Sitting of 4 June 1940

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.
DEATHS OF MEMBERS.
Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker made the following communication to the House: I regret to have to inform the House of the death of Sir Joseph William Leech, late Member for the Borough of Newcastle-upon-Tyne (West Division), and of the death in action of Captain Richard Whitaker Porritt, late Member for the County of Lancaster (Heywood and Radcliffe Division), and desire to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and our sympathy with the relatives.
NEW WRIT.
For the Borough of Croydon (North Division), in the room of Lieut.-Colonel Glyn Keith Murray Mason, D.S.O., commonly called the Honourable Glyn Keith Murray Mason (Manor of North-stead).—[Captain Margesson.]
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
  FARNHAM GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILL [Lords]
  READ A SECOND TIME, AND COMMITTED.
  MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (NORWICH) BILL.
  Read the Third time, and passed.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (LITTLESTONE-ON-SEA AND DISTRICT WATER) BILL.
  MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (THIRSK DISTRICT WATER) BILL.
  As amended, Considered; to be read the Third time.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  GROUP INSURANCE (ARMED FORCES).
  Mr. De la Bèreasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can
  748
  now make some statement regarding the inquiry which is being made by his Department into certain cases of group insurance by the Legal and General Insurance Company in respect of men who have joined the Forces?
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Major Lloyd George): I am advised that the company are entitled for the purposes of their group insurances to regard men who have joined the Forces as having left the service of their peacetime employers and the question of the effect of such termination of service on group insurance depends upon the terms of the individual contracts which are subject to considerable variation according to the types of employment covered. Where, however, the original group policy contains no clause specifically excluding war risks, an individual who leaves his employment for service with the Army, Navy or Air Force is permitted to effect a life or endowment assurance upon his life for the amount for which he was insured under the group policy at ordinary rates applicable to a person of his age and without evidence of health and free from the restriction as to war risk. The companies have also undertaken to take special measures to bring this option to the attention of the employés concerned, and I am greatly obliged to my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to my notice.
  Mr. De la Bère: Will the Minister face the facts? Are not these men who have left to serve in the Forces, pulling their full weight; and is it not a most deplorable manœuvre on the part of the Legal and General Insurance Company to seek to evade their obligation to give fair treatment to these men? I think it is very wrong.
  Mr. George Griffiths: Does this apply to volunteers as well as conscripts?
  Major Lloyd George: It applies to all people who leave their service to take service with the Army, Navy or Air Force.
  Mr. De la Bère: Will the Minister see that publicity is given to this matter? It is a scandal and it is exceedingly important that the facts should be known.
  Major Lloyd George: I think that publicity is being given to it at the present time. The answer sets out the full facts.

  ECONOMIC WARFARE.

    SHEEPSKINS (HUNGARIAN IMPORTS).
    Mr. G. Straussasked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether he is aware that Hungary is importing large quantities of South African woolled sheepskins, which are re-exported to Germany and used for the lining of airmen's coats; and will he take the necessary steps, in co-operation with the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, to stop this traffic?
    The Minister of Economic Warfare (Mr. Dalton): Hungarian imports of sheepskins during the first five months of 1940 were much lower than during the corresponding months of 1939. At first sight, therefore, the position is not unsatisfactory, but, if the hon. Member will provide me with any information he may have to show regarding the import of woolled sheepskins into Germany, I shall be glad to consider it. I would add that I shall be glad at all times to receive from any hon. Member in any part of the House information which may assist me in intensifying the economic war against the enemy.

    MINISTRY (STAFF).
    Mr. Culverwellasked the Minister of Economic Warfare how many persons were employed in his Department on 1st April, 1st May and 1st June, respectively?
    Mr. Dalton: The numbers are 1,338, 1,487 and 1,461. I am at present engaged on reorganising the work of the Ministry, having regard to recent changes in the war situation and to new possibilities of effective economic warfare against the enemy. It is possible that such reorganisation will result in some further reduction in the total number of the staff, but the paramount consideration which I shall have in mind will be to increase to the utmost the effectiveness of the Ministry.
    Mr. Culverwell: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that recent events have considerably reduced the sphere of his activities, and is it not time that some reduction was made in the size of his staff instead of an increase?
    Mr. Dalton: If the hon. Member will read my answer with attention he will see that I have in mind the point he has raised, but I judge it to be more important to help our fighting men to win the war than to save a few jobs.
    Mr. Mander: Can the Minister say whether the hon. Gentleman is anxious to promote the efficiency of the Department or not?
    Mr. Culverwell: Does the Minister think that a greater number of staff will mean more efficient work being performed?

  BRITISH ARMY.

    EXPLOSIVES (INSTRUCTIONS).
    Sir Richard Aclandasked the Secretray of State for War whether he will consider and inquire whether there are any people in this country whose experience of fighting in Spain would qualify them to instruct miners in the means by which the explosives kept in conjunction with coal-mining operations could be most effectively used in warfare if occasion should arise?
    The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Eden): I can assure my hon. Friend that the methods employed and the experience gained in the use of explosives in Spain, Finland and other theatres of war have been studied and embodied in the instructions issued to the troops.
    Sir R. Acland: Are miners being given advice, as they may have to take part in operations?

    PARACHUTISTS AND GLIDERS.
    Mr. Cocksasked the Secretary of State for War whether he intends to organise a corps of parachutists and gliders?
    Mr. Eden: Recent operations are being carefully studied by my Department in order to decide what, if any, changes in the organisation of the Army are required. It would not be in the national interest to make any further announcement at this stage.
    Mr. Garro Jones: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that operations of this kind have been in process of experiment in other countries for many years; and is this the first time that they have come under the study of the British War Office?
    Mr. Eden: I never said that. The hon. Gentleman is reading into my words what I have not stated.
    Mr. Garro Jones rose—
    Hon. Members: Fifth column.
    Mr. Garro Jones: I am asking the right hon. Gentleman whether this form of warfare, which has been experimented on by foreign armies over the last three years, has been equally studied by the British War Office?
    Mr. Eden: The reply which I made, referred to recent operations and it is those recent operations, which are a new development of a method practised before, which are now being studied.
    Mr. Sorensen: On a point of Order. Is it in order for a Member of this House when another Member is asking a Supplementary Question, to refer to him as "Fifth column"?
    Mr. Speaker: I should say, certainly not.
    Mr. Sorensen: May I draw your attention, Sir, to the fact that two voices at the other end of the Chamber uttered those words?

    CYCLISTS.
    Mr. Cocksasked the Secretary of State for War whether he intends to make use of the services of those who served in the former cyclist battalions of the Territorial force by forming cyclist companies in each area of the defence force?
    Mr. Eden: It is hoped that all ex-service men who have served in cyclist battalions and are not at present enrolled or enlisted in the armed Forces of the Crown, and who can offer their services without interfering with other vital duties, will come forward and enrol in the Local Defence Volunteers. Despatch riders, both pedal cyclists and motor-cyclists, will be of the utmost value.

    INTERNEES AND PRISONERS OF WAR.
    Mr. Manderasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in connection with the internment of aliens, arrangements are being made to keep separate genuine refugees from known Nazis?
    Mr. Eden: The persons interned fall into two broad classes, namely, those interned as the result of an individual examination of their cases, and those interned in pursuance of general directions. The former class is kept separately in different camps from the latter class.
    9. Mr. Higgsasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the
    752
    desirability of transporting internees and prisoners of war to places remote from the British Isles in order to prevent co-operation with enemy aircraft and parachutists?
    Mr. Eden: This question is under consideration.
    Mr. Henderson Stewartasked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he will suggest to the Government of Canada that arrangements be made so that all German prisoners be shipped to Canada and kept there till the end of the war?
    The Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs (Mr. Shakespeare): I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 28th May by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Office to a Question by the hon. Member for Romford (Mr. Parker) to which I am unable to add anything.
    Mr. Stewart: Will the Minister bear in mind the danger which may result from the landing of parachutists from German planes who may fall inside German camps in this country?
    Mr. Shakespeare: The protection of German prisoners is primarily a matter for the Secretary of State for War and no doubt he and the Army Council have that point very much in mind.

    SICK LEAVE (TRAVELLING FACILITIES).
    Mr. W. H. Greenasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the granting of free travelling facilities from their station, camp or base, to their homes and back, to serving soldiers who are coming home on sick leave?
    Mr. Eden: As a general rule free travelling facilities are given to soldiers who are ordered to go on sick leave by the medical officer.

    TRAINING.
    Captain Pluggeasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider making, for public information and encouragement, a statement as to the military training now being imparted to the numbers of young men who have been called up?
    Mr. Eden: The men who have been called up receive the normal military train-

    753
    ing given to recruits, and I should add that their keenness enables them to make rapid progress. It is not in the public interest to give any further details of this training.

    RIVER USK (BRIDGES).
    Sir Reginald Clarryasked the Secretary of State for War what steps he is taking to safeguard from enemy action and sabotage the road and rail bridges crossing the River Usk in Newport, Monmouthshire; and whether he is aware that these bridges are the vital traffic link between England and South Wales?
    Mr. Eden: I do not think it would be desirable to give details, but my hon. Friend may rest assured that all such important places have been reviewed, and that such protection is being provided as is considered necessary.
    Mr. Lawson: Does the right hon. Gentleman think it desirable that a Question of this kind should appear on the Order Paper?

    DEPENDANTS' ALLOWANCES.
    Mr. Burkeasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that members of His Majesty's Forces who receive promotion or proficiency pay and thereupon increase their allotment to their dependants, have the Army allowance paid to those dependants reduced as a consequence; and whether he will have this matter reconsidered?
    Mr. Eden: I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Cambridge (Lieut.-Commander Tufnell) on Tuesday last of which I am sending him a copy.
    Mr. Burke: Does the Minister think it is in accordance with general feeling that widows and widowed mothers should have their Army allowances cut down from 5s. to 1s. 6d., because this proficiency pay has been granted?
    Mr. Eden: It is a very complicated question and I do not think it is quite as the hon. Member has described it. Perhaps he will kindly study the long answer which sets out the details.
    Mr. Buchanan: Is that answer to be published?
    Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Burke: Is the Minister aware that I have here a paper from the Army authorities announcing that the 5s. will be reduced to 1s. 6d., because the proficiency pay has been increased by 10s.?
    Mr. Eden: I shall be glad to see that document.
    Mr. Glenvil Hall: Why is there any complication about it?
    Mr. Eden: I gave a detailed answer last week, and I am rather loath to make extractions from it now.
    Mr. Buchanan: Is the Minister aware that letters have been sent, not from him, but from his deputy, stating that this 3s. 6d. is to be taken into account and the amount is to be reduced? Will he take steps to have the matter corrected?
    Mr. Eden: I shall be glad to look into the matter again.

    BOMBING ATTACKS ON RED CROSS.
    Mr. G. Straussasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the policy of the German High Command to make hospitals, hospital trains and hospital ships an important objective of their bombing, he will take immediate steps to remove the red cross or other distinctive markings from all hospital accommodation in this country?
    Mr. Eden: During recent operations, the enemy have deliberately bombed hospital carriers in circumstances which admitted no mistake about their identity and incomplete disregard of the immunity given them by international agreement to which the German Government are a party. As regards hospitals and ambulance trains and convoys, I am not yet in possession of official information. I am not at present prepared to make any recommendation on the lines suggested in my hon. Friend's Question.
    Mr. Strauss: Is the Minister aware that the Germans do this because they believe it has a very demoralising effect on troops in action? Therefore, is it not in the interest of our defence soldiers here that hospitals should have no special marking upon them? Will he consider this matter further?
    Mr. Eden: I am sure the hon. Member will understand that there are a great many far-reaching considerations in this connection and that is why I do not want to go beyond this answer at present.
    Mr. Thorne: Is it not more demoralising for the Germans?

    IMPRESSED MOTOR-VEHICLES.
    Mr. Lyonsasked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he will indicate the approximate number of motor-vehicles of all descriptions that have been hired by his Department in this country in connection with present hostilities to date;
    (2) whether he will state, in connection with both the impressment and hiring of motor-vehicles by his Department for the present hostilities to date, the total number of claims of all classes not yet finally disposed of in all areas and commands?
    Mr. Eden: Some 35,000 motor-vehicles have been impressed for the War Department since the outbreak of war, and, in regard to these, only six claims are outstanding. These are in course of settlement. I regret that corresponding figures for hirings are not available.
    Mr. Lyons: Does not the Minister consider the present administrative machinery, whereby these claims are disposed of, is a very cumbersome one, and will he reconsider the whole position?
    Mr. Eden: My attention has not been drawn to that; but my hon. and learned Friend will appreciate that I have had other anxieties during the last few days.

    CALLING-UP ACCELERATION.
    Captain Pluggeasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that France is mobilising everybody, even up to its older men, he is aware of the number of young men in this country who are not engaged in any work of national importance, and who, although registered, have not been called up for military training; and what steps he is taking to expedite the calling up of these men and to inform our Allies of what we are doing?
    Mr. Eden: The calling up of men is being accelerated, and the maximum number that can be trained will be called up during this month, giving an intake of about double the normal rate. In addition, there is an opening for volunteers between the ages of 18 and 19½ in the extra companies which are being raised in certain Home Defence battalions.
    Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore: Will the Minister consider calling up some of the older men?

