpose for which this money was voted by the House

        2091
        was the relief of the distressed people in the depressed areas. I know the legislation perfectly well. I was in constant attendance in the House while it was going through, I understand the whole business, and the money was to be spent on the depressed areas. What is being contended now is that this has nothing to do with the unemployed at all, but I say that it must have to do with the unemployed. An area is a special area because of the number of its unemployed. It was for the depressed people in these areas that the money was voted by the House. Glasgow and other places have been ruled out as beneficiaries under this legislation, on the ground that it is unnecessary for them. The whole purpose is to raise the general standard of life of the people in these depressed areas; and yet we are now told that it is not for the purpose of the unemployed.
        Mr. SKELTON: The function of the Commissioners under the Statute is the initiation, organisation and prosecution of measures designed to facilitate the economic development and social improvement of the areas specified in the First Schedule to the Act, and it is under the heading of social improvement that I would venture to classify the items to which the hon. Member was referring.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: Cannot the social improvement be obtained from other sources?
        Mr. SKELTON: That may be.
        Mr. MAXTON: I am not going into what is obviously a fine point. I am not going to start arguing. I repeat my main point—
        Mr. MACLEAN: Surely, the point is that this money which is being granted for the purpose of doing these things in the depressed areas is for the benefit of the unemployed, and that these voluntary organisations are not to be regarded as unemployed organisations, or as having suffered because of a large degree of unemployment among their membership, and, therefore, should not be entitled to any assistance.
        Sir J. WALLACE: Is it not the case that the boys and girls attached to these particular organisations in the depressed areas will in all probability be, as to 90 per cent. children of people who are
        2092
        unemployed? The Measure has no meaning otherwise. In a depressed area, unemployment is particularly high, and it is because I believe that these organisations are in the interests of the children of the unemployed that I support these measures.
        Mr. MACLEAN: Helensburgh and Cowall are both in what is called a depressed area, but is it suggested that any boy scouts or girl guides in either of those two middle-class business residential places in Dumbartonshire should receive money out of this fund? It is absurd.
        Mr. MAXTON: I am merely trying, by quoting examples, to let hon. Members see the enormity of what they are approving of to-day—that the public purse is to be plundered to maintain private voluntary organisations. The hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. H. Stewart), who applauds the plundering of the public purse for organisations of which he has graciously deigned to approve, at once rises to show how improper it would be to plunder the public purse—
        Mr. H. STEWART: What I said had nothing to do with any funds for these people. The hon. Member's methods may be good debating, but they are most unfair.
        Mr. MAXTON: I do not want to be unfair. Let me try to put it fairly. The hon. Gentleman approves of the granting of public money to be used by these voluntary organisations for the furtherance of their own purposes—not necessarily, we have been told, to benefit the unemployed, but for the furtherance of their purposes; but he thinks it would be outrageous if money were similarly granted to voluntary organisations of whose purposes I approve. That is the view of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite. I say to them that, if I approve of a voluntary organisation of any kind, whether sporting, benevolent, or social in its objective, I go to my own pocket and, out of my own limited resources, give the voluntary contribution that a person is entitled to give to those organisations of which he approves. I have never come to the House to beg the Minister of Labour, the Minister of Health or the Chancellor of the Exchequer to subsidise my football club, or golf club, or any other voluntary organisation, and I do not think that, in

        2093
        decency, hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite should act in any other way than I act myself.
        Many hon. and right hon. Gentlemen, imagined that, when these Commissioners got to work, factories and new industries would spring up all over the place—that we were to see the Clyde chimneys smoking and the men hurrying down to work again. There was going to be a scarcity of men. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] I was told not to be cynical; I was told not to be sceptical, and all the rest of it. My hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline (Sir J. Wallace) is a business man, and knows that these things do not happen in the capitalist system, but no doubt some more ignorant Members did think that these Commissioners were going round to develop industries in the depressed areas, and to bring new ideas, a new point of view, a new inspiration, a new personality into them—different qualities from those of the ordinary civil servant or politician. This was to be a new type, of super-man, who was going to breathe life into the decaying parts of the body politic; and we have the Girl Guides and Boys' Brigade brought in. I knew the founder of the Boys' Brigade personally. He had two interests. One was a church, and the other was the Volunteers and Territorials. He was a distinguished officer of the Territorial regiment in which I myself served in a humble capacity. The Boys' Brigade was his attempt to combine these two interests in one organisation and pass it on to the rising generation, and he did it with a devotion and an earnestness and a fine character which is worthy of all commendation.
        This is put before us to-day as the greatest height to which the National Government, through its Special Commissioner, can rise in revivifying the decaying life of Scotland. There is not a single new industry. Home crafts, small-holdings—how the Conservative party has played about with these things for years, getting people on the land, unskilled, semi-skilled or after short courses from experts getting them on to the land, when in every country in the world, including Scotland, skilled agriculturists with a lifetime of experience are getting off the land. The Special Commissioner is spending public money in getting unskilled men on, when the men who know, who have struggled for a lifetime, sometimes
        2094
        for generation after generation, and who love the land and the life of the land have to give up a losing battle and get off. They think it is possible to make a successful, profitable agriculture on the basis of men who have fallen out of other works of life into agriculture. [Interruption.] I will not allow the hon. Member to interrupt me on this occasion, because it was disastrous on the last. I listened with very great interest to his explanation of the social gain that is achieved. The essential social philosophy of it is that everything we have done for the last 700 or 800 years has been a mistake. The factory is a mistake, the machine is a mistake, the skilled artisan as we know him is a mistake, modern commerce is a mistake, the great structure of banking and international exchange, the organisation of factories, the distribution of power—all that is a mistake that mankind has made. We have to get back to first things.
        "When Adam delved and Eve span,
        Who was then a gentleman?"
        Back we go to primitive barbarism. I see one of the most recent additions to the Government Bench smiling. I can imagine him back in primitive barbarism. He plants potatoes in this field, while someone else grows leeks in another field, and someone spins cloth and someone else makes boots out of primitive materials. At night they gather round the village spring and quaff large draughts of pure water and exchange the products of their labour. It is a great picture of primitive country life. We go back to the simple toil and the simple barter between man and man, your labour exchanged for mine and mine for yours. I do not know what the hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. H. Stewart) and I would get out of an exchange of one another's products. We get a good lot of fun out of the exchange of one anothers interruptions, but I question very much whether we should get much out of an exchange of the products of our manual labour. He may be optimistic as to what he would get from me, but I am very pessimistic about what I should get from him. That describes the basic principle of the home craft, that modern progress is a failure and that we have to go back to the primitive and find salvation there. It is a fad. There are a lot of nice people in every silly movement that grows up, but it is no solution for the economic and industrial

        2095
        problems which the House is asked year after year to confront and which the population hopes at some time we shall solve. Of all the expenditure, which I think is largely wasteful, perhaps the most wasteful is the £22,000 that is handed to the Scottish National Development Council for propaganda and research divided in the proportion of £20,000 for propaganda and £800 for research. It is a strange allocation. I imagine that the Scottish National Development Council know better how to carry on propaganda—
        Mr. SKELTON: I must have made a mistake. The research is not being carried on by the Council. It is being carried on locally in connection with the Department of Scientific Research.
        Mr. MAXTON: I know that I shall get the full report, but £800 for industrial research seems to me quite insignificant and scarcely worth spending. In these months while this has been operating I received a letter from a constituent. He may be a faddist. I do not know. There are some in my division as in others. He wrote that there was mineral wealth in a certain district, I think in South Lanark—undeveloped minerals of one kind or another—and he thought investigation should be made there. A survey should be made with a view to opening it up. I sent the communication on to the Scottish Office, who might well have sent it on to the Commissioner for his consideration, and he might have produced some new exploitation of Scotland's wealth. They sent me back one of their polite letters saying in so many words, "Do not be silly." The essence of it was, "Do not waste our time on trivial things like that. Who is going to start nosing round to see if there is any mineral wealth there waiting to be exploited?" It seems to me that research along those lines as to the general resources of the country would have been something of value, whereas this general research into the possibilities of coal and oil is being very adequately financed and very expertly carried on. As to the £20,000 for propaganda—
        Mr. H. STEWART: Very sensible!
        Mr. MAXTON: The hon. Member has lavish ideas of spending money. I have seen this council functioning ever since
        2096
        it came into being on its own resources. I believe that it has had small grants on previous occasions for special purposes, but it has largely functioned on its own resources, and I cannot see a solitary thing it has done, unless some of its most prominent figures have been very actively engaged in that type of reorganisation of industry which is directed towards the closing down of industries rather than opening them up. I would refer the hon. Gentleman opposite to Shipbuilding Securities Limited and the prominent part played by certain distinguished members of the Scottish National Development Council. They were much more successful at cutting down than opening up.
        These are my general criticisms of the temporary report which we have had here to-day. I do not carry it to extreme lengths because I have admitted that it is merely a temporary report, and that later on we shall have a proper review of the whole of the operations, but, if I am still in the same mood then as I am now, I shall certainly be unrestrained in my criticisms. The attitude of my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) and myself constantly in this House is that we should like to see £767,000 go into the pockets of the unemployed in the distressed areas of Scotland. We think that it would do them a great deal of good, and also the shopkeepers in the locality, and the voluntary associations in the area with their sports and social organisations. If they could have spent that sum of money in their area, with the intelligence they possess, it would have gone directly towards sweetening their lives and would have given them a greater confidence in living. It would have improved the general economic life of the locality if they had had a few more shillings or pounds to spend in the shops of their neighbourhood.
        The sum of £767,000 poured into the pockets of the unemployed in these special areas would have created a new social economy and a new hope. Scarcely a halfpenny has gone into the pockets of the unemployed. So much to the boys brigade, to the landowner who owned the land at the summer camp, so much to the owner of Carfin Hall, so much to the owner of land for smallholdings for plot-holders, and so on right down through the list; so much to the owner of experimental

        2097
        farms, so much to the person who owns the land on which the home crafting experiments are to be carried out, so much for industrial propaganda of the Scottish National Development Council. How much of this is going to percolate through the pockets of the unemployed? A very trifling amount at a very distant date. The sum of £767,000 passing into the pockets of the unemployed would have had a big difference at once. Some of these things will make a difference, and I do not attempt to deny it. I see the sum of £1,200 for district nursing.
        Mr. SKELTON: The sum of £490,000 of the £767,000 is for sewerage purification schemes which involve getting on with necessary works.
        Mr. MAXTON: I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that a good proportion of the £490,000 for sewerage purification and water supply schemes will go to people from whom land has to be obtained, and a big proportion will go in profit to the contractor. We have to make a substantial reduction in the £490,000 before we find what is actually going to the men employed on these schemes. When we examined the million pounds spent on the Glasgow-Edinburgh road to see how much of it got through to the people employed on the job, we were astonished at the small fraction of the total. All the criticisms the Conservative party used in opposition to public works schemes are applicable to this particular item of expenditure which the hon. Gentleman defends. Oh, yes, the hon. Gentleman cannot have it both ways. When hon. Members were in opposition they attacked the expenditure of public funds upon public works by the Labour Government of the day.
        Everybody here has stated time and again how appalled they have been at the maternal and infant mortality. Our minds have become easier about infant mortality because it has shown a tendency to decline, but our alarm about maternal mortality remains because the figure practically remains unchanged. I was speaking yesterday to a sanitary inspector in one of the districts which is a special area, and he told me that in some districts in that area it is almost impossible to get a certified nurse in cases of child-birth, and that the incidence of puerperal fever and the trouble that comes to infants through not being
        2098
        properly attended to was very marked and heavy. This is a thing upon which every Member of this House would at once be prepared to lavish money. What is the sense of shoving in a miserable £1,200 through the roundabout way of a special commissioner appointed to try and solve the unemployment problem? These are my criticisms. I withhold some for the next occasion, which I hope will not be unduly delayed.
        8.42 p.m.
        Mr. MILNE: We have heard an account of the activities of Sir Arthur Rose, and it fills me with admiration and envy—with envy because I greatly wish that his jurisdiction had been extended to Fife. With unerring instinct, he has placed his finger upon the flaw in the Government scheme of land settlement. These unemployed men are furnished with plots for a double purpose: first to enable them to find useful occupation, and, second, to provide a body of skilled agricultural workers from whom the more ambitious smallholders can be recruited. Here is the fatal defect. How seldom do these small plot holders receive promotion? When I heard that Sir Arthur Rose had furnished the means wherewithall to enable these men to stock their smallholdings it filled me with envy, and it was like touching an old sore, because for weeks and months I have been hammering at the door of the Department of Agriculture in Edinburgh.
        Many a man has come to me and said, "Mr. Milne, I am a plotholder. Cannot you get me a smallholding." I have gone to the Department of Agriculture, and the answer has always been, "We can do nothing for these men because the smallholdings require to be stocked." I have in mind a man who came to me, I think a couple of years ago. He was a man of suitable age and reliable character, and he had some measure of agricultural training, but as far as I know to-day he is still without a plot. Here we have Sir Arthur Rose coming along like a fairy godmother. He waves his wand and provides these men with stock, or with the equivalent of stock, to enable them to establish themselves as smallholders. I can only hope that the Under-Secretary will follow the example of Sir Arthur Rose. I do not know whether I can see a blush coming on his face, but I hope to see in him a change of heart and attitude.
        8.46 p.m.
        Mr. H. STEWART: The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton), in his interesting speech, said that his contribution to the Debate by way of criticism had been a restrained contribution. If that was a restrained contribution I certainly look forward to the next contribution, when he will not be restrained but will be entirely free to express himself. I do not know how much more critical he will be then than he has been on this occasion. As I listened to him destroying one after another the schemes of the Commissioner, I tried to remember a passage in the "School for Scandal," where I think Sir Peter Teazle was described as looking upon a problem with "an unforgiving eye and with a damned disinheriting countenance." The hon. Member for Bridgeton has an unforgiving eye in regard to this problem. I think that in this case his eye is not clear; or the spectacles he wears when he goes into that part of the country are dimmed. The picture he sees is confused, and I am going to try to put what seems to me to be a real picture of what is being done and what are the objects of the Commissioner.
        The hon. Member began by saying that he had feared the money placed at the disposal of the Commissioner would not be spent, but he finds that more has been spent than he expected. At any rate, Scotland can claim something in that respect, because Sir Arthur Rose has succeeded in doing in his part of the country what the Commissioner for the special area in England has not yet succeeded in doing. The complaint made in England is that the Commissioner there is not spending the money that has been given to him. The hon. Member based his criticism on the introduction of what he called two new principles, to which he was altogether opposed. The first principle was that money was being provided out of this scheme to assist certain local authorities to do things which were within the ordinary scope of their responsibility, and he said that that was a very bad thing. It may be a bad thing in principle, but in practice it has been a very good thing. These local authorities and various other bodies to which the hon. Member referred certainly have these rights, but for some reason or other until the arrival of the Special Commissioner little was done. I welcome the arrival
        2100
        of the Commissioner, because on his arrival I find that these duties are now being performed. I do not know what criticism the hon. Member can make of that fact.
        The hon. Member asked why certain areas got assistance from the State and. others did not. On that point I find myself in agreement with him. There are in all parts of the country—we have them in Fife and they exist elsewhere—little pockets, villages, it may be whole towns, where there is the most severe depression and the authorities are unable financially to do their proper duty. These districts need and deserve public assistance. I am entirely on the side of my hon. Friend in asking that that should be done. Having recognised the new principle that has been introduced, we might extend it.
        Mr. MAXTON: The hon. Member would not think of operating that principle through the Special Commissioner, but he would do it through the appropriate Minister of the Crown.
        Mr. STEWART: One would need to consider that. It is a question of which one would like notice. I do not feel disposed to answer the question without further thought. The second principle to which my hon. Friend took objection was the principle by which the funds of the State were used through the special Commissioner and given to what he called private voluntary organisations, to spend. My hon. Friend detests voluntary organisations, and especially private voluntary organisations. At any rate, he does not like mine. He does not like the Boys' Brigade. When the right hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A: Sinclair) was speaking he said something derogatory about forming fours and saluting. The hon. Member does not like forming fours and saluting. Yet I wonder. I have always understood that his political views were very closely associated with those existing in Russia. He has often in this House praised Russia and the organisation there. The latest recollection I have of a picture from Russia, a few days ago, was of a whole regiment of little children marching through Moscow, having formed fours, with all the display of militarism that it was possible for children to convey. We know from reports that almost from the cradle

        2101
        the children in Russia are taught not only to form fours but to perform much more militaristic operations.
        The hon. Member paid a high tribute to the founder of the Boys' Brigade. I am sure the hon. Member will not deny that throughout his whole work in creating the Boys' Brigade there was a profound Christian purpose. That has been my understanding of the Boys' Brigade. It is very closely associated with the Church. The hon. Member talked about the impertinence of those responsible for the Boys' Brigade in the distressed areas accepting assistance. For him to use the word "impertinence" in regard to that great body is a little more than we could have expected from him.
        Mr. MAXTON: I must correct the hon. Member. He said in defence of this organisation that they have no political ideas and no political views, and I said that it was sheer impertinence for any body with no political ideas and no political views on unemployment to be taking money to spend on unemployment.
        Mr. STEWART: There may be a difference in the hon. Member's mind in that statement from what he said before, but he has merely confirmed my previous impression that he considers it is an impertinence on the part of the captain of the boys' brigade in the distressed area of Lanarkshire to accept money from Sir Arthur Rose.
        Mr. MAXTON: Yes, if he knows nothing about unemployment.
        Mr. STEWART: The hon. Member tried to make something in his speech about the question of unemployment. The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) also made some remarks about it. What is the position? I picture a distressed area in Lanarkshire from which all employment has gone and in which there are, shall I say, 50 boys and girls whose fathers are unemployed. The local boys' brigade or girl guides' association has an idea that they could do something to bring some happiness and usefulness into the lives of these children, and they make a suggestion to Sir Arthur Rose about camps or some other method of using up the spare time of these boys and girls. The hon. Member for Govan says it is an impertinence for the leaders of these organisations to accept assistance and an
        2102
        impertinence for the Department to give the money for these operations—
        Mr. GRAHAM: I do not think my hon. Friend the Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) said anything like that.
        Mr. H. STEWART: The hon. Member for Govan was interrupting very freely, and I am replying to him. The hon. Member for Govan suggested that Sir Arthur Rose would look around the country and see a prosperous boys' brigade in a place like Hellensburgh and would say, "Where is my £10,000; let me hand it over to these prosperous boys' clubs." What a travesty of the truth! I do not know, but I should imagine Sir Arthur Rose has given nothing to boys' clubs in the prosperous towns but has made it a condition that the money shall be spent for the benefit of the children of the unemployed in distressed areas. I should have thought that the hon. Member would have had sufficient generosity to have expected that from Sir Arthur Rose, who after all has done something for his native country and is one of the best known Scotsmen.
        The hon. Member for Bridgeton dislikes the grant of £22,000 to the Scottish National Development Council. I want to make some observations on that matter because I have some connection with that council. It has a London Committee of which I am honorary secretary and I know a little about the £22,500 which is to be spent. I know what is being done. I do not know how much experience of business the hon. Member for Bridgeton has, but if he has had any he will agree that no business to-day in the distressed areas of Scotland, or anywhere else, can succeed unless it uses first-class modern publicity methods, and is prepared to spend not tens of thousands but hundreds of thousands of pounds in advertising.
        I speak with first-band knowledge on this matter. Every article of common use is sold because of the amount spent on advertising. One of the weaknesses of Scottish industry is that it does not make its wares known to the world. This sum of £22,000, arrived at by experts after considering the circumstances, is to be used for advertising and publicity purposes not only in this country but in the Empire, and on the continent. The hon. Member rather ignores what the Scottish National Development Council has done