    LOCAL DEFENCE VOLUNTEERS.
    Lieut.-Colonel Windsor-Cliveasked the Secretary of State for War what types of ammunition may be used by Local Defence Volunteers who may be armed with shot-guns or sporting rifles?
    Mr. Eden: Local Defence Volunteers providing their own shot-guns or sporting rifles may use ordinary shot-gun cartridges or buckshot with the former, and bullets other than soft-nosed or expanding with the latter.
    Lieut.-Colonel Windsor-Clive: Will there be any restriction on the purchase of this ammunition by volunteers?
    Mr. Eden: I do not think so. Perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend would have a word with me about it later.
    Major Sir Jocelyn Lucasasked the Secretary of State for War whether Army officers on the retired list who are authorised to wear uniform on appropriate occasions and who are authorised to retain their rank may, if duly enrolled in the new anti-parachute corps, wear their old uniforms on duty until such time as new ones are available and issued; and, if so, whether they must remove their badges of rank?
    Mr. Eden: Retired Army officers who enrol in the Local Defence Volunteer Force should conform in all respects to what is prescribed for the Force when they are on duty as members of it.
    Commander Locker-Lampsonasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will allow home defence forces in include elements which know the district where they are operating; and whether, in this connection, he will allow back from overseas gamekeepers and others acquainted with the use of firearms for service in their own districts against parachutists?
    Mr. Eden: As has been stated in answer to previous Questions, personnel are allotted to Home Defence battalions, so far as is practicable, which are stationed near their homes, and Local Defence Volunteers are definitely to be employed near their homes. My hon. and gallant Friend will understand that the transfer

    757
    of men from Field Force units cannot in present circumstances be considered.
    Mrs. Tateasked the Secretary of State for War whether adequate numbers of volunteers have been enlisted for the defence of London; and whether those volunteers are armed with defensive firearms issued by the War Office or with weapons provided by themselves?
    Sir William Davison: Is it in the national interest that a Question of this nature should be on the Order Paper in the House of Commons? Can nothing be done in the matter?
    Mr. Speaker: The Minister need not answer it.
    Mr. Eden: Sufficient volunteers are available for the defence of London. Those detailed for the defence of vital factories and certain public utility services are armed with weapons issued by the War Office; the remainder are detailed for specified duties, and, where necessary, are armed either by the War Office or with weapons provided by themselves.
    Mrs. Tate: Is my right hon. Friend aware that very large numbers of volunteers in inner London are resigning because they are not allowed either to use their own arms or to be provided with arms?
    Sir W. Davison: Does not that Supplementary Question show the desirability of either you, Mr. Speaker, or some committee, vetting these Questions before they are placed on the Order Paper, considering that the country is fighting for its life against a foe who studies these Questions meticulously?
    Mr. Speaker: That question may be considered.
    Mr. De la Bèreasked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to put all air-raid precautions organisations throughout the country under military control and discipline?
    Mr. Caryasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that an essential part of German military technique in tank air attack is the herding of all civilians on to main roads between important centres of communication; that in Northern France and Belgium the mobility of allied military forces was greatly handicapped as the
    758
    result of the movement of the civilian population in this way, as roads vital for counter measures to invasion became a shambles of civilian casualties and broken wagons and motor cars; and will he take immediate steps to ensure that in any part of Great Britain which may be subjected to intensive bombardment from the air, the civilian population comes automatically under the control of the competent military authority?
    Mr. Priceasked the Prime Minister whether any steps are contemplated for bringing under a single command the Local Defence Volunteers, the air-raid precautions service and special constables?
    The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Attlee): If at any time and in any area military necessities so require, the military authorities will assume complete control of all defence organisations and civil authorities. In the meantime radical changes in the composition and organisation of the Civil Defence Services would be undesirable. The military authorities already work in close touch with the Regional Commissioners, who can be invested by the Minister of Home Security with all necessary powers.
    Mr. De la Bère: Does not my right hon. Friend realise the difficulty of effecting this transition when the emergency does arise? Is it not better to do it before the emergency has arisen?
    Mr. Attlee: If the hon. Member will read the answer he will see that all provision has been made for action in an emergency.
    Mr. Price: Is not the Minister of the opinion that the efficiency of the three Services would be very greatly increased if they were all under a single command to-day?
    Mr. Cocksasked the Minister of Information whether he will prepare an instructional film showing the general public what action to take in encounters with parachute troopers; and also a more technical film for the instruction of Local Defence Volunteers?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Information (Mr. Harold Nicolson):The preparation of both the types of film suggested was considered several weeks ago, but, after careful examination, it was decided that the necessary instructions would be better conveyed by other means.
    Mr. Cocks: By what means does the Minister intend to do it?
    Mr. Nicolson: It is at present contemplated to do it by means of pamphlets which will be circulated to every household, and they will provide full instructions.

    GERMAN TROOP-CARRYING AIRCRAFT.
    Mr. Martinasked the Secretary of State for War whether he can state precisely the nature and calibre of the armament, other than small arms, carried by German troop-carriers and similar aircraft which have been employed in the operations on the Continent?
    The Under-Secretary of State for Air (Captain Harold Balfour): I have been asked to reply. The German aircraft engaged on troop-carrying operations are generally of the unarmed transport class. In addition to the usual small arms, the troops carried are known to have been equipped with heavy machine-guns of 13 and 20 m/m calibre; with 5 c/m and 8.1 c/m mortars; with 7·5 c/m infantry guns and possibly 10.5 c/m light howitzers.

  SCOTLAND.

    COMPENSATION (DEFENCE) ACT CLAIMS.
    Mr. Hannahasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will give an undertaking that Scottish claimants for compensation under any provision connected with the war will not be put to inconvenience and extra expense by having cases adjudicated in England?
    The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Ernest Brown):I assume that my hon. Friend has in mind claims under the Compensation (Defence) Act, 1939. Any Scottish case referred in default of agreement to the General Claims Tribunal may be heard by a division of the tribunal sitting in Edinburgh.

    WAR AGRICULTURAL COMMITTEES.
    Mr. Leonard: (for Mr. J. J. Davidson) asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the total number of drainage improvement or alternative recommendations made by the Scottish war agricultural committees up to date; and the acreage of hitherto uncultivated land now taken over for agricultural purposes since the setting up of such committees?
    Mr. E. Brown: The answer to the first part of the Question is that 16 such recommendations have been made. As regards the second part of the Question, farmers in Scotland have, since 4th September, 1939, notified their intention to plough 252,550 acres of old grassland under the ploughing subsidy scheme. In addition, the agricultural committees have, with my consent, taken possession for agricultural purposes of nine subjects, of a total area of 1,939 acres, which were not being cultivated in accordance with the rules of good husbandry.
    Mr. Leonard: (for Mr. Davidson) asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the total number of crofters now serving as members of Scottish agricultural committees?
    Mr. Brown: The number of crofters now serving as members of the agricultural executive committees appointed for the crofting counties in Scotland is 49. In the district sub-committees, set up by the main committees, 137 members are crofters.
    Mr. Mathers: What proportion of the total number of the committees is represented by the figures which the right hon. Gentleman has given?
    Mr. Brown: In the 11 agricultural committees in the seven crofting counties, there is a total membership of 226 persons of whom 49 are crofters or landholders. The total membership of the sub-committees is 275 of which 137 are crofters.
    Mr. John Morgan: Are any crofters chairmen of any of these agricultural committees?
    Mr. Brown: If the hon. Member will put that question on the Paper I will endeavour to give him the information.

  COAL INDUSTRY.

    FUEL STORAGE.
    Mr. Lewisasked the Secretary for Mines whether he is now in a position to make a further statement as to the rationing of coal and, in particular, whether it is proposed to encourage those in a position to do so to store coal during the summer months so as to ease the problem of distribution next winter?
    The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell): It is too early as yet to say whether the efforts now being made to increase coal production and to economise in the consumption of all kinds of fuel will enable us to avoid the reintroduction of rationing. In the meantime, it is of the highest importance to make full use of our transport facilities to distribute supplies for next winter and I would urge all domestic consumers who can do so to lay in stocks in so far as supplies are available in their area. I have arranged with the trade that their supplies shall be distributed fairly.
    Mr. Shinwell: Does the Minister realise that that means that some who can afford it will be able to lay in stocks of coal and those who cannot afford it will have to rely on what is available to them?
    Mr. Grenfell: It is intended that no one shall lay in any undue stocks of coal.
    Mr. Buchanan: Is the Minister aware that, particularly in the West of Scotland, where there are tenement dwellings, the storage of coal is absolutely impossible? Will he consider storing coal on a community basis?
    Mr. Grenfell: I will take note of the hon. Gentleman's suggestion. The House must not assume that while we invite individuals to lay in some coal for their own purposes, we are not also providing stocks from which every one may be served in turn.

    STATISTICS.
    Mr. Dunnasked the Secretary for, Mines how many more men are employed in the mines of the country since the outbreak of the war; and what increase in production has taken place in the last nine months, compared with the first nine months of 1939?
    Mr. Grenfell: It is not in the public interest to publish the figures. They are, however, supplied confidentially to the Mining Association and to the Mine-workers' Federation of Great Britain.
    Mr. G. Griffiths: Are they up or down?
    Mr. Grenfell: They are up.

    TRANSPORT (WORKMEN'S FARES, SUNDAYS).
    Mr. R. C. Morrisonasked the Minister of Transport whether he will
    762
    arrange for workmen's fares to be available on Sundays to all workers travelling to and from their employment?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Montague): On the main line railways, the London Passenger Transport Board's railways, and the Board's road services on which workmen's tickets are issued on weekdays, the Railway Executive Committee have arranged that, as a war-time emergency measure, workmen's tickets will be issued at any time on Sundays for journeys between places of residence and places of employment, to all applicants producing a works' pass, shift certificate or other means of identification associated with the place at which the work is to be performed. All regional transport commissioners have been asked to use every endeavour to ensure that arrangements for the issue of workmen's tickets on Sundays on provincial road services are equally wide in scope.
    Mr. Morrison: Will that include men employed in Government Departments in Whitehall, such as attendants and men with low wages, who during the present emergency have to go to work on Sundays?
    Mr. Montague: I am afraid I cannot answer that Question without notice, but I should imagine not.
    Mr. Morrison: Will my hon. Friend look into the question to see whether it is possible to include these men, who are in receipt of low wages and are put to considerable expense by having to go to work on Sunday?
    Mr. Benjamin Smith: Can my hon. Friend look into the question of issuing tickets to all those who can prove that they use workmen's tickets during the week?
    Mr. Montague: I think that is covered by the answer.
    Mr. Thorne: Is my hon. Friend aware that workmen's tickets are not issued after a given hour in the morning, and will he see that they are made available later?
    Mr. Montague: If my hon. Friend will read my answer he will see that workmen's tickets will be issued at any time on Sundays under this arrangement.

    SHIPBUILDING (EMPLOYMENT).
    Sir T. Mooreasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (1) the arrangements made for unemployed men, skilled in shipyard work, to report to the appropriate authority for transfer to those districts whether labour is required;
    (2) whether steps will be taken to bring back into ship construction some of the older men who still retain a knowledge of their craft and the requisite physical ability?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Assheton): A review of the men registered as wholly unemployed in the main skilled shipbuilding occupations is now being undertaken in co-operation with representatives of both sides of the shipbuilding industry. The results of this review will show which of the men concerned are suitable for immediate employment in the shipyards as well as those who could be absorbed if given the opportunity to become fit again for such work. These men will be submitted for shipyard work for which they are suitable and arrangements will be made for their transfer to other areas where this is necessary.
    Steps are also being taken to ensure that any older men of the type referred to by my hon. Friend who may not be registering at Employment Exchanges are considered for employment in shipyard work. Any skilled shipyard workers now in less essential employment would be doing a great service to their country by informing their local Employment Exchange that they are ready to go back to their old trade if they are still suitable for such employment.
    Sir T. Moore: May I thank my hon. Friend for a most satisfactory answer?

  MINISTRY OF SUPPLY.

    STEEL.
    Sir T. Mooreasked the Minister of Supply whether special steps are being taken to increase the importation of steel into this country from the United States of America and the Dominions?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply (Mr. Harold Macmillan): My hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that the question of obtaining increased supplies of steel from
    764
    the United States of America and the Dominions has received special and urgent attention. He will not, of course, expect me to give exact details of the arrangements which have been or are being made.
    Sir T. Moore: But are they satisfactory—that is the essential point?
    Mr. Macmillan: Satisfaction in regard to both questions and answers is a matter of degree.

    PAPER.
    Mr. Toucheasked the Minister of Supply whether, in view of the paper shortage, it is proposed to restrict the large number of brochures and catalogues sent out by fashionable shops and large stores, especially in view of the fact that they mainly advertise goods of a luxury nature?
    Mr. Harold Macmillan: Under the Control of Paper (No. 16) Order, the gratuitous distribution of circulars by retailers and others in any three consecutive months is cut to one-third of the distribution in the corresponding period of 1939. For this purpose retailers and others can use existing stocks of paper, but it is improbable that further quantities of paper will be made available for the purposes mentioned by my hon. Friend.

    HOTEL RESIDENTS (IDENTITY CARDS).
    Major Carverasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether during the emergency, he will consider the advisability of visitors to licensed premises or boarding-houses, who may be requiring rooms, producing their identity cards to prove their British nationality, in addition to the required written statement?
    The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peake): The production of a National Registration identity card would not secure the hon. and gallant Member's object, since these cards do not show whether their bearers are of British or foreign nationality.
    Mr. Radford: Why do they not?
    Mr. Peake: That is a question with which the Ministry of Health are more concerned than the Home Office because the Ministry of Health prescribe forms of this kind.
    Mr. De la Bère: Is it not desirable that these antiquated methods should be done away with?

    CIVIL DEFENCE (WATER RESERVOIRS).
    Mr. Loganasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that representatives of northern waterworks undertakings are of the opinion that the Government are not taking adequate precautions to safeguard the water supplies of this country; and what action he intends to take?
    Mr. Peake: I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend on Thursday last to Questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford (Mr. Etherton) and my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for West Leeds (Captain V. Adams).
    Mr. Logan: The answer on Thursday did not cover the point. I want to know whether adequate precautions are being taken, because people in the north who know all about the business say that precautions are not being taken. May I have an answer? On a point of Order. I am told this question was answered, but it was not, and I want an answer to-day. It is an important Question and it ought to be answered.
    Mr. Speaker: The Minister says that it was answered last time.
    Mr. Logan: I have had trouble in the city of Liverpool in regard to this. Can I have an answer? On a point of Order. If I call attention to an important point with regard to defence without giving any publicity, is it not necessary that I should get an answer?
    Mr. Speaker: A similar Question was asked the other day and the Minister did not answer because he did not think it was in the national interest to do so, and to-day he has said the same thing.

    POST OFFICE (TELEGRAPH SERVICE).
    Mr. Lewisasked the Postmaster-General what has been the ascertained loss on the telegraph branch of the Post Office for each of the last three financial years; and what proportion of that loss is estimated to be due to the granting of reduced rates for Press telegrams?
    The Assistant Postmaster-General (Captain Waterhouse): The losses on the telegraph service during the three years ended the 31st March, 1939, which are the latest years for which figures are available, were £635,600, £739,000 and £823,300, respectively. The proportions of those losses which it is estimated were attributable to the inland Press service are, 14, 11 and 8 per cent., respectively. These figures are arrived at after allocating to the Press traffic a proportion of the general expenses of the telegraph service. They do not purport to represent savings which would follow the cessation of Press telegrams.

    NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
    Major Milnerasked the Minister of Pensions when the terms of the amendments that have been approved by the Government to the Royal Warrant of September last will be available to Members of this House?
    The Minister of Pensions (Sir Walter Womersley): Some delay has unavoidably occurred in the matter, but I am hopeful that copies of a new Royal Warrant embodying the recommendations referred to will be available to Members in the course of next week.

    SPAIN AND RUSSIA (BRITISH MISSIONS).
    Colonel Wedgwoodasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how much in sterling per year is represented by frais de representation in the cases of the right hon. Member for Chelsea (Sir S. Hoare) and the hon. and learned Member for Bristol (Sir S. Cripps), respectively?
    The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Butler): I can at present only reply to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's Question. As I stated on 29th May, frais de representation will be at a rate appropriate to the mission concerned in present circumstances.
    Colonel Wedgwood: May I ask whether it will be possible to pay the right hon. Gentlemen in future according to results?
    Mr. Hicks: What does frais de representation mean?
    Mr. Butler: It means expenses.
    Mr. Hicks: Why did not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman put it in the Question?
    Mr. Martinasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can yet say when our diplomatic representation by an Ambassador in Moscow will be resumed; and whether he will give an assurance that the Government is prepared to enter into fully normal relations with the Russian Government?
    Mr. Butler: I hope to be able to give a reply on this subject to-morrow. As regards the second part of the Question, the answer is in the affirmative.