        2103
        so far. It has made the name of Scotland known on the continent to a far greater extent than ever before; it has failed to do so in the past because it has had no funds. It is an organisation, the members of which are representative of local authorities, trade unions, and there are Labour members on the executive committee.
        Mr. GRAHAM: I do not think there are any Labour members on the Committee.
        Mr. H. STEWART: It has representatives of public authorities, trade union organisations and its purpose is to extend the sales of Scottish products. This £22,000 will be used to extend the sale of the products of the whole of the industrial West of Scotland, and it is not a great sum but a paltry sum. If I had to sell all the goods of the West of Scotland I should need 10 times the amount, and then I would make some work for the hon. Member and his friends.
        Mr. MAXTON: Is the expenditure in connection with publicity being done in Scotland or by the London Committee?
        Mr. STEWART: I can answer the second part of the hon. Member's question. The London Committee does not spend any money at all, we are only an advisory body. As to the first part, I think that the literature published is printed in Glasgow. Let me say a word about land settlement, on which the hon. Member for Bridgetown was scornful. He says that it cannot be done. He denied that success could possibly come to any scheme for settling unemployed men on the land. The Under-Secretary of State could answer the hon. Member any day of the week. He could take him to many holdings which the Department of Agriculture have set up where men who were idle before have been settled on the land and are making a fair income. He was equally scornful about home crofting. He said this scheme went further back than the cry of back to the land. It went right back to early days, before banking or any of the machinery of commerce was introduced. He condemned it because it tried to ignore all the developments of the last few hundred years, and we had the most surprising spectacle of the hon. Member shedding tears over the reversal of
        2104
        capitalism. He would like to have it all back. If the Bankers' Association want publicity I suggest that they should get the hon. Member to provide it, as he would do so with much vim and effect. The actual truth is that this is an experiment. It has been working in England for about a year and is showing signs of success. It is an exceedingly interesting experiment and I think we should be foolish if we set it aside.
        I am sorry if I have detained the Committee too long, but the hon. Member said a few things upon which I have some knowledge, and I felt it was right for me to reply to him. The Special Area Commissioner deserves congratulation. Of course he has not done all that we hoped, but he has been at work for only six months, and I hope that at the end of a year from now, if we are all still here in the same places, I shall find the hon. Member for Bridgeton standing up and saying that not only has one of his scepticisms been blown sky-high, but that all the others have gone the same way, and that I shall hear him fully and proudly acknowledge that the Special Commissioner has indeed been very successful.
        9.6 p.m.
        Mrs. COPELAND: I should not presume to intervene in a Scottish Debate except to put in a plea for the Boy Scouts and Girl Guides. From the remarks made by the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) and the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) I must conclude that they are under a misapprehension as to what that movement really is. The movement is non-sectarian and non-political. The hon. Member for Bridgeton may be interested to know that in the part of the country where I am 70 per cent. of our Boy Scouts and 65 per cent. of our Girl Guides are children of the unemployed. Thanks to the Boy Scout and the Girl Guide movement they are able to have many happy evenings. I invite the hon. Members to come and see some of these children in camp. They would then realise that the money is not ill spent. There is one further point. Both hon. Members who have spoken are lovers of peace. They do not seem to realise that these two movements are the greatest movements for peace in the world. When you can get representatives of 40 or 50 nationalities in camp together, in pouring

        2105
        rain or sunshine, living in perfect harmony, you realise that the "net social result" is one of gain for the whole world. If everyone was a Boy Scout or a Girl Guide there would certainly be peace in the world.
        9.8 p.m.
        Mr. SKELTON: We have had a very interesting Debate. Opportunity has been taken to criticise the activities of the Commissioner with a greater or less degree of conviction or of acrimony, but I think there is an underlying feeling that the very brief record I was able to give, pending the receipt of the Commissioner's Report on his first six months' work, shows, as my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. Graham) said, that at all events the Commissioner has been working. That is a very satisfactory main result. I do not at all complain of the criticism that has been directed towards the particular items of expenditure that he has made. There must be a variety of opinions on the matter. It is for us who are responsible for this Estimate to defend the activities of the Commissioner.
        We have had the most amusing and delightful criticism from one hon. Member opposite, but I think the Committee will feel, if they look at the full account of the Commissioner's activities, that he has distributed his efforts well. One critic may say that too much has been spent on social improvement and that the organisations selected to administer the money have not been well chosen, and so on; another may say that too much or a third may say that too little has been devoted to the land; but the fact remains that if we look at the Commissioner's various activities we find that he has covered a very large field and that his work is of a definitely useful quality. He has assisted what is a most necessary thing both for economic development and from the point of view of health and amenity—such things as sewerage works and water supplies in areas where the local authorities are specially heavily burdened.
        The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) said that care had to be taken as to how far the Commissioner's activities cut into the normal activities of central or local Government. I do not think anyone would take exception to that statement as a word of warning, but
        2106
        where you have heavily burdened local authorities undertaking improvement of sewerage schemes and water supplies, you have a matter which is directly connected with economic development as well as with the amenities and health of the area. That is the answer to the warning that the hon. Gentleman gave. To some of the questions that have been put to me my proper answer is that I would be obliged if hon. Members would await the report of the Commissioner.
        Mr. GRAHAM: Shall we have an opportunity of discussing that report when it is presented?
        Mr. SKELTON: We propose not to close this Vote to-day, and it will be a matter for those who select the Vote to be discussed to decide that point. Meanwhile it is only right that I should leave the Commissioner to speak for himself on a good many of the points that have been raised. That is why I do not say anything now on the subject of afforestation, nor do I propose to discuss further the remarks that have been made on the object of the Commissioner's dealing with land. I was immensely entertained by the account given by the hon. Member for Bridgeton of the home crofting idea. Many a great new idea has been laughed at by its contemporaries, just as the hon. Member now laughs at home crofts.
        Mr. MAXTON: You would scarcely call the Garden of Eden a new idea.
        Mr. SKELTON: It is always easy to find criticism of new ideas, but while I delighted in the wit of my hon. Friend's speech I did not feel that it was a serious criticism of Sir Arthur Rose in making this experiment. Like my hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. H. Stewart), whose admirable speech delighted us all, I did feel that the line developed by the hon. Member for Bridgeton, his glowing account of the improvements of the last 400 or 500 years, which were all being cast aside by this home crofting—I felt that the unequalled eloquence of the hon. Member was now coming to reinforce our puny efforts to support the present system of society. I refer only briefly to the note which has been struck again and again in the course of the Debate—"What amount of employment will be given by these schemes?" I know how the question of the amount of employment to be provided was laboured

        2107
        during the passage of the Resolution and the Act appointing the Commissioners. I ask hon. Members who have made that point to keep in mind the fact that the objects of the Commissioner's work are as set out in the Act, namely, the economic development and social improvement of the area. I am not going into the almost philosophical discussion which would be involved in the consideration of how far the amount of employment provided is a factor to be taken into account. I only say that the Commissioner would not be carrying out the terms of the Act if he were to spend large sums on schemes the sole object of which was to give employment. I think anyone acting in that capacity would have to keep most carefully to the language of the Act and would have to consider every scheme, having regard to its relation to the economic development and social improvement of the area.
        Subject to the qualification contained in the criticism of the hon. Member for Bridgeton, that money spent on sewerage schemes, for instance, does not all go into the hands of the men who do the work, I suggest that where, out of a total of £750,000, some £490,000 are going to be spent on such improvements in the special area, one cannot say that the interests of the unemployed or of the wage-earners are being overlooked. I believe it to be the case that the Commissioner in dealing with these schemes has applied the test, "Will this expenditure help economic development or not?" The fact that the Committee is now being asked only to vote a total sum of £490,000 would not, of course, have been any excuse for me to have refrained from giving the details I have placed before the Committee. As a matter of fact, however, from the mere money-voting point of view, the Committee is only being asked to deal with the total sum in the Estimate and in the expenditure of that total the Commissioner has a free hand subject to the condition that on certain matters the appropriate Minister has to advise him. That, as I say, would be no excuse for withholding from the Committee the facts which I know about the Commissioner's activities.
        My right hon. Friend the Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A.
        2108
        Sinclair) asked me how much the Commissioner had spent up to 31st March, how much he was going to spend in this financial year, and how much of the £750,000 would be left for a future Estimate. I am afraid I must await the Commissioner's report before I can answer those questions. The actual expenditure up to 31st March was small. I believe it was in the nature of £6,000. It is impossible at this moment to say how much of the £490,000 in the Estimate will be spent this year. In the case of such things as sewerage schemes, the actual works are to be done by local authorities and therefore the speed with which those works will be carried out is not directly under control. My right hon. Friend will also agree that, in regard to some of the other items which I have mentioned, such as the possibility of transferring plot-holders to smallholdings, we cannot, with the best will in the world say how much money is going to be expended during this year.
        I cannot answer my right hon. Friend more directly than that but I give him the assurance that my right hon. Friend and I will work in the closest liaison with the Commissioner that nothing will be wanting on our part as I am sure nothing will be wanting on his part to ensure the maximum speed. Whether the actual amount to be spent in this financial year will become clear from the Commissioner's report I do not know but perhaps my right hon. Friend will await the report for further information on that point.
        I think I fell into an error in one statement which I made earlier and I want to correct it now. I spoke rather too broadly when I said that the Commissioner was going to give a grant of £10 to each plot-holder who had successfully cultivated his plot for a year or more. Here again I would ask hon. Members to check what I say by the Commissioner's report but I understand that where the Commissioner feels that the first year's record of a plot-holder shows that that plot-holder has the lucky touch in agriculture and is a man likely to go on from strength, he is going to see that that man receives the assistance necessary to enable him to get on.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: Because he does not need it.
        Mr. SKELTON: If my hon. Friend will go round these plots as I have gone

        2109
        round them he will find that there are certain plot-holders who are able to take 100 per cent. advantage of the opportunity. There are others who can take 90 per cent. advantage of it. I am afraid that if I were put on a plot the advantage which I would take of the opportunity would be about 10 per cent.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: Then you should get all the more help.
        Mr. SKELTON: Not so. That is an easy way of putting it but it is not the right way. We want to make sure that the man who has the capacity for making full use of the land is not handicapped by want of means and it is in order to secure that the best use will be made of the land that it is proposed to give the maximum support to the man who, having little means of his own, has yet the capacity to bring about progress and expansion if he only gets the proper help.
        I now turn to the point raised by the hon. Member for Dunfermline (Sir J. Wallace) who contrasted the actions of the Commissioner with the actions of my right hon. Friend and the Department in relation to plot-holders in outside areas. It would not be in order to go into that matter at present but I would say to my hon. Friend that one of the results of the Special Commissioner having these ample powers in the special area, is that things can be done in the special area which cannot be done in outside areas under the ordinary law or the ordinary practice. This is not the time or the place to put before my hon. Friend the considerations which have made us leave these outside areas to voluntary organisations, with further assistance to the plot-holders, but at a suitable time I shall be glad either in public or in private to go closely into the matter with him. I think he will agree that it is a very important thing that in this specially distressed area any gleam of hope should be pursued to the uttermost. As to the practice outside the area, I am, under the limitation of this debate, precluded from dealing with it.
        I think that covers, generally speaking, the Debate as a whole. I welcome the Debate, and I am sure the Commissioner welcomes it, too. I think the brief record which I gave shows that the Scottish Commissioner has addressed himself to his task with the utmost zeal. Unanimous
        2110
        approval of the activities he proposes is impossible, though I do feel that there is unanimity here, that in the Commissioner we have a man who will buckle to his task, and who, to the best of his ability, is carrying out the onerous duties placed on him by the State.
        Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

      CLASS VI.

        FISHERY BOARD FOR SCOTLAND.
        Motion made, and Question proposed,
        "That a sum, not exceeding £74,127, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1936, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Fishery Board for Scotland, including Expenses of Marine Superintendence, and a Grant in Aid of Piers or Quays." [NOTE.—£54,250 has been voted on account.]
        9.26 p.m.
        Sir G. COLLINS: We now ask the Committee to turn from the special areas Vote to the fishery Vote. Let me recall to the memory of the Committee that during the last two years the Fishery Board and the activities in connection with that office have been centred around two main problems. The first was the illegal trawling practice which had grown up for many years round the coast of Scotland, and the second the severe plight of the herring industry for many years past. These two problems have been tackled, I do not say completely, but with zest in the Measures which are now on the Statute Book, and it becomes us to-day to consider their administration. There will be no doubt in a later stage of the Session a discussion on the herring industry Vote—there will be a special Vote for that purpose—but it would seem to be appropriate that I should say one or two words this evening on the subject of the herring industry, because it has always been closely allied to the Fisheries Board. That measure brought some gleam of comfort and hope to the herring industry. The difficulties, however, which beset the industry are not only questions affecting the internal administration of the industry over which they have control themselves; the complete salvation lies outside their control, in their inability to persuade countries abroad to buy these cured herring. Since the Bill became law progress has been made, and the Board is now functioning. It has settled down to its task with good will,

        2111
        after much searching of heart and many arguments, around which controversy has settled during the last 12 months.
        Fishing has opened in a fairly prosperous manner. The fishing fleet engaged is slightly larger than last year, and the catch of herring from 1st April to the end of June shows an increase of some 40 per cent. Practically every important district has shared in that increase. It would be unwise for me to prophesy the ultimate result of the fortunes of the herring industry during this year, for few industries are more liable to fluctuations of world trade, but it is permissible to hope that a step has been taken to secure a greater measure of prosperity for the herring industry.
        Before passing from that, there are two matters connected with the industry to which I would like to refer. The first relates to the trade agreements which the Government have made with certain Continental countries which are important customers for cured herring. I will not go into the details, which are no doubt known to many hon. Members, but taking five countries—Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland—with which agreements were concluded, I may mention that the exports from Scotland to them rose from 124,000 barrels in 1932 to 154,000 barrels in 1933, and there was a further increase to 211,000 barrels in 1934. These figures are no doubt not satisfactory, but they do indicate an upward course in our exports to those countries which has, I suggest, been made possible by the new trade policy of His Majesty's Government. It is true that other markets, such as Russia and Germany, have gone back, but the lack of ability of the German Government and the German people to buy our herring is really outside the control of this Government.
        There is one other matter connected with the herring industry I should like to touch on, and that refers to the new type of drifter which is being built, I think, in the constituency of my hon. and gallant Friend opposite (Sir M. McKenzie Wood)—drifters with Diesel engines, two of which, I understand, were built at Buckie last year. I understand that this new type of boat has running costs at least 25 per cent. less than the old steam drifter. That indicates in the minds of those competent to judge
        2112
        that by applying their minds and evolving a new type of boat, the fishermen will be able to ply their trade on the high seas with a greater profit to themselves in the future. It is also an indication of a spirit of enterprise and experiment which is indeed welcome.
        Passing from the herring industry, the great bulk of the Scottish white fish catch is landed by trawler. Line fishing still remains important, and I regard the welfare of the men who prosecute lining in inshore waters as a matter of great importance. In many districts for many years illegal trawling has damped down the ardour of these men, and there came over them a spirit of fear and doubt as to whether they would be able to continue their line fishing, which was formerly so successful. But with the passing into law of the Illegal Trawling (Scotland) Act, increased hope has arisen, and I find around our coasts that a new spirit has grown up. Competent observers report that since the passing of the Act there has been not only a marked decrease in illegal trawling, but an increase in line fishing. In connection with that, as the Committee knows, we took steps at the same time to improve the protection to the fishermen. One of the new boats is presently under construction, tenders for the second have been received, and we hope that the contract will be placed before the end of this month. As to the third boat, that is, the boat of the drifter type, it has baffled the ingenuity of our architects to evolve a type of boat satisfactory to our needs. It is unfortunate, but we will not relax our efforts in order to secure the drifter type of boat for the fishery cruiser service. Pending the construction of the new vessels, we have tried herring drifters for patrol duties. Two such vessels were regularly employed last year, and during the winter further vessels were engaged. These vessels have given efficient service and tributes to them and to the officers serving in them have been paid by the fishermen who have benefited from their service. One other measure designed to increase the efficiency of the fleet has been the appointment of an experienced seaman to be responsible to the Department for the organisation and control of the protection fleet. That, I think, covers the ground with regard to illegal trawling during the last two years, and the further

        2113
        steps which the Government have taken to improve the efficiency of the protection fleet. It is undoubtedly true that we cannot hope completely to eradicate illegal trawling. There will always be some fishermen who think poaching worth trying on occasions, but we hope that with the tightening up of the law it will become a thing of the past.
        Let me say a word as to the harbours round our coast. On many occasions during the year hon. Members have asked for special grants for harbours in their areas. Let me remind them that during 1934 grants and loans amounting to a total of £32,000 were sanctioned for improvements at harbours in various parts of Scotland, including Fraserburgh, Burghead, Buckie and Wick. In the current year grants and loans amounting to about the same sum have been sanctioned, including a loan of about £11,000 for the improvement of Stornoway Harbour. In addition, the two dredgers owned by the Fishery Board have been fully engaged.
        The other side of the Scottish fishing industry, namely, the white fish industry, presents a more pleasing picture than the other two types of fishing to which I have referred. The total value of fish increased from £2,379,000 in 1933 to £2,695,000 in 1934. There was a good demand for fish in the home markets caused, no doubt, by the increased economic prosperity of our people, and the same time the provisions of the Sea Fishing Industry Act of 1933 undoubtedly assisted the success of the catching side of the industry. The Sea Fish Commission, after having studied the herring trade, is now directing its attention to the white fish industry, and no doubt we shall be favoured in due course with a report from that competent body. I am sure that their report will be welcomed by hon. Members in all parts of the Committee.
        These are some of the details which have occupied the attention of the Commission during the last 12 months. It is a record of steady progress. It has not been startling, perhaps, but the Commission has endeavoured to deal with the two large questions which have affected the fishing industry in Scotland for many years, that is, the herring industry and the illegal trawling practices, and we now look forward with interest to its report on the white fish industry. Directly that
        2114
        report reaches His Majesty's Government they will give it the attention it demands. Round our coasts we have a body of men of whom all sections of the Committee are proud, and, if this House by legislation or by administration can do anything to improve the economic life and happiness of those people, it will be done, and any suggestion towards that end coming from any quarter of the Committee will be welcomed by His Majesty's Government.
        9.41 p.m.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: In giving a brief review of the work of the Fishery Board, the Secretary of State has made some statements which, I think, will be considered very carefully by Members who represent fishing constituencies. I do not intend to intrude upon the question of the harbours where fishing fleets require to go to shelter or to sell their catches, because the representatives of the constituencies which are directly concerned ought to deal with them. Before I make any criticism, may I make one of those complimentary references, which the Secretary of State may think I make too seldom, with reference to the crews of one of the fishery vessels. It is reported in to-day's Press that one of the crew of the "Vigilant" at considerable risk saved a man from drowning in Campbeltown harbour. That is only one of many deeds of gallantry committed by the fishery cruisers, and also by the fishermen themselves in the pursuit of their calling, and it is a deed of which we can well take notice when the opportunity offers. I am all the more pleased to draw attention to it because I have often railed at the "Vigilant" because of the long service it has been compelled to give to the Fishery Board of Scotland. I am sorry that it has not yet gone, like the "Mauretania," to its last home. It has a longer record than the "Mauretania," and as brilliant a record perhaps as the larger vessel, and I think that it ought to have been sent to its last home long ago.
        One of the disappointments that I have in discussing this matter to-day is that one of the additions to the fleet is not yet quite ready to take its place and to assist in reducing still further the illegal trawling that has been going on for a long time. The "Vigilant" must be approaching 70 years of age. It was a second-hand boat when it became the