    ANGLO-FRENCH CO-OPERATION.
    Mr. Woodburnasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in the case of national demonstrations being held in connection with the purpose of the war, consideration will be given to the desirability of having also a representative, such as M. Blum, of the French nation, to cement the comradeship of the nations; and whether he will make a like offer from our side to the French nation for an exchange of information, Ambassadors and interpreters of our common purpose?
    Mr. Butler: We shall naturally always be delighted to welcome members of the French Government and other distinguished representatives of the French people at any gatherings in this country of the sort indicated by the hon. Member. In the same way Members of His Majesty's Government and other representatives of the British people visiting France have never failed to find the most cordial reception. Unity of purpose and complete co-operation between this country and France has already been so clearly achieved that I do not think it is necessary to propose further joint machinery as suggested by the hon. Member.
    Mr. Woodburn: Since this Question was put down a large number of Frenchmen have involuntarily landed on these shores, and would it be possible to make representations to the Secretary of State for
    768
    War that members of the French Forces should be taken to other parts of the country in order that the people can see them and get the same inspiration from them as the French people get from our men?

    REFUGEES (MILITARY SERVICE).
    Mr. Lewisasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will consider the desirability of issuing regulations to provide that Dutch and Belgian subjects who wish to remain in this country during the war shall be under the same liability to military service as British subjects?
    Mr. Butler: I understand that the Netherlands and Belgian Governments are already calling up for service in their own forces all their subjects in this country of military age.
    Captain Pluggeasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the announcement by the Belgian Ambassador, prior to the surrender of King Leopold, that every male Belgian in this country should register for Army service still holds good?
    Mr. Butler: Yes, Sir.

    MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (EMERGENCY SERVICE).
    Mr. R. C. Morrisonasked the Prime Minister whether he will open a register for Members of both Houses of Parliament who wish to enrol for useful work during times when Parliament is not sitting?
    Sir R. Clarryasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the urgent necessity of utilising to the fullest extent the nation's man-power resources, including business and technical knowledge and administrative experience, he will immediately consider some method of using the services of those Members of Parliament who have the requisite time and ability to undertake additional duties during the present emergency?
    Mr. Attlee: His Majesty's Government is desirous of utilising to the full the services of hon. Members, and I am considering the best way in which to meet the desires of hon. Members in this respect.

    ECONOMIC ORGANISATION.
    Mr. Manderasked the Prime Minister whether he is now able to make a statement concerning the proposed changes in the economic organisation of the Government's activities?
    Mr. Attlee: As the reply is rather long and detailed I propose, with Mr. Speaker's permission, to make a statement at the end of Questions.
    Later:
    Mr. Attlee: The work of Ministers, under the direction of the War Cabinet, falls into three divisions:

    (a) Defence:

    (b) Foreign Policy:

    (c) Economic and Home Affairs.

    As regards (a), the Prime Minister, in his capacity of Minister of Defence, is assisted by a Defence Committee which comprises—

    The First Lord of the Admiralty,

    The Secretary of State for War,

    The Secretary of State for Air

    with the Chiefs of Staff as Advisers.
    As regards (b), questions of Foreign Policy will continue, as heretofore, to be submitted by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs direct to the War Cabinet at its daily meetings.
    As regards (c), Economic and Home Affairs cover a wide range of interrelated subjects. These will be dealt with by the following five Ministerial bodies:

    (1) The Production Council (Chairman, the Minister without Portfolio) will give general direction as to the organisation and the priority of production for war purposes;

    (2) The Economic Policy Committee (Chairman, the Minister without Portfolio) will concert and direct general economic policy;

    (3) The Food Policy Committee (Chairman, the Lord Privy Seal) will deal with problems of food including food production;

    (4) The Home Policy Committee (Chairman, the Lord Privy Seal) will deal with questions relating to the Home Front and social services; it will also be responsible for the framing of regulations and draft legislation;

    770

    (5) The Civil Defence Committee (Chairman, the Home Secretary) will deal with civil defence including home security questions.

    The work of these Committees will be concerted and directed by a Committee under the Chairmanship of the Lord President, of which the Lord Privy Seal, the Minister without Portfolio and the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be members. It will be the function of this body to ensure that the work of the five Ministerial Committees is properly co-ordinated, and that no part of the field is left uncovered.
    Lord Stamp will continue to preside over the Survey of Economic and Financial Plans. The Survey, with its associated economic staff, will be at the disposal of the Ministerial Committees dealing with economic and related subjects. The staff will also provide digests of statistics bearing on the development of our war effort, and reports on the progress achieved by Departments in giving effect to decisions on economic questions reached by the Ministerial committees referred to above.
    Mr. Mander: Can the Lord Privy Seal say whether Lord Stamp will devote the whole of his time to this work, and if not, what proportion of it? Will he be a half-timer?
    Mr. Attlee: His position is unchanged in that respect.
    Mr. Shinwell: Is the economic committee with which Lord Stamp was associated, and over which the Chancellor of the Exchequer formerly presided, now abandoned in that form?
    Mr. Attlee: Yes, Sir. As I have explained to the House, there is now a committee under the Minister Without Portfolio, dealing with general economic matters. Lord Stamp's organisation will report to that committee.
    Mr. Shinwell: Are we to understand from that answer that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer will not preside over that committee?
    Mr. Attlee: As I have said, the Minister Without Portfolio will preside.
    Mr. Loftus: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider co-opting on the Economic Advisory Committee men like Professor Harrod and Mr. Maynard Keynes?
    Mr. Garro Jones: May I ask a question, Mr. Speaker, which is whether any Minister is specifically charged with the vitally important task of the co-ordination of foreign intelligence in regard to counter espionage?
    Mr. Attlee: That subject is dealt with by the Cabinet, and the special organisation dealing with the subject.
    Mr. Garro Jones: Is any Minister specifically charged with that responsibility?
    Mr. Attlee: The Lord President of the Council is specifically charged with it.
    Mr. Glenvil Hall: May I ask that Lord Stamp should not be put on this Organisation?

    ARMED FORCES (WIRELESS ORDERS).
    Mr. Hamilton Kerrasked the Prime Minister whether he will issue an order that, in the event of an attack on this country, all orders apparently given on the wireless to cease fire or lay down arms shall automatically be disregarded by the fighting services?
    Mr. Attlee: Appropriate measures are being taken to deal with enemy interference of the kind suggested, but I would add that it seems to me inconceivable that members of His Majesty's Forces should ever assume that orders of such a kind were genuine.

    EIRE (INVASION DANGERS).
    Sir Henry Morris-Jonesasked the Prime Minister whether he is satisfied that, in our measures of defence in this country, adequate safeguards have been taken to protect us from an attack on and through our western seaboard by air and submarine via the Dominion of Eire; and whether, in particular, adequately armed detection and prevention personnel is provided for the Isle of Man, Anglesey, Bardsey, Stockholm, Lundy, Caldy and Walney Islands?
    Mr. Attlee: As regards the first part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to a similar Question of his on the 23rd May. As regards the second part, I do not think it would be desirable to enter into details as regards particular localities.

    BANK RATE (CONTROL).
    Mr. Stokesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he now controls the fixing of the Bank Rate?
    The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Kingsley Wood): Under Clause 2 of the recent Emergency Powers Regulations and within the ambit of those Regulations I have power to give directions in this matter.
    Mr. Craven-Ellis: Could the right hon. Gentleman exercise the authority which he states that he now has?
    Sir K. Wood: I could do so, but I am not satisfied that the situation requires it.

    BANK OF ENGLAND (PROFITS).
    Mr. Stokesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is proposed that the profits of the Bank of England should be subject to 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax?
    Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Stokes: Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1918, the Bank of England is empowered to assess its own profits for taxation, and will he put an end to that ridiculous system so that they may be fairly assessed by an independent authority?
    Sir K. Wood: That is another question, and perhaps the hon. Member will put it on the Paper. I thought I had given him a very good reply.
    Mr. Glenvil Hall: Can we assume that the Bank of England will now publish a proper balance-sheet?
    Sir K. Wood: That is another story.

    LIMITATION OF DIVIDENDS BILL (WITHDRAWAL).
    Mr. Hely-Hutchinsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the decision to raise the Excess Profits Tax to 100 per cent., he intends to proceed with the Limitation of Dividends Bill?
    Sir K. Wood: The decision to raise Excess Profits Tax to 100 per cent. all round has materially affected the limitation of dividend proposals. The main

    773
    object of the Bill was by limiting dividends to prevent an increase in the purchasing power in the hands of shareholders and this will now be substantially attained. Moreover, companies which would now be mainly affected if the Bill is passed are those which have shown themselves prudent in the distribution of their dividends. In these circumstances, I have decided not to proceed with the Bill. The prohibition imposed on bonus issues for the period of the war will, however, remain. I should like to emphasise that the objective of the original proposals remains as important as ever, and to the limited extent that it is not attained by the imposition of 100 per cent Excess Profits Tax, I am sure that all public companies concerned will act in accord with the general principles underlying the Bill. The national interest requires reduced consumption by individuals and the greatest measure of support for new Government loans from all.
    Mr. Mander: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that as a result of the decision he has just announced it will be possible for certain companies, in spite of the 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax, to pay increased dividends if they so desire? Will he give the matter further consideration before abandoning what was really an excellent Bill and is still desirable?
    Sir K. Wood: I think my hon. Friend will see that I have anticipated a question of that kind, because the companies he refers to are those which have been prudent in regard to the distribution of their dividends.
    Mr. Stokes: Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer state exactly what will prevent a company from distributing its reserves in additional dividends?
    Sir K. Wood: I think I have already referred to that.
    Mr. Benjamin Smith: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that by dispensing with the 100 per cent. Profits Tax he will create a very sad feeling among workmen who have thrown in their whole lot on the assumption that this tax was to be included?
    Sir K. Wood: I do not think my hon. Friend could have heard my answer.

    EMERGENCY CONVALESCENT HOMES.
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Minister of Health whether, in addition to those voluntarily offered to the Government, he will acquire other large houses or mansions suitable for conversion into convalescent and recreation homes under public control and in which wounded and sick men of the fighting forces, women, children and the aged and civilian male workers could be accommodated?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health (Miss Horsbrugh): This question has already been carefully considered in its various aspects, and I can assure the hon. Member that the Government will be prepared to use to the full the powers which it possesses as the need may arise.
    Mr. Sorensen: Is the hon. Lady satisfied that an adequate number of these houses and mansions are being used for convalescent homes?
    Miss Horsbrugh: I think all the houses of which we have heard are being inspected, but, as the hon. Member will realise, some of them, although they may have been quite suitable and very nice as family residences, are not suitable to become convalescent homes.

    EVACUATED CHILDREN (MEDICAL SERVICES).
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Minister of Health whether he is satisfied that arrangements are adequate for the medical examination of children to be evacuated; whether the examination was fully carried out in the recent evacuation; whether he is making arrangements medically to examine refugees and their children; and whether those refugees can fully utilise the public medical services in the municipal areas in which they are billeted?
    Miss Horsbrugh: Very thorough arrangements for the medical examination of children in the event of further evacuation have been prescribed for all evacuation areas. The evacuation last Sunday from towns on the East Coast which had not hitherto been classed as evacuation areas was carried out at short notice, but so far as time permitted the same arrangements were made there.

    775
    The evacuation on the previous Sunday, referred to in the second part of the Question, was a transfer of London children from reception areas on the East Coast to other reception areas in Wales. This was carried out at still shorter notice, but my right hon. Friend has received reports which show that the authorities in the new reception areas are well satisfied with the condition in which the children arrived. As regards the third and fourth parts of the Question, refugees are medically examined both at the ports where they land and at the receiving centres in Greater London. Directions have been issued to authorities in whose areas refugees are accommodated to bring to the notice of refugees the health services that are there provided.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Sir H. Morris-Jones: On a point of Order. Will the very important statement on the war which the Prime Minister is contemplating making to the House, and which we are all anxious to hear, be made in the traditional way on a Motion for the Adjournment of the House, and will any right hon. Gentleman or hon. Gentleman who cares to say a word be able to do so?
Mr. Speaker: The statement will be made as a Statement, and not on the Adjournment of the House.

NEW MEMBER SWORN.
William Edward Woolley, esquire, for the County of York (West Riding) (Spen Valley Division).
SAINT MARY MAGDALENE HOSPITAL (NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE) BILL [Lords].
Report presented of the Attorney-General on the Bill [pursuant to Standing Order 189];referred to the Committee on the Bill.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to,—
Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Blackburn) Bill, without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise the Gosport Water-
776
works Company to construct additional works; to authorise the transfer to the Company of part of the water undertaking of the Mayor Aldermen and Burgesses of the borough of Southampton; to extend the limits of supply of the Company; to confer upon the Company further capital and borrowing powers; and for other purposes." [Gosport Water Bill [Lords.]
And also a Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable The Monmouthshire and South Wales Employers' Mutual Indemnity Society Limited to make special calls upon its members; to confer upon it preferential rights in certain events and to empower it to make certain agreements with its members; and for other purposes." [The Monmouthshire and South Wales Employers' Mutual Indemnity Society Limited Bill [Lords.]

GOSPORT WATER BILL [Lords].
  THE MONMOUTHSHIRE AND SOUTH WALES EMPLOYERS' MUTUAL INDEMNITY SOCIETY LIMITED BILL [Lords].
  Read the First time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
  PUBLICATIONS AND DEBATES REPORTS.
  Second Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 133.]