        2115
        property of the Fishery Board, and it has been with the Board 40 or 50 years. It has earned its old age pension by now, and it is about time it was laid away or sold for scrap. I hope that the three vessels which the Government promised last year as the result of persistent questioning will not be long delayed, because they are absolutely necessary. There is one small motor vessel which has to cover the Shetland Isles. When it is in one area, illegal trawling can go on inshore at the other side of the isles, and, if the wind is in a certain quarter, that vessel cannot get round to stop it. She seems to be of little service in the stormy waters round the Shetland Isles and the Pentland Firth, and I think it would be advisable for the marine superintendent who has now ben appointed to exercise his knowledge of the sea and his organising power to move that motor boat to some part of the coast where it would not experience such heavy weather and where the efforts of the crew to stop illegal trawling would not be thwarted in the way I have suggested.
        I happened to be in Edinburgh last week on Parliamentary business and I took the opportunity of going down to Leith harbour. It would seem that the fishery cruisers regard that as a haunt of illegal trawlers, judging by the length of time they spend there. One of the fishery cruisers was already in the harbour. I did not think it would get there till I got there, but there it had been lying for three days, and I understand it lay there for another day after I had left. I also saw the fishery research vessel steaming in. I feel that the Secretary of State must be well aware, from the information he has had to get from the Fishery Board Department to reply to questions which I have addressed to him, that far too much time is being spent in Leith Harbour by fishery cruisers. Time and again I have represented to him that there is no need to bring fishery cruisers from Invergordon to Leith harbour to coal. The ships of His Majesty's Navy can coal at Invergordon. The time lost by fishery cruisers having to sail from the Moray Firth or the Shetland Isles and from various places on the North-East coast to Leith harbour to coal and then go back, with the time they have to lie off Leith harbour when coming in, could be spent to better advantage in the prevention
        2116
        of illegal trawling. Some of the areas cannot be properly patrolled when we find two fishery cruisers at one time either in Leith harbour or lying off Leith harbour. That is denuding the coast of the necessary protection. I suggest that the marine superintendent should be asked to pay very close attention to the reorganisation of the cruising areas and see whether the sailings of the cruisers cannot be altered so that they may do even more effective work than they have done in the past.
        As to the west coast, surely it is absurd to bring vessels from the coasts of Caithness and Sutherland into Greenock in order to coal there, when they could just as well coal in the Kyle of Lamlash or other places on the west coast. The "Vigilant," which is at present utilised in the Firth of Clyde, will be, I expect, the first boat that is likely to go. I have put questions in this House as to the time these vessels spend at sea. One does not always get the satisfaction from those replies which one looks for when putting the question. One wonders whether the day occupied in getting out of Leith harbour is included as one of the days at sea. If that be so, then we get an entire misrepresentation of the length of time devoted to cruising.
        Commander COCHRANE: Do I understand that the hon. Member is in favour of a 40-hour week for these fishery cruisers?
        Mr. MACLEAN: The hon. and gallant Member will see, if he looks at a reply to a question which I put about a fortnight ago, that two of these vessels spent between 20 and 25 days each in Leith harbour in two months of this year. That is a little better than a 40-hour week for these vessels, if not for the crews, because I expect they would be kept doing work while in harbour. Another question which I have raised concerned the holiday arrangements. I am certain that the hon. and gallant Member for Dumbartonshire (Commander Cochrane), who has such a desire to see that the men are not overworked and the vessels are not oversailed, will join with me here. I urge the necessity for having additional assistance in the engine room and on deck when holidays are taken. Hitherto no one has been engaged to replace any of the officers or crew away on holiday. Even in the engine room,

        2117
        where there are two engineers, when one goes off on holiday there is generally no auxiliary engineer taken on to fill his place, and if it were necessary for the cruiser to do any hard steaming while chasing a trawler the one engineer on board would have to get assistance from some other member of the crew, thereby taking away from the efficiency of the deck complement. I suggest that that matter should be looked into by the marine superintendent. There are several other matters which I had intended to bring up, but I had expected that we should get through the Estimates much more rapidly than we have done. It was in that expectation that we put down the Estimates of four Departments for discussion. Now it is probable that one of the most important Estimates will not be reached at all this evening and must be left for another day.
        In the interests of other Members I will not now pursue the other matters which I wished to raise, but I hope the Secretary of State, will go into these matters by referring back to a number of questions I have put relating to the reorganisation of the fishery cruiser fleet to secure more effective work, and to the fuelling and stores arrangements, boiler tube and other necessary maintenance work that has to be done upon it from time to time. I hope it will be possible to find some new method of arranging the work of these cruisers, so that the best can be got out of the vessels and their crews, and that the fishermen can at all times depend upon not finding that the places where they usually look for their best catch are denuded of fish, owing to the operation of vessels which have been able to engage in illegal trawling because of the absence in Leith Harbour or elsewhere of the fishery cruisers.
        9.56 p.m.
        Sir MURDOCH McKENZIE WOOD: The Committee will be grateful to the Secretary of State for Scotland for the view which he has presented of the Scottish Fishery Board during the last few months, and they will perhaps desire to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman, and themselves, that the atmosphere in which we are able to discuss these Estimates is less controversial on this occasion. In recent years a great deal of the time of this Committee has been
        2118
        devoted to the herring fishing industry, but that question is now to some extent segregated by the fact that the Herring Board has been set up, and has a special Vote to itself. If one desired or attempted to discuss the herring fishing industry it would largely become a discussion of the activities of the Herring Board. I will not attempt to examine the work of the Board at this moment, because they have only had a short time in which to carry out the task that has been laid upon them, and I shall therefore have very much less to say than usual about the herring fishing industry.
        I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the position is very much better than it was at this time last year. I am also glad to note that that improvement is largely due to the fact that the home trade has improved. That improvement is partly due to the advertisement that the hard plight of the industry secured for it last year. Many people had their attention drawn to the situation, and deliberately bought herring in order to assist the industry. The improvement is partly due to the fact that the herrings this year are very good. It is thirdly due to the fact, I am glad to say, that the industry has bestirred itself. Curers and others who sell fish from the harbour have undoubtedly done a great deal more than they have done before to try to sell their article. I have always maintained that if the industry would see that the people who buy herring, and particularly kippers, always got their fish fresh and good, sales would go up by leaps and bounds. It is not sufficiently well known that the public, who are always complaining of the prices of this fish, and of kippers in particular, can do a great deal to circumvent and get rid of the middleman by buying direct from the places where the herrings are cured. Nearly every curer nowadays has vans running throughout the country and are prepared to send directly through the post—
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRIMAN: I would point out to the hon. Member that this year there is a special Vote for herring, and that details in regard to the herring industry should be raised on that Vote, and not on the Vote for the Fishery Board of Scotland.
        Sir M. McKENZIE WOOD: I am much obliged to you, Captain Bourne. I realise the difficulties, but I might have

        2119
        said that last year on this Estimate. I submit that nothing that I have said trenches upon the department of the Herring Board.
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is overlooking the fact that the Vote for the herring industry, as such, last year was supplementary. Therefore, it came under the Fishery Board of Scotland. That is no longer true.
        Sir M. McKENZIE WOOD: With respect, I suggest that the Fishery Board has exactly the same duties to perform in the herring industry as it had last year, and that the only difference is that it is now being assisted by another organisation called the Herring Board. I doubt if there is one thing which the Scottish Fishery Board could have done last year which it could not do this year. I submit that I have not gone outside the scope of this Vote; in any case I do not desire to proceed with it any further. I am trying to take advantage of this Vote to impress upon the public outside that they can now get this fish very cheaply, and much better than they could otherwise, because it can come straight from the curer. I hope that they will take advantage of that. Now is the time, when these kippers are at their very best. Even if you take into account the postage—the General Post Office, by reducing their rates, have assisted—people can have them at less than one penny each.
        Sir EDWARD CAMPBELL: Cannot the hon. Gentleman do something to eliminate the bone in the middle of the fish?
        Sir M. McKENZIE WOOD: If the hon. Member knew how to eat a kipper I do not think the bone would trouble him. He has been too long away from Scotland, and has become Anglicised. The herring fishing industry is undergoing very great changes, to which a number of factors are contributing. The hon. Member for Bromley (Sir E. Campbell) has just referred to the bones; the industry are now using machines to bone and prepare the fish in a way that was never adopted before. That may mean that the public will be provided with cheaper fish, although it may have the effect, like the introduction of machinery in other industries, of making the work which the industry provides less than it was before.
        2120
        The action of the unemployment insurance scheme on the herring fishing industry is also producing unlooked for results. Many factors are tending to the industrialisation of the herring industry to an extent never dreamt of in Scotland in recent years. I hope that the Scottish Fishery Board and the Scottish Office are keeping in touch with the Ministry of Labour to impress upon them that changes are taking place. I hope it will not be considered enough to supply the Ministry of Labour with information when the Ministry ask for it, but that the Scottish Office and the Scottish Fishery Board will consider it to be their duty to take the initiative. My experience is that the Ministry of Labour require a great deal of information.
        I would draw attention to the fact that there is a vacancy upon the Fishery Board, caused recently by the death of Sir Malcolm Smith, who used to be in this House and who had given a great deal of valuable service to the fishing industry, which I am sure everyone will be glad to acknowledge. I wonder if the right hon. Gentleman could say whether it is proposed in the near future to fill that vacancy. If we are going to get the best men to join a body like the Scottish Fishery Board, the right hon. Gentleman will have to see that the recommendations of that Board are always treated with the very greatest respect. I have no doubt the right hon. Gentleman would be very sorry if it could be suggested that that was not always the case, but one is sorry when one sees a recommendation of a body of this kind apparently turned down, as it was recently, in connection with the seine-net controversy in the Firth of Forth. The Fishery Board, as I understand, appointed a sub-commitee to go into this question. They had some difficulty, as far as I can see, in coming to a conclusion, but they recommended that a certain course should be taken as an experiment for a year. It was a recommendation of an experiment which had been tried in somewhat similar circumstances in the Moray Firth, and, I believe, tried very successfully. However, the Secretary of State for Scotland did not see his way to accept their recommendation, and the draft order which they had made was not confirmed by him. I think that was unfortunate, because if these recommendations are to be turned down, it is not likely to attract to

        2121
        the Board the very best type of men, which I am sure the right hon. Gentleman and everyone else would desire to do.
        The right hon. Gentleman made some references to piers and harbours, always a very vexed question in dealing with the Scottish Fishery Board Vote. He knows as well as anyone else how depressed these fishery districts are at the present time, and how many men have dropped out of fishing and looked forward to work of more or less a labouring kind. The repairs to harbours provide almost the only type of work which is available for them, and there are no public works in the North and the North East of Scotland which are of so much value as the works which are expended on repairing these harbours round our coasts. The present position is very unsatisfactory. Many of these harbours are not properly managed; indeed, some of them are hardly managed at all. The right hon. Gentleman introduced a Bill last year, I think it was, which I had hoped would help, but it did not proceed further. I hope he will consider that Bill and see whether it might not go some distance towards keeping these small harbours in a state of better repair than they have been hitherto.
        A sum of something like £5,000 is devoted to fishery research, but very little information is given in the Vote as to how this money is used. Some time ago I met Dr. Lumley, of Aberdeen, who has been carrying out some very good experiments in the way of curing fish, but we have never yet had from the Scottish Office any explanation of what exactly he is doing and what success has attended his efforts. I feel quite certain, as I think Dr. Lumley does too, that he is on the right lines, and I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman could give us some information as to what has so far been achieved. I believe that Dr. Lumley works directly under the Economic Advisory Committee, but there is a large sum of £5,000 here, also devoted to fishery research, and I wonder whether we may be told whether the two Votes are dovetailed together, or how they are dealt with.
        The right hon. Gentleman had a word or two to say about the success of his Department in getting rid of the two controversial questions of his time, the herring question and the illegal trawling question. There is no doubt that the
        2122
        Illegal Trawling Act was highly desirable and has been of considerable advantage, but when it was going through this House I impressed upon the right hon. Gentleman, as I impress upon him now, that merely getting rid of trawlers will not of itself bring prosperity to these districts, and particularly to the Highland districts and the islands of the North West. What they want, I am certain, is assistance in getting better craft, motor craft particularly, and if something could be done with the money at the disposal of the right hon. Gentleman or of the Development Commission to assist these men to get modern boats, I am sure a great deal could be done, not only to help them, but to improve the whole economic condition of the North West of Scotland. I desire, in conclusion, to offer my congratulations to the Board and to the Secretary of State for Scotland on the very improved outlook that we have at the present time, and I sincerely trust that that better prospect which we now see will be improved still further and that the lot of the herring fishermen will never be as bad again as it has been during the last two or three years.
        10.15 p.m.
        Captain McEWEN: I should like to join with the two previous speakers in congratulating the Secretary of State on his lucid and interesting speech. Before I pass to the two comparatively small points with which I wish to deal, I should like, however, to say that I failed entirely to appreciate the argument of the hon. and gallant Member for Banff (Sir M. McKenzie Wood) in connection with the recent proposed Firth of Forth bylaw. His argument, as far as I was able to understand it, was that men of ability would not be attracted to join the Scottish Fishery Board in future because the Secretary of State chose to refuse to sanction that by-law when it was submitted to him. It is well known, however, that the Secretary of State, by virtue of his office, has the right of veto in a great many fields, and I cannot appreciate the strength of the argument put forward by the hon. and gallant Member. I do not think that men of ability are so thin-skinned as he seems to suggest.
        The first of the two points that I wish to raise is connected with this same proposed Firth of Forth by-law. Had the by-law been sanctioned and come into

        2123
        operation, it would have had, among other things, a most damaging effect upon the seine-net boats, and most of these in which I am interested come from the port of Cockenzie. When the inquiry started, therefore, it was obviously incumbent upon these men in particular to put their case before the Committee, and in doing so they have incurred very considerable expense. It so happens that they are a very hard-hit community, and, as the proceedings involving this extra outlay were, so to speak, forced upon them, because they did not ask for the by-law in the first place, there would appear to me to be good ground for asking that the suggestion that they should be relieved of this expense may be favourably viewed by the Department.
        My other point is connected with the subject of dredging, in which I take a considerable interest, since at least one harbour in my Division, the harbour of Eyemouth, in Berwickshire, is entirely dependent for its existence upon dredging operations. I notice that on page 51 of the Annual Report, where this subject is dealt with, it is stated that there are only two dredgers in the possession of the Board, and I also understand that an inquiry which was made as to the use of a dredger for a certain harbour in the North of Scotland recently was answered by the Board to the effect that it was impossible to send either of these two dredgers to this particular harbour, as the services of both were booked up for many months ahead. I would appeal to the Secretary of State, if he can possibly manage it, to see that we have at least one additional dredger for use in our Scottish harbours, because it is quite evident that the two at present in existence are not enough.
        10.19 p.m.
        Mr. MILNE: I rise to draw attention to a matter which has been engaging the active interest of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy (Mr. A. Russell). I am glad to seize this opportunity of seconding his efforts. The seaport town of Buckhaven, in Fife, whose harbour must be familiar to all those who are fond of the picturesque, used to be, not so very long ago, quite a busy little place, but to-day its activities have practically come to an end. The fishing in the
        2124
        Firth of Forth is not what it was; it is on the decline; but nevertheless the fishing in the Forth is still perfectly capable of furnishing with a livelihood a considerable number of fisher folk in Buckhaven. But Buckhaven has suffered a calamity. There is a colliery nearby, and refuse is swept round by the current into the harbour. I went there to see it, and it was manifest even to the eyes of a landsman what had happened. They told me that the entrance to the harbour was partially blocked and that that morning one boat trying to enter it was swamped. It is more than inconvenient; it is dangerous. Five years ago an appeal was made to the Government, and they sent a dredger to clear the harbour. The fishermen are renewing the appeal through me to-day.
        It is said sometimes by some people that this is not an economic proposition and that money could be spent more profitably in some other way. I have also heard it asked why the people could not go elsewhere and try to find some other occupation. I do not think these arguments will commend themselves to hon. Members. It is not a matter of economics at all. I hope the Secretary of State will not view the problem through the spectacles of a chartered accountant. The amount required to clear the harbour is a mere trifle to the Government, but it is not a trifle to Buckhaven, nor to Scotland, that our rapidly diminishing sea population should be further diminished. I anticipate that the right hon. Gentleman will give me a sympathetic answer, but I want more than that. I suppose, while I am speaking, the fishermen are lounging at the pierhead looking disconsolately at the sky. The best answer that they could get would be a view of the smoke of a dredger on the horizon.
        10.23 p.m.
        Mr. H. STEWART: I wish to refer to the Firth of Forth inquiry and the drift net controversy. That inquiry was due to the fact that the Secretary of State felt unable himself, on the evidence provided for him by the Board, to make a decision. He refused to decide one way or the other, either to accept the by-law of the Fishery Board or to reject it. He said he could not make up his mind until he had a special inquiry. He ordered the inquiry, which involved the attendance of fishermen from the hon. Member's side of the coast and from the side