WAR SITUATION.
3.40 p.m.
The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): From the moment that the French defences at Sedan and on the Meuse were broken at the end of the second week of May, only a rapid retreat to Amiens and the south could have saved the British and French Armies who had entered Belgium at the appeal of the Belgian King, but this strategic fact was not immediately realised. The French High Command hoped they would be able to close the gap, and the Armies of the north were under their orders. Moreover, a retirement of this kind would have involved almost certainly the destruction of the fine Belgian Army of over 20 divisions and the abandonment of the whole of Belgium. Therefore, when the force and scope of the German penetration were realised and when a new French Generalissimo, General Weygand, assumed command in place of General Gamelin, an effort was made by the French and British Armies in Belgium to keep on holding the right hand of the Belgians and to give their own right hand to a newly created French Army which was to have advanced across the Somme in great strength to grasp it.
However, the German eruption swept like a sharp scythe around the right and rear of the Armies of the north. Eight or nine armoured divisions, each of about 400 armoured vehicles of different kinds, but carefully assorted to be complementary and divisible into small self-contained units, cut off all communications between us and the main French Armies. It severed our own communications for food and ammunition, which ran first to Amiens and afterwards through Abbeville, and it shore its way up the coast to Boulogne and Calais, and almost to Dunkirk. Behind this armoured and mechanised onslaught came a number of German divisions in lorries, and behind them again there plodded comparatively slowly the dull brute mass of the ordinary German Army and German people, always so ready to be led to the trampling down in other lands of liberties and comforts which they have never known in their own.
I have said this armoured scythe-stroke almost reached Dunkirk—almost but not quite. Boulogne and Calais were the scenes of desperate fighting. The Guards
788
defended Boulogne for a while and were then withdrawn by orders from this country. The Rifle Brigade, the 60th Rifles, and the Queen Victoria's Rifles, with a battalion of British tanks and 1,000 Frenchmen, in all about 4,000 strong, defended Calais to the last. The British Brigadier was given an hour to surrender. He spurned the offer, and four days of intense street fighting passed before silence reigned over Calais, which marked the end of a memorable resistance. Only 30 unwounded survivors were brought off by the Navy and we do not know the fate of their comrades. Their sacrifice, however, was not in vain. At least two armoured divisions, which otherwise would have been turned against the British Expeditionary Force, had to be sent for to overcome them. They have added another page to the glories of the Light Division, and the time gained enabled the Graveline waterlines to be flooded and to be held by the French troops.
Thus it was that the port of Dunkirk was kept open. When it was found impossible for the Armies of the north to reopen their communications to Amiens with the main French Armies, only one choice remained. It seemed, indeed, forlorn. The Belgian, British and French Armies were almost surrounded. Their sole line of retreat was to a single port and to its neighbouring beaches. They were pressed on every side by heavy attacks and far outnumbered in the air.
When a week ago to-day I asked the House to fix this afternoon as the occasion for a statement, I feared it would be my hard lot to announce the greatest military disaster in our long history. I thought—and some good judges agreed with me—that perhaps 20,000 or 30,000 men might be re-embarked. But it certainly seemed that the whole of the French First Army and the whole of the British Expeditionary Force north of the Amiens-Abbeville gap, would be broken up in the open field or else would have to capitulate for lack of food and ammunition. These were the hard and heavy tidings for which I called upon the House and the nation to prepare themselves a week ago. The whole root and core and brain of the British Army, on which and around which we were to build, and are to build, the great British Armies in the later years of the war, seemed about to

789
perish upon the field or to be led into an ignominious and starving captivity.
That was the prospect a week ago. But another blow which might well have proved final was yet to fall upon us. The King of the Belgians had called upon us to come to his aid. Had not this Ruler and his Government severed themselves from the Allies, who rescued their country from extinction in the late war, and had they not sought refuge in what has proved to be a fatal neutrality, the French and British Armies might well at the outset have saved not only Belgium but perhaps even Poland. Yet at the last moment, when Belgium was already invaded, King Leopold called upon us to come to his aid, and even at the last moment we came. He and his brave, efficient Army, nearly half a million strong, guarded our eastern flank and thus kept open our only line of retreat to the sea. Suddenly, without prior consultation, with the least possible notice, without the advice of his Ministers and upon his own personal act, he sent a plenipotentiary to the German Command, surrendered his Army and exposed our whole flank and means of retreat.
I asked the House a week ago to suspend its judgment because the facts were not clear, but I do not feel that any reason now exists why we should not form cur own opinions upon this pitiful episode. The surrender of the Belgian Army compelled the British at the shortest notice to cover a flank to the sea more than 30 miles in length. Otherwise all would have been cut off, and all would have shared the fate to which King Leopold had condemned the finest Army his country had ever formed. So in doing this and in exposing this flank, as anyone who followed the operations on the map will see, contact was lost between the British and two out of the three corps forming the First French Army, who were still further from the coast than we were, and it seemed impossible that any large number of Allied troops could reach the coast.
The enemy attacked on all sides with great strength and fierceness, and their main power, the power of their far more numerous air force, was thrown into the battle or else concentrated upon Dunkirk and the beaches. Pressing in upon the narrow exit, both from the east and from the west, the enemy began to fire
790
with cannon upon the beaches by which alone the shipping could approach or depart. They sowed magnetic mines in the channels and seas; they sent repeated waves of hostile aircraft, sometimes more than 100 strong in one formation, to cast their bombs upon the single pier that remained, and upon the sand dunes upon which the troops had their eyes for shelter. Their U-boats, one of which was sunk, and their motor launches took their toll of the vast traffic which now began. For four or five days an intense struggle reigned. All their armoured divisions—or what was left of them—together with great masses of German infantry and artillery, hurled themselves in vain upon the ever-narrowing, ever-contracting appendix within which the British and French Armies fought.
Meanwhile, the Royal Navy, with the willing help of countless merchant seamen, strained every nerve to embark the British and Allied troops. Two hundred and twenty light warships and 650 other vessels were engaged. They had to operate upon the difficult coast, often in adverse weather, under an almost ceaseless hail of bombs and an increasing concentration of artillery fire. Nor were the seas, as I have said, themselves free from mines and torpedoes. It was in conditions such as these that our men carried on, with little or no rest, for days and nights on end, making trip after trip across the dangerous waters, bringing with them always men whom they had rescued. The numbers they have brought back are the measure of their devotion and their courage. The hospital ships, which brought off many thousands of British and French wounded, being so plainly marked were a special target for Nazi bombs; but the men and women on board them never faltered in their duty.
Meanwhile, the Royal Air Force, which had already been intervening in the battle, so far as its range would allow, from home bases, now used part of its main metropolitan fighter strength, and struck at the German bombers, and at the fighters which in large numbers protected them. This struggle was protracted and fierce. Suddenly the scene has cleared, the crash and thunder has for the moment—but only for the moment—died away. A miracle of deliverance, achieved by valour, by perseverance, by perfect discipline, by faultless service, by re-

791
source, by skill, by unconquerable fidelity, is manifest to us all. The enemy was hurled back by the retreating British and French troops. He was so roughly handled that he did not harry their departure seriously. The Royal Air Force engaged the main strength of the German Air Force, and inflicted upon them losses of at least four to one; and the Navy, using nearly 1,000 ships of all kinds, carried over 335,000 men, French and British, out of the jaws of death and shame, to their native land and to the tasks which lie immediately ahead. We must be very careful not to assign to this deliverance the attributes of a victory. Wars are not won by evacuations. But there was a victory inside this deliverance, which should be noted. It was gained by the Air Force. Many of our soldiers coming back have not seen the Air Force at work; they saw only the bombers which escaped its protective attack. They underrate its achievements. I have heard much talk of this; that is why I go out of my way to say this. I will tell you about it.
This was a great trial of strength between the British and German Air Forces. Can you conceive a greater objective for the Germans in the air than to make evacuation from these beaches impossible, and to sink all these ships which were displayed, almost to the extent of thousands? Could there have been an objective of greater military importance and significance for the whole purpose of the war than this? They tried hard, and they were beaten back; they were frustrated in their task. We got the Army away; and they have paid fourfold for any losses which they have inflicted. Very large formations of German aeroplanes—and we know that they are a very brave race—have turned on several occasions from the attack of one-quarter of their number of the Royal Air Force, and have dispersed in different directions. Twelve aeroplanes have been hunted by two. One aeroplane was driven into the water and cast away, by the mere charge of a British aeroplane, which had no more ammunition. All of our types—the Hurricane, the Spitfire and the new Defiant—and all our pilots have been vindicated as superior to what they have at present to face.
When we consider how much greater would be our advantage in defending the
792
air above this island against an overseas attack, I must say that I find in these facts a sure basis upon which practical and reassuring thoughts may rest. I will pay my tribute to these young airmen. The great French Army was very largely, for the time being, cast back and disturbed by the onrush of a few thousands of armoured vehicles. May it not also be that the cause of civilisation itself will be defended by the skill and devotion of a few thousand airmen? There never had been, I suppose, in all the world, in all the history of war, such an opportunity for youth. The Knights of the Round Table, the Crusaders, all fall back into a prosaic past: not only distant but prosaic; but these young men, going forth every morn to guard their native land and all that we stand for, holding in their hands these instruments of colossal and shattering power, of whom it may be said that
"When every morning brought a noble chance,
And every chance brought out a noble knight,"
deserve our gratitude, as do all of the brave men who, in so many ways and on so many occasions, are ready, and continue ready, to give life and all for their native land.
I return to the Army. In the long series of very fierce battles, now on this front, now on that, fighting on three fronts at once, battles fought by two or three divisions against an equal or somewhat larger number of the enemy, and fought fiercely on some of the old grounds that so many of us knew so well, in these battles our losses in men have exceeded 30,000 killed, wounded and missing. I take occasion to express the sympathy of the House to all who have suffered bereavement or who are still anxious. The President of the Board of Trade is not here to-day. His son has been killed, and many in the House have felt the pangs of affliction in the sharpest form. But I will say this about the missing. We have had a large number of wounded come home safely to this country—the greater part—but I would say about the missing that there may be very many reported missing who will come back home, some day, in one way or another. In the confusion of this fight it is inevitable that many have been left in positions where honour required no further resistance from them.

793
Against this loss of over 30,000 men, we can set a far heavier loss certainly inflicted upon the enemy. But our losses in material are enormous. We have perhaps lost one-third of the men we lost in the opening days of the battle of 21st March, 1918, but we have lost nearly as many guns—nearly 1,000 guns—and all our transport, all the armoured vehicles that were with the Army in the North. This loss will impose a further delay on the expansion of our military strength. That expansion had not been proceeding as fast as we had hoped. The best of all we had to give had gone to the British Expeditionary Force, and although they had not the numbers of tanks and some articles of equipment which were desirable, they were a very well and finely equipped Army. They had the first-fruits of all that our industry had to give, and that is gone. And now here is this further delay. How long it will be, how long it will last, depends upon the exertions which we make in this island. An effort the like of which has never been seen in our records is now being made. Work is proceeding everywhere, night and day, Sundays and week-days. Capital and labour have cast aside their interests, rights, and customs and put them into the common stock. Already the flow of munitions has leapt forward. There is no reason why we should not in a few months overtake the sudden and serious loss that has come upon us, without retarding the development of our general programme.
Nevertheless, our thankfulness at the escape of our Army and so many men, whose loved ones have passed through an agonising week, must not blind us to the fact that what has happened in France and Belgium is a colossal military disaster. The French Army has been weakened, the Belgian Army has been lost, a large part of those fortified lines upon which so much faith had been reposed is gone, many valuable mining districts and factories have passed into the enemy's possession, the whole of the Channel ports are in his hands, with all the tragic consequences that follow from that, and we must expect another blow to be struck almost immediately at us or at France. We are told that Herr Hitler has a plan for invading the British Isles. This has often been thought of before. When Napoleon lay at Boulogne for a year with his flat-bottomed boats and his
794
Grand Army, he was told by someone, "There are bitter weeds in England." There are certainly a great many more of them since the British Expeditionary Force returned.
The whole question of home defence against invasion is, of course, powerfully affected by the fact that we have for the time being in this island incomparably more powerful military forces than we have ever had at any moment in this war or the last. But this will not continue. We shall not be content with a defensive war. We have our duty to our Ally. We have to reconstitute and build up the British Expeditionary Force once again, under its gallant Commander-in-Chief, Lord Gort. All this is in train; but in the interval we must put our defences in this island into such a high state of organisation that the fewest possible numbers will be required to give effective security and that the largest possible potential of offensive effort may be realised. On this we are now engaged. It will be very convenient, if it be the desire of the House, to enter upon this subject in a secret Session. Not that the Government would necessarily be able to reveal in very great detail military secrets, but we like to have our discussions free, without the restraint imposed by the fact that they will be read the next day by the enemy, and the Government would benefit by views freely expressed in all parts of the House by Members with their knowledge of so many different parts of the country. I understand that some request is to be made upon this subject, which will be readily acceded to by His Majesty's Government.
We have found it necessary to take measures of increasing stringency, not only against enemy aliens and suspicious characters of other nationalities, but also against British subjects who may become a danger or a nuisance should the war be transported to the United Kingdom. I know there are a great many people affected by the orders which we have made who are the passionate enemies of Nazi Germany. I am very sorry for them, but we cannot, at the present time and under the present stress, draw all the distinctions which we should like to do. If parachute landings were attempted and fierce fighting attendant upon them followed, these unfortunate people would be far better out of the way, for their own sakes as well as for ours. There is, how-

795
ever, another class, for which I feel not the slightest sympathy. Parliament has given us the powers to put down Fifth Column activities with a strong hand, and we shall use those powers, subject to the supervision and correction of the House, without the slightest hesitation until we are satisfied, and more than satisfied, that this malignancy in our midst has been effectively stamped out.
Turning once again, and this time more generally, to the question of invasion, I would observe that there has never been a period in all these long centuries of which we boast when an absolute guarantee against invasion, still less against serious raids, could have been given to our people. In the days of Napoleon, of which I was speaking just now, the same wind which would have carried his transports across the Channel might have driven away the blockading fleet. There was always the chance, and it is that chance which has excited and befooled the imaginations of many Continental tyrants. Many are the tales that are told. We are assured that novel methods will be adopted, and when we see the originality of malice, the ingenuity of aggression, which our enemy displays, we may certainly prepare ourselves for every kind of novel stratagem and every kind of brutal and treacherous manœuvre. I think that no idea is so outlandish that it should not be considered and viewed with a searching, but at the same time, I hope, with a steady eye. We must never forget the solid assurances of sea power and those which belong to air power if it can be locally exercised.
I have, myself, full confidence that if all do their duty, if nothing is neglected, and if the best arrangements are made, as they are being made, we shall prove ourselves once again able to defend our island home, to ride out the storm of war, and to outlive the menace of tyranny, if necessary for years, if necessary alone. At any rate, that is what we are going to try to do. That is the resolve of His Majesty's Government—every man of them. That is the will of Parliament and the nation. The British Empire and the French Republic, linked together in their cause and in their need, will defend to the death their native soil, aiding each other like good comrades to the utmost of
796
their strength. Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the new world, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.
4.14 p.m.
Mr. Lees-Smith:I am glad to think that the Prime Minister, in his call to the nation, has told it of the efforts which it will be called upon to make and of the gravity of the days through which it will pass, and I may say—
Mr. Maxton:On a point of Order. I am somewhat at a loss to understand what is now taking place. I understood, in reply to a question from the hon. Member for Denbigh (Sir H. Morris-Jones), that we were to have a statement from the Prime Minister and finish, and then proceed to the business on the Order Paper. Do I understand now that the right hon. Gentleman is proceeding to open an Adjournment Debate?
Mr. Speaker: I understood that the right hon. Gentleman was desirous of making a remark.
Captain Bellenger:On a point of Order. Will the same indulgence be allowed to private Members of this House to say a few remarks as is permitted to my right hon. Friend? I, as well as others, have something to say.
Mr. Speaker: The same indulgence will be given to every hon. Member of the House, but I do not propose to allow the right hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench any particular indulgence on this occasion.
Sir H. Morris-Jones: Would it not be necessary, to meet the wishes of the House, to move the Adjournment?
Mr. Lees-Smith: May I explain that in accordance with the custom of the House—[Hon. Members: "No."] In previous statements of this character which have been made under these conditions it has been thought fitting that a few appropriate remarks should be made from this Bench.
Mr. Maxton: I grant the right hon. Gentleman the occasion that when a statement was made and no Adjournment Motion was moved right hon. Gentlemen were allowed to make extended speeches on the issue before us. If a second speech is required in support of the Prime Minister from the Government side, I hope that one of the Ministers who has shared responsibility with the Prime Minister will be the man to make that second statement.
Mr. Speaker: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will confine himself to a few remarks and not attempt to make a speech.
Mr. Lees-Smith: On the last occasion last week when the Prime Minister made a statement under these conditions I followed with the general consent of the House, and I assumed that the same conditions would apply to-day.
Sir Joseph Lamb: Will this create a precedent for the future?
Mr. Speaker: It is difficult to know what the hon. Member means by creating a precedent. No precedent is going to be made on this occasion, but I think in the circumstances, and in view of the misunderstanding of the situation, the right hon. Gentleman had better not proceed.
Hon. Members: Hear, hear.
Captain Bellenger: I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, not to stifle views which are prevalent among those Members who have returned from overseas, but to give us the opportunity, not perhaps now, but on an appropriate occasion, to say what we have in our minds. If you are going to stifle debate, there is going to be trouble.
Mr. Speaker: The hon. and gallant Member will appreciate that there is nothing before the House at the moment.
Captain Bellenger: May I ask the Prime Minister a question? He mentioned in his speech this afternoon that an opportunity would be given for a Debate in secret Session. May we take that as an assurance that such a Debate will take place at a very early date? I have no desire to speak at the moment, but if I am given that assurance, it will satisfy me.
The Prime Minister: I understand that it is to be next Tuesday.
Mr. Thorne:On a point of Order. I want to know whether it is not advisable for men in uniform to be at their jobs as well as the people working in factory and workshop?
Captain Bellenger: They have been there.
Mr. Thorne: And so they should.
Captain Bellenger: You should go out.
Mr. Thorne: I would if I were younger.
Captain Bellenger: You have no right to make remarks of that kind.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  POST OFFICE AND TELEGRAPH BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  4.20 p.m.
  The Postmaster-General (Mr. W. S. Morrison): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
  After the account of the great events which has immediately preceded, the subject which I now introduce to the House causes us to descend to a more humdrum plane. In times when great events and days are shaping themselves, in which each one of us is attending to his own particular duty, I have to ask the House to bear with me while, in a very few words, I explain the contents of this Bill and ask the House to give it a Second Reading. The Bill itself is made necessary by Budget proposals which are now before the House in the form of the Finance Bill. It will be remembered that my Noble Friend, when he made these proposals on 23rd April, announced certain increases in postal, telegraph and telephone charges, and these increases are made solely to raise additional revenue for

  799
  the purposes of the war. Speaking generally, many of these proposals which have been announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer have already been put into force because they did not require legislation for their enactment. All the postal increases, for example, with the exception of one, have been effected by Treasury warrant and are now operating, and the only reason for this Bill is that Parliament has in the past fixed certain statutory maximum charges for various forms of Post Office services, and there is no power to increase charges above these maxima without the consent of the House. That, in general, is the purpose of the Bill. As I have said, the bulk of the increased postal charges thus announced are not referred to in the Bill, because under the Post Office Acts it has been possible to effect them by warrant or regulation. The only postal charge for which it is necessary to legislate now is the inland registered newspaper rate.
  Clause 1 of the Bill removes the statutory maximum charge and makes it possible for this postal charge to follow the line of other postal charges and be enacted by warrant, as are the other charges. The fact that there will be these increases in the postal charge for registered newspapers—a charge of 1½for four ounces instead of 1d. for six ounces as at present—renders necessary the following Clause. Clause2 deals with cases where people have made contracts with the publisher of a periodical for the supply of that periodical at an inclusive charge covering the postage. This would necessitate those who sell these periodicals to meet the postal charge, which was not in contemplation by the parties when the contract was made. The Clause gives power for the contracts to be terminated so that the parties may make such fresh arrangements as they may agree on the matter.
  Clauses 3 and 4 deal with the telegraph service proper, and Clause 3 imposes a new maximum for the inland Press telegrams of 1s. 3d. for 60 words instead of 1s. Clause 4 raises the maximum charges for certain special classes of telegrams, that is to say, priority telegrams and greeting telegrams, where previously the maximum was 1s. for 12 words, and in future the charge for priority inland telegrams will be
  800
  1s. 3d. for nine words, and for greeting telegrams 1s. for nine words.
  Clause 5 deals with matters particularly affecting the telephone service. Hon. Members will see that without Clause 5 mention is made only of telegraph services and telegraph contracts and so on, but the word "telegraph" in its legal connotation includes the telephone services, and though certain private telegraph services are affected by Clause 5, the main purpose of the Clause is to deal with the telephone services. At the outset I should distinguish between the telephone exchange service and the private telephone service, because I find, from representations that have been made to me, that a certain amount of confusion exists in regard to this matter. The normal telephone service is the exchange service; that is to say, the line from the subscriber's house terminates in a telephone exchange, where it is possible to link him up with any other subscriber. That is the normal telephone service, but in addition to that there exist private telephone lines where the end is not in an exchange but in another office. Many newspapers in London have such private telephone lines to their offices in the so-called provinces, and there the exchange does not intervene at all. It is that second class where there is no exchange facilities which is the private telephone service proper. I mention that because some hon. Members have assumed that the private telephone service applied to the ordinary private subscriber, but it does not. The Budget charges which were announced were an increase in the charge of 15 per cent. on the exchange service and 25 per cent. on the private telephone service. In the ordinary exchange service the charges fall under two heads. There is the charge for calls, so much per call according to the distance, and the fixed periodical payment, of which rental is the most common and important. The charges for calls do not require legislation. The changes have been effected by regulation under the Telegraph Acts and are in force.
  Clause 5 deals with periodical payments like rentals, and the necessity for the Clause arises in this way. Telephone services are arranged between the Postmaster-General and the public by means of a contract made between them, and where new contracts come to be made they will be based on the new scale of

  801
  charges, but in order to raise the necessary money which has been budgeted for, it is necessary that these increased charges should become exigible from 1st July. The purpose of the Clause is to deal with contracts which are now current and to make it plain that the charge will be exigible on 1st July. That means a unilateral intervention by this House in a contract entered into between two persons—the Postmaster-General and the citizen. Therefore we are enabling those affected by that variation, if they so desire, on proper notice to cancel their contract, so that they may, if they so desire, avoid a burden which they did not contemplate when they entered into the contract previously. Sub-section (8) of Clause 5 gives that power and Subsection (9) is consequential to the extent that if a person were given a month—
  Mr. Graham White:May I ask the right hon. Gentleman why there is a different rate of interest in respect of exchange contract services and private contracts? The right hon. Gentleman said that some representation had reached him, and that may be why on this point, I understand, no objection has been taken to the 25 per cent.
  Mr. Morrison: The best answer that I can give is this: This is, of course, taxation, and in all questions of taxation it is for the Government and the Chancellor of the Exchequer to decide what any particular source of revenue will stand. The view was formed when the Budget was framed that what the private telephone service would stand is 25 per cent. As regards the ordinary exchange service, the appropriate increase for taxation purposes is 15 per cent. I was saying that as these charges are now being included it is proposed by Subsection (8) to give power to a party to determine a contract if he so desires. Sub-section (9) makes it plain that if he does decide to cancel his contract, then, for two months over which the contract can run after 1st July, no extra charge will be exigible. Hon. Members will observe in the Bill, notably in Clause 5, that there is a reference to "any local telegraph authority." These words refer in the main to the Corporation of Hull, who operate their own system within their own boundaries under licence from the Postmaster-General under which terms are arranged between them. By this Bill
  802
  the private citizens of Hull will have a privilege equal to that of fellow citizens in other boroughs in paying more for telephones in order to aid the national finances and to provide the sinews of war. The Bill gives Hull, in regard to subscribers, the same right as the Postmaster-General has in regard to the public. Clause6 deals with the Title and construction of the Measure. That is an outline of the Bill, and it only remains for me to say that the Post Office, besides rendering great service to the public, vital in time of peace and still more vital in time of war, is also a great revenue Department. It is purely in its latter capacity that I now move that the Bill be now read a Second time.
  4.36 p.m.
  Mr. Ammon: The House might feel that to a large extent discussion of this Bill is something of an anti-climax after what we have just witnessed in the House However, I will take the opportunity of welcoming the Postmaster-General on his first appearance in Debate since he took office. To some extent he calls for the commiseration of the House, because he has had the most extraordinary ill luck. He has been from Department to Department, and each time he arrived something went wrong with it. He has been put into the position of having to clear it up and has even had to carry responsibility and blame for something which happened previous to his arrival. He has now come into this office at a time when we are celebrating the centenary of the penny post which no longer obtains. It is a pity, of course, that the actual increase of postage is not in this Bill, because that would have been about the only thing on which we could have obtained a grip. It is a long way from the four ounces for a penny letter-post, which was granted in the Jubilee of 1891, to the proposals which have been introduced in the Finance Bill.
  There are two main points in this Bill; one the increase in newspaper postage, and the other alterations with regard to the telegraph services. In 1870 the introduction of the halfpenny newspaper rate was brought in, and now, 70 years after, we are going back. It is curious to reflect that, so far as London is concerned, we are now very much worse off from the point of postal delivery, organisation and cost than we were in the seventeenth cen-

  803
  tury. This has been done in order that the revenue may gain. It will probably gain from more than one angle, because the further impost on ordinary printed matter has the effect of indirectly increasing the revenue. It costs as much to handle halfpenny services as it does to handle the penny service. The only criticism one can make is that the tax on newspapers is, perhaps, a tax on information and commercial channels, but while we could have argued this a little while ago, it is now entirely another matter. Although we cannot oppose it, we may look at it with regret and reckon that one of the disadvantages that war brings to a nation is that it throws us back in respect of communications. However, we have not been bombarded by various interests, and there has been no outcry in the Press, which seems to suggest that the tax on commercial telegrams has been accepted with proper public spirit. It is curious to note that in 1868 the Press was allowed to send 100 words a shilling by night and 75 words by day, so that we have gone back, in that respect, two steps. In 1920 the rates were increased by 25 per cent.
  Turning from that to the telegraph services, the Postmaster-General answered the question put to him, which was, I think, the only point which might have been made, namely, the peculiar anomaly which exists in the City of Hull, which is independent owing to the accident of time and the fact that it did not come within the ambit of the Post Office proper when the arrangements were made for taking over the telegraph and telephone services. I would like to ask a question in connection with the increased charges for the telegraph system. Does the Postmaster-General intend to wipe out by Regulation or this Bill the 50 calls allowed to private subscribers before any extra charge begins to count?
  Mr. W. S. Morrison: The answer is, "No."
  Mr. Ammon: I am glad to obtain that answer, because it does give an indication that things are not quite so bad as they seem from a first look at the Bill. With regard to the difference in exchange services, is it not so that they do recover a bit of their tax by the difference made in the charges?
  Mr. Morrison: The 15 per cent. is the surcharge on the exchange services and the 25 per cent. is on private wires, both for rentals and calls.
  Mr. Ammon: So that the private wire to a certain extent suffers in two ways by the 25 per cent. and by having to pay the extra amount. Newspapers too have private wires.
  Mr. Morrison: Perhaps I had better not interrupt the hon. Gentleman too much, because my hon. and gallant Friend will deal with these points later. The actual position is, however, that Press telegrams are sent over the Post Office system. The Exchange Telegraph Company, for instance, and companies of that sort, have private telegraph and telephone wires which they hire from us. They pay only for the wire and not for its use. They can use them much or little, as they desire.
  Mr. Ammon: Many newspapers use private wires, so that from that point of view the tax is not so bad as it seems at first sight. Greetings telegrams, I see, are to be charged a little extra. One cannot oppose a Bill like this on such an occasion. From the brief examination which one is able to give it, the imposts do not seem quite so bad as when looked at for the first time. One can now understand why the Press have not been active in their protests against this proposed increase. So far as the larger newspapers are concerned, they, to some extent, will escape, but their correspondents will have to bear the increased cost of increased telegrams. Naturally, we shall not do anything to impede the passage of this Bill, and I take this opportunity of congratulating the right hon. Gentleman, who is having a smoother passage with this Measure than has been his lot on many occasions in the past.
  4.43 p.m.
  Sir John Mellor: I want to ask the Postmaster-General a question, and it is with regard to the subscriber's right to cancel his contract with the Government when the Government propose to vary that contract unilaterally. I recognise that it is bare justice that subscribers should be allowed the option to cancel, but have the Government entirely counted the cost to the Revenue? There will be a number of subscribers, at the present time, especially those evacuated from their homes and those hard hit in

  805
  business, who will welcome this opportunity as a convenient one to escape their obligations. Many would have to pay rentals for a substantial period of years, perhaps on a five or seven year contract. I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that in view of evacuation particularly many people who have left their houses empty are still paying to the Government and would have been liable to pay several more years' rental. I think it may be a rather expensive thing for the Revenue if, in order to add generally 15 per cent. to rentals throughout the country a large number of people should be able to escape altogether from paying rentals which they would otherwise have had to pay to the Government for the next several years. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will consider this point.
  4.45 p.m.
  Mr. Lewis: Five years ago a request was made to this House to provide a lot of further money for the development of the telegraph service. It was pointed out how unsatisfactory it was that the service should be carried on at a loss year after year. It was then stated that one of the principal contributory causes of that loss was the loss made on Press telegrams. I observe in the Bill that power is being taken to increase the charge for Press telegrams. For my part, I am pleased to see that. I wish the increase had been higher. After all, every industry in the country has to bear a great burden of taxation and thereby contributes to the Exchequer of the country and its general well-being. Here we have a sheltered industry which, so far from making a contribution to the revenue, is a burden year after year. It seems to me that attention should be drawn to this; anything that can be done to remedy it is most desirable.
  With regard to Press telegrams in particular, the Press lords can very well afford to pay for the public service provided for them. I see no reason why they should be subsidised by being allowed to send telegrams at rates which constitute a loss to the telegraph service of the country. Moreover, I suggest that not only can they afford to pay for the service which is given to them, but that in point of fact they do not make so good a use of the service that we need worry very much about it? If we consider the
  806
  information given in the popular Press, much of which has been telegraphed at the expense of the Exchequer, I think we may reflect that we could do without a good deal of it. As this subject has been raised by the Bill, I shall be glad if someone on behalf of the Government will give us a little information on this matter. It would be interesting to know whether any effort has been made by the Post Office to find out what the effect would be if such a charge was made for Press telegrams as would reasonably cover the cost of the service provided. No doubt that would result in some diminution in the amount of Press telegrams, but it would be interesting to know whether the subject has been investigated by the Post Office and what conclusions they have reached.
  I know that this is a rather thorny subject for the Postmaster-General. I have always thought that one reason why it has never been tackled is because very often we have had a young Minister, an Under-Secretary with a bright future before him, made Postmaster-General, and it is rather too much to ask him to do something which would be unpopular to the Press, which is so very powerful in the country. We are fortunate now in having a more seasoned Minister in charge of the Post Office. Whatever failings we may have attributed to the right hon. Gentleman we are bound to admit that he is not lacking in courage, and I hope he will take the opportunity, if he cannot do it within the scope of the Bill, to investigate the questions, first, why this great service, which should easily be made to earn large sums in revenue for the benefit of the country, should be carried on at a loss; and, secondly, whether that part of the loss which is attributed to the subsidy which in effect is given to the newspaper proprietors to-day, could not easily be cut out without any reasonable person in this country losing anything of value.
  Mr. Ammon: May I ask whether the City of Hull have a right to refuse this payment, or whether there is any power in the Bill to compel them?
  4.51 p.m.
  The Assistant Postmaster-General (Captain Waterhouse): Let me reply to the question of the hon. Member for North Camberwell (Mr. Ammon) at once.