        2125
        which the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Milne) and I represent. They were obliged to attend the inquiry, and it has cost the men from my constituency some hundreds of pounds. They have no money to pay that. I understand that the costs are being guaranteed by one person, and it is very doubtful to me whether he will get them refunded. In the circumstances the Secretary of State is almost bound under a debt of honour to recoup these poor men for their expenses in attending the inquiry. It is not only a case of journeys to Edinburgh and sometimes staying the night. They have had to engage counsel, which is an expensive luxury. I support the hon. Member in the plea that the whole of the expenses of the attendance of these men and the presentation of their case should be met out of State funds. The second point is that in the Duncan Report, as the right hon. Gentleman is aware, one of the most important recommendations was that the winter herring fishing in Scotland and elsewhere should be strengthened. We found in the last two or three years the most important winter fishing—
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Since the hon. Member for Banff (Sir M. McKenzie Wood) spoke I have had the advantage of seeing a copy of the Herring Industry Act, and I am quite clear that any matter dealing with the herring fishery must be raised on the appropriate Estimate, and is not now before the Committee.
        Mr. STEWART: I am going to ask the Secretary of State to give assistance for the extension of the harbour at Anstruther, and in order to support that argument I must raise the matter of the herring fishery. The question of harbours certainly arises out of this Vote, and, therefore, I must ask for your indulgence, Captain Bourne, in order to develop my argument, which will only take about two minutes. The development of winter herring fishing throughout the whole of the coast of Great Britain is most essential. Everybody agrees that the most important fishing area in the whole of the coast of Great Britain is in the Firth of Forth, and the most important harbour in the Firth of Forth is Anstruther, Last winter we had a record catch there, and during the winter of the previous year there was a record catch. The right hon. Gentleman, I have no doubt, knows
        2126
        that we offered hospitality in the Firth of Forth last year to an exceptional number of visiting vessels, some of them coming from the constituency of the hon. Member for Banff (Sir M. Wood). They came to the Firth of Forth in order to make a living there, and I am glad they did. We found that the harbour accommodation at Anstruther was not nearly sufficient to cope with the increasing business.
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I am afraid that this really comes under the Herring Vote. If this can be discussed at all it would appear to be in the paragraph relating to schemes for giving assistance to winter fishing.
        Mr. STEWART: I have been given a good piece of advice, which is to get on with the harbour and leave the herring out. In any case this harbour—I will mention no more the word "herring"—has to cope with an increasing trade at the present time.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: Trade in what?
        Mr. STEWART: I dare not mention it, but I am sure that my right hon. Friend would not wish to cramp a development such as is now happening there. The harbour commissioners at Anstruther are presenting a proposal to the Fishery Board who I hope will look sympathetically upon the proposal. I know that the Chairman of the Fishery Board, who understands the problem there, is in great sympathy with it. I am only going to make this plea that the right hon. Gentleman, who is himself an example of great enterprise, will do everything he can to encourage the enterprise of that most enterprising people who live in the East of Fife, and that when the petition comes before the Fishery Board, the Board and the Chairman will know that, in supporting it when it goes to the development commissioners for the receipt of funds, they will have the warm support of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State.
        10.30 p.m.
        Sir G. COLLINS: My hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. H. Stewart) and the hon. Member for Berwick and Haddington (Mr. Maclean) asked me questions about the expenses of the fishermen who had to put their case before the Commissioner who inquired into the proposed by-law. I had to defer a decision

        2127
        on this matter in view of the controversy existing, and in view of the difficulty of coming to a decision I thought it wise to refer the matter for further inquiry. In doing so I little thought that I should be pressed at a later stage in regard to the expenses incurred by the fishermen representing the two types of fishing. I cannot say that I can give any undertaking or promise that those expenses will be forthcoming. I cannot say under which Vote Parliament would authorise those expenses to be paid, but I will look into the matter. I heard from the hon. Member for East Fife that one individual had already promised or guaranteed a certain sum. With the good offices of another person perhaps we may be able to make an arrangement which will satisfy not the hon. Member for East Fife but the hon. Member for Berwick and Haddington.
        Questions have also been put to me in regard to dredging and to the use of further dredgers. I can assure the hon. Members who raised those points that the problem will be examined by myself and my advisers not through any glasses coloured with any chartered accountant outlook but with a desire to do what is best not only in the interests of the fishermen who live in these small ports, but at the same time having some regard to public finance. There are two dredgers employed by the Fishery Board, and it may be that a further dredger should be employed. I will inquire and find out the amount of work required to be done by way of dredging in these ports before coming to any decision. Undoubtedly, the position of these ports and harbours around our coasts call for anxious consideration by those responsible for them. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Banff (Sir M. McKenzie Wood) referred to the Piers and Harbours Bill which we introduced last year. May be we fixed our hopes too high when we introduced that Bill, in the hope that it would find its way on to the Statute Book at an early date. Our hopes have been frustrated, but they have only been deferred, and we shall not relax our efforts to secure the passage of that Bill into law at some other opportunity.
        My hon. Friend the Member for Banff also pointed out that there was a vacancy on the Fishery Board and he asked me
        2128
        if it was to be filled. It has not yet been filled, but we have been addressing ourselves to the task of securing the very best possible successor to one who I can trly say has given much time and thought, without money and without reward, in the service of the Fishery Board. It is undoubtedly true that one of their recent recommendations in connection with a draft order affecting the Firth of Forth I was unable to confirm, and I referred it to a legal mind for consideration. I hope that that action will not retard or check the interest and enthusiasm which the members of the board give freely and voluntarily to the public service. As the matter has been raised this evening I should like to pay my tribute to the work of the board and to those individuals who come from different parts of Scotland to study the problems which are presented to them by the chairman. I thank them on behalf of His Majesty's Government not only for their guidance during the passage of the Herring Bill into law, but for the real help their assistance has been over a long period of time to the fishing industry of Scotland.
        The hon. Member also asked about research at Aberdeen. No money is set apart in this Vote for this research work. He spoke of the valuable work done by Dr. Lumley, but the Vote under which he works is industrial research and is under the jurisdiction of the Lord President of the Council. It is not included in the multifarious duties which fall on the shoulders of the Secretary of State. The hon. Member pleaded for assistance for West Highland fishermen to enable them to secure modern boats. During the last year or two there has been considerable development on the Eastern shore, and I hope that this spirit of enterprise will spread rapidly to the West. They may have no capital, but it is not only capital which is wanted. There may be other factors which are needed. Although we addressed ourselves to the problem last year, unfortunately we were not able to find a solution. As the controversy about the herring industry is now out of the way I hope that we may be able to turn our attention to the line fishermen around our shores. The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean), whose interest in the fishery boats and their crews is well known, asked that the

        2129
        new marine superintendent, who is about to take up his duties, should make a survey and consider whether it was not advisable that the headquarters of the boats which are stationed at Leith and work up the East Coast as far as Invergordon, and the boats which have their principal harbour at Greenock, should be transferred to a more northerly port.
        Mr. N. MACLEAN: I suggested that there should be some rearrangement so that they would not be compelled whenever they wanted to refuel to come down to Greenock on the West Coast or to Leith Harbour on the East.
        Sir G. COLLINS: I will ask the new marine superintendent, who has spent his life at sea, to direct his attention to that matter so that we may secure the best possible arrangement. Our sole object is to promote the interests of the fishermen, an object which the hon. Member for Govan has at heart as much as we have. We shall endeavour to see whether some improvement can be made in the matter. These are the points which have been raised in the Debate. I thank hon. Members for their help and assistance and the encouragement they have given to the Government. Anything which the Government can do to secure a more prosperous time for the fishermen around our coasts we are only too anxious to do.
        Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

      CLASS V.

        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR SCOTLAND.
        Motion made, and Question proposed,
        "That a sum, not exceeding £2,062,724, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1936, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Health for Scotland; including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, certain Grants to Local Authorities, &c., Grant in Aid of the Highlands and Islands Medical Service, Grants in Aid of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under the National Health Insurance Acts; certain Expenses in connection with the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contribution Pensions Acts, and other Services."
        10.42 p.m.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: I know that at this late hour it is not to be expected that the Minister will introduce this Vote in a normal way, but I should have liked to have had some discussion on the administration
        2130
        of old age pensions. Can nothing be done in Scotland to deal with the payment of the pensioner who is over 70? As everyone knows, the payment of pensions to those of 70 and over is subject to a different procedure from that adopted under the Contributory Pensions Act. There is a different kind of inspectorate. The inspection is done by the Excise officers. Could not the Scottish Office take up the question with a view to seeing that the administration of both kinds of pensions is under one department? These people who are over 70 do not understand the technicalities and difficulties of the forms which they have to fill. I have nothing but praise for the administrative staff, from whom we always get civility—
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: As far as I can make out, the point that the hon. Member is raising comes under Vote 6, Class V. Pensions for those over 70 come under a separate Vote.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: I knew the dangerous ground I was on, but I was trying to plead with the Under-Secretary to group these two classes of pensions under one Vote. Cannot we get the administration carried out by one set of people? The forms in both cases go to the same department in the end, the Board of Health, and the people who ultimately adjudicate on claims are the same people. The time has come when the whole of the investigating staff and the general administration should be under the Scottish Board of Health.
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That would require legislation.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: I thought that approach could be made without legislation, and I leave it at that. The other point I wish to raise is in connection with widows' pensions. I feel that the Government could make things easier for the claimants. At present a claimant for a widows' pension may be notified that the claim is refused because her late husband had been passed out of insurance and had come back into insurance without the 104 stamps. I know that that is a matter which would require legislation, but the Government at present have power on one point and that is in regard to the passing-out. People are constantly asking why they have been passed out and I cannot discover from the Secretary of State or anybody else