  807
  The City of Hull are bound to pay to the Postmaster-General the 15 per cent. The hon. Member for Tamworth (Sir J. Mellor), of course, appreciates that there are comparatively few of the cases of the kind he mentioned, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer had to take into consideration the possibility that some at any rate might throw in their hands and give up their contracts. The maximum loss at the worst is about £90,000, which is a small item compared with the total revenue. The hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Lewis) raised the question of Press telegrams. He rather made a large mountain out of a very small molehill. The actual loss on Press telegrams is about £64,000, but I must even qualify that statement by saying that a proportion of overheads are included, and the actual out-of-pocket loss on Press telegrams is not really sufficient to warrant an inquiry at such times as these. The Postmaster-General, however, has authorised me to say that my hon. Friend's remarks will be noted.
  Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a Second time.
  Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Sir J. Edmondson.]

  SUPERANNUATION SCHEMES (WAR SERVICE) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  4.53 p.m.
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Assheton): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
  As the House is aware, one of the principal aims of the Ministry of Labour at the present time is to secure the best use of skilled labour. To get this it is obviously necessary for skilled workers to leave the employment in which they find themselves in order to go into factories engaged in the production of war munitions. It has been found that in certain cases the fact that a man is covered by a superannuation scheme in his present job is an obstacle to his leaving it and going where he is most wanted, as it means a loss to him of certain benefits upon which he had been very
  808
  properly counting. The purpose of this Bill is twofold. It is designed, in the first place, to enable trustees and others concerned with administering superannuation schemes to prevent loss of rights under a scheme which might otherwise result from employés going into the Armed Forces or into civil employment for war purposes. Secondly, it is to enable the payment of contributions to be continued on behalf of persons after they have left the employment to which the schemes relate.
  I would remind the House that the rights of persons affected by the Military Training Act, 1939, and the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces Act, 1939, were protected by provisions of this nature made by Orders-in-Council under those two Acts. There was power also under the Armed Forces Act, 1939, to protect men called up for service by similar Orders-in-Council, but this power did not extend to men who volunteered for service nor to men transferring to war employment. It is necessary, therefore, to ask the House to pass this Bill in order to cover such cases. I do not think I need stress the desirability of a Measure to maintain the rights of men serving in the Forces, and I need hardly add that many concerns have been most anxious to do this for their employés, but in some cases have not legally been in a position to do so.
  As far as civil employment goes, unless power is given to trustees and others concerned, any men or women covered by a superannuation scheme who transfer to war employment would suffer loss which it would be hard for them to bear. We have already made provision in the Local Government (War Service) Superannuation Act, 1939, and in other Acts, to protect the rights of local government staffs, teachers, constables, firemen and civil servants, and the Ministry of Health is co-operating with the Ministry of Labour in taking the most active steps it can to encourage members of local government staffs who can be released for war work. In view of the urgent need for every skilled man and woman to find his or her way into vital war industries, it is clear that no measure should be neglected which will help to achieve this object. There are many private firms as well as a number of public and semi-public bodies whose staffs are covered by superannuation schemes and who should be encouraged, when they can be spared, to transfer to war work. Such schemes are

  809
  of very diverse kinds, and about 1,500,000 employés are covered by them. Some are operated by individual employers or groups of employers through insurance companies. A few workers are covered by independent group schemes, but the vast majority are covered by schemes operated by individual employers themselves.
  The House will observe that this is an enabling Bill. It enables trustees, employers or insurance companies to take advantage of its provisions. It has been discussed by the National Joint Advisory Council, which represents the organisation of employers and the trade unions. As the employers' organisations have welcomed the Bill, and in view of their attitude and of certain undertakings given on behalf of life insurance companies, for which I should like to express my appreciation, the Government are asking the House to pass the Bill in the confident expectation that full use will be made of it and that employers who can spare workpeople covered by their superannuation schemes for work of a more urgent national importance, will do so to the greatest extent possible and will put no obstacle in the way of such transfers. It is in this confidence that the Bill is made permissive instead of imposing obligations which would not be easy to define owing to the very wide variation in the nature and terms of superannuation schemes. If, however, the Bill does not achieve the object desired, I want to make it clear that the Government will not hesitate to come to the House for further legislation in this matter.
  Hon. Members will notice that the Bill covers all service in the Armed Forces whether or not a man has entered the Armed Forces as a volunteer or has been compulsorily called up. It will be for the Minister of Labour and National Service to determine what employment should be recognised as employment for war purposes, but I think I should tell the House that it is the intention of the Minister to recognise employment in all industries essential to the war effort, including such occupations as agriculture and coal mining, as well as those industries directly connected with the production of arms. It will also be possible for the Minister to give the necessary certificate in the case of men who undertake training to fit them for the war employment they propose to take up.
  810
  The proposals contained in the Bill have been discussed with representatives of the life insurance companies which are concerned in this matter. As the House is aware, many private firms make provision for superannuation by taking out group policies on the lives of their employés and in order that the rights under such schemes may be preserved, it was necessary to obtain an undertaking from the insurance companies as to the way in which they will deal with policies affecting any employés in respect of whom arrangements are made under the provisions of this Bill. The policies taken out with the companies often provide not only pension benefits but also life assurance benefits. With regard to pension benefits, the companies have given the Government to understand that they will continue to accept payment of contributions in respect of men serving in the Armed Forces or transferred to war employment. Where payment of contributions is continued the insurance companies will allow the employé concerned to continue in any scheme without loss of pension rights. If pension contributions are not continued after the date of the transfer to the Armed Forces or to employment for war purposes, the benefits secured by the contributions to the date of cessation of payment will be protected and contributions may be resumed at the end of the war upon the return of the employé and his re-entry into the scheme.
  With regard to the second class of benefits, life insurance benefits, and, in certain cases, total disablement benefits, the group premiums cover only the risks allowed for in the original employment and make no allowance for increased hazards such as military or certain other war-time services. Therefore, the insurance companies have intimated that they cannot continue to pay life assurance benefits under the group policies in respect of employés transferred from their original employment in cases where the employé is transferred to service in the Armed Forces or to war employment where there is a material increase in the hazard. In most cases, however, under the existing schemes an employé,on the termination of assurance under the scheme, is entitled, when he is under 60 years of age, to effect an individual policy for the amount for which he has hitherto been covered in the group scheme at the rate for his attained age, and this he can

  811
  do without any evidence of health. If in a group assurance, as was the case in many policies taken out before 1937, there was no restriction as to war risks, the individual policy would be issued free from war restrictions or the imposition of any special war extra premium. The insurance offices have, however, agreed that where employés are transferred to war employment where there is no material increase in hazard they will continue to hold the employé covered both for life assurance as well as for pension if both contributions are maintained, provided that there is no selective discrimination by the employer in the choice of the men for whom he will continue to contribute. In the case of men serving with the Armed Forces, provision has already been made by the Government for death and disability, and as a general rule, of course, this provision is much in excess of the cover usually provided under group life assurance. In view of the urgent need of the transfer of workers to the production of armaments, I ask the House to give this Bill a Second Reading this afternoon, and I hope very much that it will be possible for it to be passed into law with all convenient speed.
  5.7 p.m.
  Mr. Rhys Davies:On behalf of my hon. Friends and myself, we welcome this Bill. I should have been a little happier if the Minister had not stopped short when he spoke about what transpired in the negotiations between his Department, the assurance companies and the trade unions. He told us that the insurance companies had agreed to certain propositions, but I do not think he made clear what was the attitude of the trade unions; and before this Debate is closed, perhaps he will be good enough to tell us exactly what is their attitude. This Bill is necessary for the reasons which the Parliamentary Secretary has very well stated. The number of superannuation schemes in this country has grown enormously during our life-time, and it would be a thousand pities if men who, together with their employers, have paid contributions towards these schemes for years, were deprived of the benefit of them because they may have left their employment temporarily, either to go into the Armed Forces or some other occupation.
  812
  For my part, I wish this Bill was not merely an enabling Bill; I think it ought to be made compulsory. Hon. Members and the Government will understand that during the earlier period of any war, the enthusiasm for men who join the Forces is very much greater than it is later on. I remember in the last war that at the beginning of hostilities employers made up the whole of the wages of their staffs when they joined the Army, but they did not continue the practice until the war ended. They made payment in respect of some of their employés who joined up first, but when the war had gone on for two or three years they paid nothing in respect of those who joined the Forces later. I imagine that a similar attitude may be adopted in connection with payments to superannuation schemes. Incidentally, I am myself within a small superannuation scheme, and I have been wondering what would happen to me if I were conscripted into the Forces and my superannuation payments suffered.
  I should like to put two or three points to the Parliamentary Secretary, and I hope he will look into them. I am never happy when a Minister of the Crown talks about discussions with insurance companies. We have discussed this sort of problem before. The impression given is that this Bill is, in a large measure, if not entirely, the Bill which the insurance companies want Parliament to pass. The Parliamentary Secretary shakes his head. I wish he had sufficient grounds for shaking his head. I know the insurance companies probably as well as most hon. Members do; I have a fair idea of what they can do and what they will not do. This Bill is an enabling Bill, and the Parliamentary Secretary has told us that should it be found later on that this permissive Measure is not working properly, the Government will bring in compulsion. I ask the hon. Gentleman to bear in mind the tragedy that would occur if a man left his ordinary occupation to enter another, and died or was killed when following that new employment. Is the hon. Gentleman absolutely satisfied that under this Bill the committees which administer some of these schemes would make a payment to the widow and the dependants—because that is allowed under some of the schemes, if not most of them—if the man died before he arrived at the superannuation age?

  813
  I will give an example. In most superannuation schemes the contributions are paid by the employer and the employed at about an equal rate. If a man dies before the age at which he is to be superannuated, generally speaking the contributions which he has paid, plus interest on them, are handed over to the widow. In other cases the contributions of both the employer and employed, plus the accrued interest, are all handed over to the widow. Those are the principles on which these schemes work. This, however, is what concerns me about this Bill, and it is a matter which is very much more important than appears on the surface. Suppose a man works in an occupation where the staff is covered by a superannuation scheme, and he goes into an occupation where there is no such scheme. That would probably be quite a common thing. For instance, in the co-operative movement, with which I am connected, nearly all the employés are covered by superannuation schemes. Suppose that such an employé became a coal miner, say, in South Wales, and there is no superannuation in that coal industry. Or supposing a shop assistant or a bank clerk were transferred to an occupation connected with the production of munitions. In his original employment there might be a superannuation scheme, but in the new employment there is none. Frankly, I know of no means whereby a man in such a new occupation where there is no scheme compelling a deduction from his wages would voluntarily pay his contribution to the old scheme covering his former employment. Therefore, unless there is compulsion, it seems that a great deal of hardship will ensue later on to that type of person.
  I was a little surprised when the Parliamentary Secretary talked about the insurance companies. I can almost predict now that in everything the insurance companies have done in connection with this Bill, about group schemes, annuities and contributions, they will have worked out the figures to decimal points and to the smallest fraction, and in the end their balance sheets and profit and loss accounts will not be affected adversely in the least by what they give away in this Bill. Having said that, and being usually a little critical of insurance companies, let me say that we welcome the principles of this Measure. We want it to
  814
  pass into law. I think nevertheless it ought to be made compulsory, because otherwise I can foresee all manner of difficulties arising in connection with the administration of these schemes. We shall watch with interest how these provisions operate in practice, and if complaints reach us from people who find that they are likely to lose their rights under superannuation schemes as a result of transference to other occupations, I hope the hon. Gentleman, even though he is a Minister in a Coalition Government, will not be offended when we call his attention to those facts. I hope, too, that if it is found necessary, he will then take steps to make these provisions compulsory.
  5.16 p.m.
  Sir Geoffrey Ellis: I am glad that the Government have, for the present at any rate, made this only an enabling Measure. I think the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies) does not appreciate some of the difficulties which are involved in these schemes. Roughly speaking, there are two kinds of schemes. There are the schemes in which employers and employed work together, with hard-and-fast rules which cannot be varied. There is the other type of scheme in which the payments connected with the scheme go to an insurance company.
  Mr. Rhys Davies: Does the hon. Gentleman suggest that under any scheme, anywhere, there are rules which cannot be altered?
  Sir G. Ellis: Of course I do not. I have no doubt that a Government of which the hon. Gentleman was a member, would probably alter the rules, whatever anybody might say. I am merely pointing out the distinction between the two kinds of scheme which now operate. The point is that when you are dealing with an insurance company you must, as far as possible, keep the contract which you have made. A contract has been made on a certain basis, and it has to be kept. We cannot complain if the insurance company says, "This risk which it is now thought desirable to include was not part of our original bargain, and if it is to be brought in, it must bear a certain monetary relation to the whole position." That is only fair. I am glad, therefore, that this Bill is permissive, because there are many schemes in existence which have

  815
  nothing to do with insurance companies. Since the war started the rules of those schemes have been altered so as to do just what this Bill provides for doing. If the Government should think it necessary, in future, to bring in a Bill to make the plan of this Measure compulsory, I hope they will put in a Clause allowing for exceptions under certain conditions so as to allow schemes which are already fulfilling all the requirements of this Bill, to be treated as exceptions subject to all proper conditions being observed. In effect, I hope they will allow "contracting out" of any compulsory Measure, if such should be introduced later. If there is in existence a hard-and-fast set of rules and if they are being carried out, you should allow that to continue, but where the conditions are not being justly met then, I think, there might be ground for applying compulsion. I suggest, however, that my hon. Friend, before bringing forward a general proposal, ought to produce some individual instances by which his general suspicions might be crystallised into real evidence and let us deal with the matter on the basis of that evidence as far as it goes. I do not think it is just to make general accusations about insurance companies when, on the whole, they are at present helping all they can.
  Mr. Rhys Davies: Has the hon. Gentleman read the Cohen Committee's report on industrial insurance?
  Sir G. Ellis: I have read the report, but it is not germane to this question and does not really affect this situation. But I do suggest that if my hon. Friend has anything real to produce in the way of evidence, he should specify it and not treat this as a general question in the way he has done.
  5.20 p.m.
  Mr. Mander: This Bill is obviously necessary to fill certain gaps in previous legislation and to cover the cases of certain men who have joined the Colours or who are accepting civilian employment at war work. I presume that the scope of this proposal includes service in A.R.P. work, A.F.S. work, and other work of that kind. I am particularly interested in the type of insurance scheme, of which there are many in this country, in which an individual firm has its own joint scheme,
  816
  contributed to by employer and employed. I think a certain measure of compulsion ought to be brought in wherever it is proved necessary. In a great many cases—I hope in all—it is practicable now for an employer to pay not only his own contribution but those of the employés, and this is being done. I think it is the desire of the Government that that should continue under the provisions of this Bill.
  The workers attach enormous importance to these schemes. I have noticed it during discussions in works councils connected with businesses with which I am associated. They are more anxious to ensure something for the years of their retirement than about almost anything else. If under war conditions the admirable schemes which now exist were spoiled or their value diminished in respect of persons who are giving their services to the State, it would be a great pity. I know that the Government desire to avoid that eventuality. Perhaps the Minister will tell us, when he replies, how far the Government themselves are acting in accordance with the provisions of this Measure. Are they keeping alive the insurances of persons in their own employment and setting an example to the rest of the country? If the Minister can give us any information about the practice in that respect, I am sure it will be appreciated by hon. Members and by the country as a whole. I do not know whether any difficulty is likely to arise as regards the question of period. I take it that the Bill is to operate until the war ends. It is easy to see how it would work in relation to the Forces, but as regards civilian employment, there are possibilities of difficulty. A man might stop work some time before the war ended, or might be required to carry on his work for a certain period after the war ended. I presume that in all such cases the rights of the men concerned will be preserved.
  5.23 p.m.
  Mr. Watkins: I intervene to seek elucidation of one point only, but before dealing with it, I would like to say that this is a very wise Measure. At a time of great stress like the present, it is tremendously important that all who give their services where those services are most required, should have their superannuation rights preserved. A man may easily be trans-

  817
  ferred, in present circumstances, from an employment in which there is a superannuation scheme to another employment which is more urgent at the moment, but which is without a superannuation scheme. It is unfair to ask the man to sacrifice his rights and it is right that he should be able to carry on his superannuation benefits, even though he undertakes a new employment. This Bill may help to give the Ministry powers which they require in order to fit men in where their services will be most valuable.
  The point which I wish explained is how railway superannuation funds will be affected. In the Schedule there is a list of persons to whom this Measure will not apply. They are mostly people in the Civil Service and the local government service, and they are all members of statutory superannuation schemes. The railway clerical, supervisory and technical employés also belong to statutory superannuation schemes, but they are not mentioned specifically in this Bill. I realise, as I am sure the Minister realises, that it is unlikely that servants of railway companies, in clerical, supervisory and administrative capacities, would be transferred in any large number to other industries. The railway companies are carrying on their undertakings with the very minimum of staff. When we consider the strain which has been imposed on the Southern Railway in bringing the men of the B.E.F. back from the South-East Coast during the last few days, and performing that task so successfully, it is obvious that no great deduction can be made from the staffs of the railway companies. I would like the Minister to say whether this Bill will affect the statutory railway superannuation funds, and, if so, in what way.
  5.26 p.m.
  Sir Robert Tasker: I wish to ask the Minister, first, whether this Measure has been made an enabling Bill because of the complications which would arise if it were made compulsory? I can foresee the possibility of many complications. The next question which I would ask the Minister to resolve is this: Is there any provision in the Bill to enable those who have contributed to schemes for many years and who fall into arrears, to pay up those arrears afterwards, so that their position may be restored? Suppose that a man has been paying so
  818
  much a year into a superannuation scheme. Owing to the war he is unable to continue payment. At the end of the war, will he be able to say, "I will pay now the premiums which I should have paid during the war years, and you will restore me to the position which I should have been in, if I had not been on active service or engaged in war work as the case may be"? The third question to which I would like an answer is this: Will this apply to all persons engaged in war work except those mentioned in the Schedule, and in cases where there is any doubt, will the matter be left to the determination of the Minister of Labour?
  5.28 p.m.
  Mr. Assheton: I can speak again only by leave of the House. [Hon. Members: "Agreed."] There are one or two points which have been raised and with which I desire to deal as far as I can. The hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies), who, with other hon. Members, welcomed the Bill, asked about the attitude of the trade unions. I may tell him, although he may know it already, that the trade unions welcomed the Bill, but they too desired that it should be compulsory rather than permissive. There is, of course, a number of difficulties in the way of making it compulsory. Some of these were referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Ecclesall (Sir G. Ellis). I have given the House an assurance that the Government will be prepared to propose further legislation if this Bill fails to fulfil the desires of the Government, after a reasonable period has elapsed in which we can see how it works. There was another point raised by the hon. Member for Westhoughton. He was somewhat critical of the insurance companies. I think it right to say in this particular case that insurance companies have made some very reasonable concessions, and only just before the House met this afternoon, one of the points which created some difficulty was decided, and in that particular case the insurance companies fell in entirely with the wishes of the Government.
  The hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) also asked one or two questions. He asked in the first place what the Government did for their own employés. I understand that the position is that the Government do not contribute in these schemes, but the period of service of men who are away

  819
  with the Forces is, of course, counted in their favour in determining their pension rights.
  Mr. Mander: Is that the case if they go away on civil work?
  Mr. Assheton: I should like to make some inquiry upon that point, and I will let the hon. Member know. The hon. Member for East Wolverhampton also asked about A.R.P. workers, and other workers doing that sort of work. The answer is that, as far as concerns paid workers, they will, of course, be amongst those people whom the Minister of Labour and National Service would certify as being employed for war purposes. It is entirely left in his discretion, as the House will observe at the bottom of page 2 of the Bill, whom he certifies as being employed for war purposes, and certainly he will exercise his discretion in the direction suggested by my hon. Friend. The hon. Member for Central Hockney (Mr. Watkins) asked about the railway companies. They are not among those exempted under the Schedule, and, therefore, they are covered by the Bill itself and are able to take advantage of its provisions. I do not think there are any other points, but if there are, perhaps we shall have an opportunity of dealing with them on the Committee stage.
  Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a Second time.
  Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Mr. Whiteley.]

  NATIONAL SERVICE (CHANNEL ISLANDS) BILL [Lords].
  Order for Second Reading read.
  5.35 p.m.
  The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peake): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
  This Bill is short, and it is good. It comes to us from another place, and I can explain its provisions to the House in three or four sentences. As its Title describes it, it is to provide for the enlistment of men called up in the Channel
  820
  Islands for service in the Armed Forces of the Crown. While the people of the Channel Islands have always been liable to compulsory service in defence of the islands, they are traditionally exempt from compulsory service overseas, except for the particular purpose of rescuing their Sovereign. This immunity is of very long standing, dating back to the early thirteenth century, but it was confirmed by a charter of Queen Elizabeth as recently as the year 1562. To-day the islanders are willing and anxious to play their part to the full in our war efforts, and they have expressed the desire to waive their traditional privileges. In fact, the States of Jersey and Guernsey have already passed, or are in the process of passing, legislation to that end. Constitutionally, however, such domestic legislation undertaken by the Channel Island authorities can have no extra territorial validity, and an Act of the Imperial Parliament is, therefore, required in order to confirm and regularise the position.
  5.36 p.m.
  Mr. Mander: As probably one of the few Members of this House who can claim Channel Island descent, I should like in a very few words to support cordially this Measure and to say how delighted one is to see every part of the Empire doing everything they possibly can at this time. It is, of course, perfectly right that the Channel Islands should be treated with every possible consideration. They attach great importance to their ancient historic rights, and joint legislation is clearly necessary in this case. When William the First came over and conquered England in 1066 he was as Duke of Normandy supported by the Channel Islanders who were then under his sovereignty. So, in some sense, they have always claimed to have participated in the conquest of England. But to whom it may concern throughout the world I should like to add that it is the last occasion on which England will be conquered.
  Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a Second time.
  Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Mr. Whiteley.]

  EVIDENCE AND POWERS OF ATTORNEY BILL [Lords].
  Order for Second Reading read.
  The Attorney-General (Sir Donald Somervell): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
  I rise to move the Second Reading of this Bill, dealing with three or four different matters, which I shall try to explain, very briefly, on going through the Clauses. The procedure in ordinary peace-time for enabling British subjects, or other persons, who have business here to swear affidavits abroad which would be accepted in this country is quite inadequate in war-time when there are so many of our fellow citizens serving overseas. It is, therefore, thought right that special procedure should be introduced to enable such documents to be taken before officers of the various units with which these men may be serving. Clause 1, Sub-section (1) provides that:
  "The Lord Chancellor may by order provide for empowering officers of His Majesty's naval, military and air forces, holding such ranks or appointments as may be specified in the order, to administer oaths and take affidavits during any war in which His Majesty is engaged for all or any purposes for which an oath may be administered or affidavit taken by a commissioner for oaths appointed under Section one of the Commissioners for Oaths Act, 1889."
  There are many occasions on which someone serving abroad may require to do that—one obvious example is where a man is concerned in winding up an estate. Sub-section (2) of the same Clause deals with those who might be in enemy territory, or territory which might be occupied by the enemy, and enables the Secretary of State to provide for empowering persons serving in the Diplomatic, Consular or other foreign service of a Power which by arrangement with His Majesty have undertaken to represent him in those countries, to administer oaths or take affidavits.
  Clause 2 deals with quite a different matter. The Censorship Department realised that cases might arise in which intercepted communications might be material evidence in criminal cases—for example, cases under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Under the ordinary procedure officials of that Department would have had to attend the trial—probably the commital proceedings and the trial—
  822
  to give what would be purely formal evidence that these were the documents which had been intercepted by the Censorship Department. They asked, therefore, whether their officials could be exempt from that duty, both on the grounds of saving time, and also that there might be cases where, at the time of a trial, the official who was involved had subsequently been sent overseas. Anything which affects the law of evidence, particularly in criminal matters, is one which requires very careful consideration, and my Noble Friend asked a small Committee, consisting of Mr. Justice Humphreys, Sir Gerald Dodson and other lawyers familiar with criminal work, to look into this matter, and to see whether they thought these demands could be met without any danger or injustice. The result is that Clause 2 provides that a certificate by a competent officer that, either a particular identified document has been intercepted, or a photograph of the document which has been intercepted, shall be admissible as evidence in the ordinary courts. That does not mean it is conclusive if the defence has grounds for showing that it is not what it purports to be. It merely means it is admissible as evidence, and, as a result, formal evidence by officers of the Department will be dispensed with.
  Clause 3 deals with powers of attorney. The fact that so many men are outside this country serving overseas will mean that a great many more powers of attorney have to be executed by those abroad than was the case in ordinary times. There are many acts for which a power of attorney are necessary, and the main purpose in Clause 3 is to provide certain safeguards. Obviously, it does open certain temptations to certain people to fabricate powers for those who have gone abroad and cannot look after their own affairs, and to seek dishonestly to claim advantage by fraudulent use of those powers. These matters, together with the matters in Clause 1, were looked into by a Committee presided over by Lord Maugham—that there should be extra safeguards to prevent fraudulent action of that kind. This Clause provides that there shall be a file of an affidavit by a solicitor who drew up the powers. I think that these are reasonable safeguards, and that it is also true to say that the ordinary law with regard to powers of attorney does not provide any particular

  823
  safeguard—at any rate it is regarded by some people as somewhat lax in that respect. Dealing therefore with the situation we have at present, with many people overseas who cannot look after their own affairs, it is reasonable that we should have special safeguards.
  Sub-section (3) is designed to protect third parties. I may want a somewhat different provision in Committee, and therefore I just make that passing reference for the time being. Clause 4 deals with a technical defect in the law. Under the present law, office copies of these documents filed in this country or in Northern Ireland are accepted at courts in this country or in Northern Ireland but not in Scotland. As the object of this Bill is that these documents can be filed in any of the three countries, the Clause puts the law on a uniform basis and enables office copies or the equivalent to be accepted in the courts of all the three countries wherever the original may have been filed.
  Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a Second time.
  Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Mr. Whiteley.]

  PRIVILEGES.
  Ordered,
  "That Mr. Amery, Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Greenwood and Sir Archibald Sinclair be discharged from the Committee of Privileges, and that Mr. Clynes, Colonel Sir George Court hope, Sir Percy Harris, Sir Hugh O'Neill and Earl Winterton be added to the Committee.—[Mr. Whiteley.]

  KITCHEN AND REFRESHMENT ROOMS (HOUSE OF COMMONS).
  Ordered,
  "That Miss Wilkinson be discharged from the Select Committee on Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms (House of Commons) and that Mrs. Hardie be added to the Committee."—[Mr. Whiteley.]
  The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

  ADJOURNMENT.
  Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Whiteley.]
  Adjourned accordingly at Thirteen Minutes before Six o'Clock.