        2131
        who passes them out and why they are passed out. The law says that if a man is trying to keep within the insurance field he is entitled to be kept in by the society.
        The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I have been looking into this matter further, and it really appears to me that this question should be raised on Vote 7. There is a very small sum in this Vote in respect of certain expenses connected with the administration of contributory pensions, but I am not clear whether that covers the subject which the hon. Member is raising. The question appears to be one of general administration rather than Scottish administration.
        Mr. BUCHANAN: I submit that it is covered by the Scottish Vote. In proportion to the number of insured contributors in Scotland it is covered by the Scottish Vote. We pay part of the expenditure in so far as the Scottish section of the population is concerned and therefore I think I am right in saying that the cost of administration in respect of Scotland falls on the Scottish Vote. All I want to say is that I would like the Scottish Office to go into the question of widows pensions again and to see whether this system of men being passed out cannot be put on a better footing. At least we ought to know how and by whom they are passed out.
        I now desire to raise a question concerning grants for housing. We have had many and varied housing Acts in Scotland. At present there are two Measures under which local authorities can build and there will soon be a third. At present they can still build in Scotland with the £3 subsidy and there is also the Slum Clearance Act. Under the £3 subsidy there is no right to interfere with the local authority which fixes its own rents and so forth. Under the Slum Clearance Act there is power in regard to fixing rents and general conditions. A large number of houses are being built in Scotland now and I find in Glasgow that some of the residents in more well-to-do districts think that slum replacement houses ought not to be built beside them. I am not going to stand for the idea that the slum dweller is necessarily inferior. He may be better or he may be worse but it is more or less a case of "Jock Tamson's bairns"—good, bad and indifferent.
        2132
        I will give an illustration of what I mean. I live in a house for which I pay £26 10s. and in the next road to me are new houses which have cost less to build and which in my judgment do not give the same accommodation. Certainly they are not of the same character. These houses have been built and I think they were originally intended for slum clearance people. They are being let at rents which displaced slum tenants cannot pay—£26 plus rates. Displaced slum tenants cannot look at houses at that price. I would like the Secretary for Scotland to go into this question. I do not want to see any social snobbery decree that slum people shall not live in the next block of houses to where I live. Why should not displaced slum tenants live there? Why should the slum people living in my division be carried all together to slum clearance houses as if they were prisoners never able to escape from the slum house atmosphere? If they are to become ordinary citizens they must be freed from this same taint wherever they go. In this respect I do not like slum clearance housing schemes, and I do not like to feel that because people have lived in a slum they must go to live in slum clearance houses.
        I believe that wages are at the root of this matter and that if a man had a good wage he would not be tackled as a slum tenant or an intermediate tenant but would go into a decent home just like any other ordinary citizen. I hope the Secretary for Scotland is going to try and induce local authorities not to bar tenants from areas where well-to-do people live. Displaced slum tenants are in no sense inferior to other classes. I suppose we are all subsidised for we are all getting money from the State to some extent. I hope that the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Under-Secretary will try to see that nobody is debarred from entering these houses. I do not want to see new houses in Glasgow reserved for slum tenants exclusively. I want to see them available for any low wage earner, even though he may not be living in a slum. Certainly I want no snobbery or class basis in this matter.
        10.53 p.m.
        Mr. SKELTON: I greatly sympathise with the whole of the observations the hon. Member has made about displaced slum tenants. From time to time I have

        2133
        expressed exactly the same view to the local authorities, and I have used almost exactly the same arguments. I think the hon. Member will find that under the new legislation that matter to some extent will be remedied. One of the causes of the congregation of people displaced from the slums in slum clearance houses has been that if they were going into State houses at all they had to go into houses to which the slum clearance subsidy was attached. The subsidy was attached to the individual house. The new provisions will take away the topographical cause of the evil which the hon. Member has been discussing, although the social cause will remain. I entirely agree with his two arguments—that it is a vital mistake to suppose that those people who have lived in unfortunate houses represent an inferior class; and I think also the argument at which he hinted, that it is not for A, who is in one form of subsidy house, to turn up his nose at B. Under the new legislation, which in a way gathers all the Acts together, the situation will be made easier, and I will not forget what the hon. Gentleman has said.
        With regard to the other points which he made, I will look into both of them. I think, speaking offhand, that legislation would be required with regard to the old age pensions. With regard to the question of passing-out, I will look into it carefully and will try to take the opportunity of discussing it with some Members who are interested in it. I do not think that it has been directly brought to my notice before. Examples of the bad results of passing-out have been brought to my notice, but I do not think that the question whether it can be dealt with by administration has been. The question of pensions has been very little discussed on the Vote of the Department of Health, and I am much less equipped on that subject than I am on some others. I will, therefore, take it up and see what can be done in the matter.
        I think that we will keep the Estimate open in case there should be another opportunity of discussing the Department of Health Vote. I would only like to say that I very much welcome the assistance which I get from hon. Members in all parts on health matters, and I welcome the very true and kindly words of the hon. Member as to the admirable efficiency of the officials of the Department,
        2134
        and the courtesy and care with which they deal with their very varied and difficult tasks. I am sure that I can speak in their name in thanking the hon. Gentleman for what he said, which I know is echoed by other Members who have the same close connection as he has in their Parliamentary work with the Department. I congratulate myself on the officials who work for me.
        Ordered, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—[Captain, Margesson.]
        Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

  GAS UNDERTAKINGS ACTS, 1920 TO 1934.
  Resolved,
  "That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 to 1934, on the application of the Farnham Gas and Electricity Company, which was presented on the 17th day of June and published, be approved, subject to the following addition:—
  Clause 5, page 3, after line 30, insert the following new sub-clause:— 'The scheduled agreement shall be read and have effect as if the following clause were inserted after Clause 15A:—
  15B. The Farnham Company shall compensate all workmen who have been in the continuous employment of the Bordon Company for not less than three years and who may suffer loss of employment or diminution of wages by reason of the transfer of the undertaking of the Bordon Company to the Farnham Company in accordance with the terms agreed by the National Joint Industrial Council for the Gas Industry dated the twenty-ninth day of April, one thousand nine hundred and thirty, a copy of which terms are set out in the Schedule hereto. Provided always that no man who has been in the employ of the Bordon Company for a continuous term of not less than three years shall except for misconduct, incapacity, or neglect of duty be discharged within the period of two years from the day of transfer.
  and as if the following Schedule were inserted after Clause 18:—

  THE SCHEDULE.

    NATIONAL JOINT INDUSTRIAL COUNCIL FOR THE GAS INDUSTRY.
    Amalgamation of Gas Undertakings—Compensation for Loss of Employment.
    1. Where an amalgamation (as hereinafter defined) between two or more undertakings has taken place compensation (as hereinafter

    2135
    determined) shall be payable by the purchasing undertaking to any gasworker who—

    (a) has been in the continuous service (as hereinafter defined) of one of the amalgamating undertakings for a period of three or more years immediately preceding the amalgamation; and

    (b) has in consequence of such amalgamation suffered loss of employment or diminution of wages, otherwise than on grounds of misconduct, incapacity, or superannuation, provided that the claim of such gasworker is made within a period of five years from the date of the amalgamation.

    2.—(a) The compensation payable in cases where a gasworker has suffered loss of employment shall be a total sum of money payable by weekly instalments or otherwise as hereinafter mentioned and calculated in accordance with the following scale:—

    (i) Men of or over fifty years of age: Two weeks' pay (as hereinafter defined) for each year of service;

    (ii) Men of or over forty-five years of age, but under fifty years of age: One and a-half week's pay (as hereinafter defined) for each year of service;

    (iii) Men under forty-five years of age: One week's pay (as hereinafter defined) for each year of service;

    (iv) The above compensation shall be paid by weekly instalments, except in special cases when an application may be made for a lump sum payment, and if the undertaking declines to make a lump sum payment then the decision shall rest with the National Joint Industrial Council;

    (v) The amount of the weekly instalment to be agreed with the beneficiary of the gas undertaking concerned, but to be at the rate of not less than ten shillings per week;

    (vi) In the event of the death of the beneficiary prior to the payment of the full amount to which he is entitled under the scheme, the balance outstanding to be paid to his "dependants" (as defined by the Workmen's Compensation Acts).

    (b) Where a gasworker has suffered diminution of wages (otherwise than on grounds of misconduct, incapacity, or superannuation), compensation shall be payable on the above-mentioned scale, but the loss suffered by such gasworker shall be deemed in such case to be his "week's pay."
    For example, if a stoker earning, say seventy shillings per week was employed (after and in consequence of an amalgamation
    2136
    of gas undertakings) as a labourer earning fifty shillings per week his loss would be one pound per week, and this sum (viz., one pound) would be deemed to be his "week's pay" for the purposes of compensation under this scheme, so that, if the gasworker were fifty-five years of age and had thirty years' continuous service, he would receive the sum of sixty pounds.
    3. Where a gasworker is entitled, otherwise than under this scheme, to receive from the undertaking in whose service he has been any sum or sums of money by way of compensation for loss of employment such sum or sums shall be deducted from the compensation receivable under this scheme.
    4. If any gasworker refuses an offer of work within the undertaking for which he is suitable he shall be deemed for the purposes of this scheme not to have suffered any loss of employment.
    5. The following phrases in this document contained bear and are intended to bear for the purposes of this scheme the meaning set out hereunder:

    (i) "amalgamation" means and includes cases where:

    (a) the gas undertakings of existing undertakers are transferred to a new company incorporated for the purpose of such amalgamation; or

    (b) one or more undertakings are absorbed by another undertaker.

    (ii) "continuous service" includes service in any of His Majesty's Forces during the Great War.

    (iii) "week's pay" means the sum payable in respect of a normal working week at plain time rates, inclusive of war wage advances.

    6. Any difference of opinion which may arise with regard to the interpretation of this agreement shall be settled by the National Joint Industrial Council for the Gas Industry whose decision shall be final and binding upon the parties concerned."—[Dr. Burgin.]
    The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

  ADJOURNMENT.
  Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Margesson.]
  Adjourned accordingly at One Minute after Eleven o'Clock.

UNEMPLOYMENT.
  INSURANCE (DOMESTIC SERVANTS).
  INSURANCE (DOMESTIC SERVANTS).
  STATISTICS.
  STATISTICS.
  SPECIAL AREAS COMMISSIONER (REPORT).
  SPECIAL AREAS COMMISSIONER (REPORT).
  URBAN DISTRICT COUNCILS (CHAIRMEN, ALLOWANCES).
  URBAN DISTRICT COUNCILS (CHAIRMEN, ALLOWANCES).
  MEDICAL RESEARCH (STATE GRANTS).
  MEDICAL RESEARCH (STATE GRANTS).
  TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT, 1932.
  TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT, 1932.
AGRICULTURE.
  REGISTERED BACON CURERS.
  REGISTERED BACON CURERS.
  RABBITS (DAMAGE TO CROPS).
  RABBITS (DAMAGE TO CROPS).
  RIBBON DEVELOPMENT.
  RIBBON DEVELOPMENT.
  COAL INDUSTRY (EXPORTS).
  COAL INDUSTRY (EXPORTS).
  ASSURANCE COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) BILL [Lords].
  ASSURANCE COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) BILL [Lords].
  ANGLO-FRENCH TRADE.
  ANGLO-FRENCH TRADE.
  GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (CLERICAL WORK).
  GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (CLERICAL WORK).