CIVIL DEFENCE.
  ALIENS.
  ALIENS.
  ARMED FORCES (TREATING).
  ARMED FORCES (TREATING).
  AIR-RAID SHELTERS.
  AIR-RAID SHELTERS.
  EVACUATION TO DOMINIONS.
  EVACUATION TO DOMINIONS.
  GROWING TREES (TAXATION).
  GROWING TREES (TAXATION).
  NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
  NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
  COAL INDUSTRY (RHONDDA).
  COAL INDUSTRY (RHONDDA).
MILITARY SERVICE.
  MEDICAL BOARDS.
  MEDICAL BOARDS.
  UNEMPLOYED MEN.
  UNEMPLOYED MEN.
  CANADIANS (ENLISTMENT).
  CANADIANS (ENLISTMENT).
  BROADCASTS IN WELSH.
  BROADCASTS IN WELSH.
  ROYAL NAVY (INTELLIGENCE SECTION).
  ROYAL NAVY (INTELLIGENCE SECTION).
  COLONIAL RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
  COLONIAL RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
BRITISH ARMY.
  CASE FOR INQUIRY.
  CASE FOR INQUIRY.
  EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN).
  EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN).
  BOMBING ATTACKS ON RED CROSS.
  BOMBING ATTACKS ON RED CROSS.
  ANTHROPOMETRIC SURVEY.
  ANTHROPOMETRIC SURVEY.
  MAISONS TOLéRéES.
  MAISONS TOLéRéES.
  LOCAL DEFENCE VOLUNTEERS.
  LOCAL DEFENCE VOLUNTEERS.
UNEMPLOYMENT.
  SOUTH WALES.
  SOUTH WALES.
ROYAL AIR FORCE.
  INTELLIGENCE SECTION.
  INTELLIGENCE SECTION.
  WOMEN'S AUXILIARY AIR FORCE.
  WOMEN'S AUXILIARY AIR FORCE.
  ATTESTATION AND RECALL.
  ATTESTATION AND RECALL.
Preamble
The House met at four of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
GOSPORT WATER BILL, [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
MONMOUTHSHIRE AND SOUTH WALES EMPLOYERS' MUTUAL INDEMNITY SOCIETY, LIMITED BILL, [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
PEERS KILLED IN ACTION.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DOMINION AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT CALDECOTE): My Lords, I very much regret to have to record the death in action of two members of your Lordships' House, the Duke of Northumberland and the Earl of Erne. I know your Lordships will desire to express your sympathy with the relatives.

THE WAR: OPERATIONS IN FRANCE AND BELGIUM.
4.4 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, I beg leave to ask His Majesty's Government whether they have any statement to make on the military operations in France and Belgium.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, the events of the last few weeks in broad outline are already known to your Lordships. I propose to try to give your Lordships the substance of the facts which are now being recounted in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. My story will naturally not have the form or the flavour which my right honourable friend will give to it, but I know I shall have your Lordships' indulgence.
The breach in the French defences at Sedan and on the Meuse opened the door to a war of movement and contained a
456
threat of very grave developments. The formidable task of arraying the Allied Armies to deal with this menace was very soon entrusted, as your Lordships will know, to General Weygand. The Belgian Army of twenty divisions or more was on the left of the long line. To enable the French Army to take hold of the right hand of the British Army was General Weygand's first desire. The German force which was the spearhead of the main armies consisted of eight or nine armoured divisions each comprising something like 400 armoured vehicles. This formidable force cut our lines of communication as well as our contacts with the main French Armies. Our own lines ran from Amiens by way of Abbeville and along the coast to the Channel ports. The German armoured divisions burst their way with increasing momentum through these lines till they almost, but not quite, reached the places which will for ever be memorable in our history. Boulogne held out for several days under a gallant defence made possible by sending in two battalions of the Guards. When this force was withdrawn, Calais was in turn invested. A force of something like 4,000 in all, comprising the Rifle Brigade, the 60th and Queen Victoria's Rifles, with a battalion of tanks together with 1,000 French troops held this important bastion of the British positions. Your Lordships heard, I have no doubt, with emotion and admiration of the refusal of the British Brigadier of the chance offered to him to surrender. My Lords, thirty unwounded survivors have come away. The intrepid defence of the small force against two armoured divisions which had every advantage on their side held out for four invaluable days and then silence, which has not yet been broken, fell upon the place.
Dunkirk then became the centre of the hope of saving a remnant of the French and British Armies. Few of your Lordships would have thought that it was anything but a forlorn hope. The three northern Armies, the Belgian, French and our own Armies, which had not succeeded in re-establishing their lines of communication with the main French Armies, were undergoing a process of relentless encirclement. One hope, and only one, remained. Dunkirk and its beaches to the east and the west offered a possibility—a bare possibility—of withdrawal. The prospect of obtaining even

457
inadequate supplies of food and ammunition seemed to be of the slightest. When the day of prayer was observed just over a week ago, in obedience to His Majesty's command, those few who knew the sombre facts could only have felt that the deliverance of the force of over 300,000 men would be a miracle. My Lords, it was in these circumstances that the King of the Belgians surrendered. After months of refusal to emerge from the scanty shelter of neutrality, he had, at the very end, called us and our Allies to his rescue. Then, without warning, he laid bare not only our northern flank but our only line of retreat.
Your Lordships will not expect me to state more than the bare facts. Whatever has further to be said on this subject will be said by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. King Leopold's Army—a magnificent Army—had at many points responded nobly to the demands made upon it. Now it laid down its arms at the order of its King and Commander-in-Chief. The action of the British Army under Lord Gort, in a position which was forced upon him by this unhappy submission, was to cover a flank of about thirty miles to the sea. The successful completion of this operation was in itself a performance of almost incredible skill and coolness. The enemy closed in upon our two Armies with ever increasing forces. As step by step the Allied Army closed their front to ever-narrowing dimensions, plans were being laid by the Royal Navy, and merchant seamen and volunteers of every sort, not counting the cost, vied with the Royal Navy in feats of almost unexampled audacity during those days. My Lords, 650 vessels of every sort and shape and size, with 220 light war vessels, bore the fierce bombardment of the land and air. The Royal Air Force, showing qualities that have made their name imperishable, provided a shelter for the harassed forces that were awaiting relief. Ceaseless energy, with scant hours for sleep in the course of days, as well as unfaltering courage, were displayed on every hand. The character of the efforts of those whom our forces were facing may be judged from the fact that they did not scorn to bombard two hospital ships. To-day we rejoice to know that over 330,000 men, French and British, have been brought back. This is a heroic story which, even told in faltering words, may be a
458
magnificent page in our history. Your Lordships mourn the loss of two members of your Lordships' House, and the relatives of the 30,000 or more who must be accounted to have been wounded, killed or missing will, I know, have your Lordships' true sympathy.
The events which I have tried to describe are not, of course, a defeat of the forces of the enemies of the human race against whom we are arrayed. A heavy toll of life has been taken, we must realise; but perhaps I may say that I am informed that it is only about one-third of the losses suffered in the battle of March, 1918. There has been, of course, a loss of material which will take time to repair. Guns and vehicles of all sorts have been lost in large numbers. The nation, as your Lordships have seen, has been and is responding to the demands made upon it. Neither capital nor labour now withholds its contribution or its services. Your Lordships will be glad to hear that fresh supplies in swiftly-increasing volume have already been obtained under the direction of my right honourable friend the Minister of Supply and his colleagues. Our general plan will proceed; in a few months we shall have repaired our losses. But, when all is said and done—your Lordships would not desire for a moment to disguise the facts—we must count the cost already suffered and the cost to come. Munitions have been lost and are now in the hands of the enemy. Armies, material, territory have all been swallowed up in what no one who faces the facts could for a moment describe as anything but a defeat.
The British nation awaits with confidence whatever events may flow from these circumstances. There are large forces in Great Britain at the present time, larger than at any time during the war. His Majesty's Government are engaged in putting our defences in order to meet the menace of invasion, whether or not that menace is likely to be fulfilled. Measures will be taken and are already being taken with increasing stringency not only against enemy aliens but also against suspicious characters of other nationalities, and also against British subjects who may be a danger or a nuisance to the war if so be this war should be transported to the United Kingdom. Parliament has been ungrudging in the powers it has conferred upon His

459
Majesty's Government. Your Lordships are so very familiar with those powers that I think it is unnecessary for me at the present time to say more in ending this statement than that your Lordships may be assured that, with the support of Parliament and the nation, this fight will be continued in France, in Great Britain, in the Empire, upon the sea, until we reach that victory upon which your Lordships and the whole nation are determined.
4.16 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, certain changes in the representation in your Lordships' House have imposed on me the temporary duty of following very briefly my noble friend. He has told us a magnificent story. It is obvious that the splendid traditions of His Majesty's Army have been upheld to the full. He began by speaking of a disaster in a part of the French lines. I wish to begin, and I am sure I speak for the whole of your Lordships, by paying tribute to the gallantry of those French divisions, especially those round Lille under General Prioux, who rallied, inflicted terrible losses on their ruthless enemy, and made possible this magnificent withdrawal of our own men and certain of the Belgian survivors. No praise is too high for our French Allies, and never must it be heard for one moment, in your Lordships' House or elsewhere, that there was a failure of the French soldier. How has this thing happened, my Lords? I have had the honour of speaking with some of the men who have returned: the trouble was the lack of aeroplanes and of guns. That lack will be made good in the future. I felt great sympathy with my noble and learned friend Lord Caldecote in having to make the statement. What I say now does not give me any pleasure: a heavy responsibility lies on the shoulders of himself and his colleagues of the former Government for this lack of necessary equipment; and that is all I will say on this occasion.
Now may I re-echo with some pleasure what the noble Viscount has said about the response of the British people? I spent the week-end in the Midlands with workpeople for whom I have some responsibility. The response is unhesitating and magnificent. Those men and women,
460
doing heavy monotonous work, are sacrificing the whole of their leisure, their strength, their health even, after a period of great pressure already, to respond to the call for aeroplanes, guns, munitions and equipment of all kinds. They realise that the next few weeks will be vital for the history of our country and for the future of civilisation. From what I have seen and heard of the efforts of the workpeople of the Black Country, they will be worthy of the courageous example set by our Fighting Forces in the great retreat and the evacuation.
4.20 p.m.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, in the first place I wish to say a word on what fell from the noble Viscount opposite on the loss which this House has sustained by the death of two of its young members. Both the Duke of Northumberland and the Earl of Erne were greatly beloved in their homes and by their friends, and they had also both made a rather unusually good start in taking part in the debates in your Lordships' House. Some of your Lordships, I am sure, can recall occasions on which both those noble Lords took part in the debates, with an amount of promise which led us to hope that in future years they would become active participants in our discussions.
The statement of the noble Viscount has marked a milestone on the road of which we cannot see the end, except to be certain that the end will not be the triumph of brute force and the destruction of civilization. I think that we have all been impressed by the absolute can-dour with which His Majesty's Government have stated the facts. That is in marked difference from the German practice; the German public statements are a farrago of empty boasts or of futile excuses. The statement which the noble Viscount made, on the other hand, offered no attempt whatever to disguise the fact that a serious reverse to the Allied arms has occurred, and it gave, so far as it can be given without damage to military considerations, an explanation of how that event occurred. The unlucky breaking up of the defences of the Meuse has not been veiled in obscurity, either by the French statements or by the statements that are made here. I think the facts are clear, and undoubtedly they do show that there was a want of foresight as to the kind of

461
attack which might be made if the German force was prepared, so to speak, to throw the whole stake into the pool, and as to the place at which such an attack might be pressed, the means of meeting it there having proved not to be adequate.
Then the noble Viscount stated the position arising out of the surrender of the Belgian Army. It will probably be better to leave it to future history, when more is known, to say what precisely actuated the King of the Belgians in coming to his decision against the unanimous desire of his Ministers. It may be that he never joined heartily in the desire to see the Allies victorious, and it may be that he was not whole-hearted in joining in the call to the French and to ourselves. If that is so, he found himself in the miserable dilemma of having to see heavier and heavier losses inflicted on his own people, for whom we need not doubt he deeply cared, or of deserting and throwing over the Allies whom he had called in. That is the picture on which history will have to pass its judgment.
We are all agreed as to the marvellous skill and heroism with which this reverse has been met. In the first place, we all wish to pay the heartiest possible tribute to Lord Gort. He has shown not only the qualities of a fighting soldier but those of a master of strategy. We all feel the same about the men of the Navy, the Army and the Air Force; but I should like to say a special word of admiration for the civilian element of those who played such a prominent part in this wonderful rescue. In one sense I think that it is even more striking than the discipline and perfect devotion of those in the Forces. We all feel that our most unstinted admiration should be given both to those who belong to the Fighting Services of the Crown and to those civilians who came to help them.
4.28 p.m.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: My Lords, I do not know whether my noble friend can enlighten the House on one point on which I am sure that enlightenment must be very much desired by every member of your Lordships' House, and that is whether General Prioux has or has not been taken prisoner. The Germans have claimed it, and I have seen no contradiction of it. It would be a matter of very great satisfaction to everyone in this House if we could learn
462
that it was not true, because we do owe so very much to him and to his Army. Before I sit down I should like to add one word. I entirely agree with everything that has been said in admiration for what has been done, but there is one aspect of it which perhaps has not been actually mentioned, although it must have been in the minds of every one of your Lordships. I refer to the extraordinary spirit of the men who have come out of this terrific trial. None of them has the slightest doubt that they are better men than the Germans. I most earnestly believe that to be true, and it is a spirit which I believe is unconquerable and which will bring us the victory, apart from all other considerations.
4.29 p.m.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, I am sure that you will join wholeheartedly in what the noble Viscount has just said as to the spirit of the men who have come out from this inferno. With regard to the question which the noble Viscount put as to the safety of the gallant soldier to whom he referred, there has been no information up till a few hours or so ago as to his fate.

INDIAN AND COLONIAL DIVORCE JURISDICTION BILL, [H.L.]
4.30 p.m.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA AND BURMA (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, I beg leave to introduce a Bill to explain and amend the Indian and Colonial Divorce Jurisdiction Act, 1926, and to move that it be read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (BLACKBURN) BILL.
Read 3a (according to order), and passed.

COURTS (EMERGENCY POWERS) (AMENDMENT) BILL. [H.L.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
4.31 p.m.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON): My Lords, after the profoundly moving story of heroism and sacrifice set before us by the Leader of the House, it falls to me to move the Second Reading of this Bill, and I think I can do this in very few words. This is a Bill to amend the original Courts (Emergency Powers) Act, 1939, which was one of those Acts which passed through all their stages in both Houses as emergency measures on September 1 last on the eve of the outbreak of war. The general effect of the Act of 1939 was to empower the Courts to restrain the putting into operation of remedies available to judgment creditors, landlords or mortgagees in cases where the appropriate Court was of opinion that the persons liable to satisfy the judgment or order, or to pay the rent or other debt, was unable immediately to do so by reason of circumstances directly or indirectly attributable to the war. Your Lordships will observe therefore that it is not that the creditor is restrained from instituting proceedings; he may get from the Court the judgment or order to which he is entitled, and of course there are cases in which remedies like the levying of distress are normally available for default in payment of rent without having to get the leave of the Court. What the Act of last year did was to secure to the debtor the protection that the Court would not allow remedies to be put into force against him if it considered that there was an inability to pay which arose out of war conditions.
What then is the reason for seeking to amend the Act of last year? It is this. The Act requires amendment because in its actual working it has not in all cases produced the protection that was intended. In the case of non-payment of rent, for example, or of non-payment of the interest on a mortgage, it was undoubtedly intended by Parliament that the Court should consider the circumstances of the debtor at the time when the landlord or the mortgagee proposed to exercise his ordinary legal rights. It was undoubtedly intended by Parliament that the Court at that stage should decide, by reference to the actual circumstances then existing of the tenant or mortgagee, whether leave to distrain or to re-enter should be given or withheld. But there has arisen a practice by which it frequently happens that
464
on the first occasion, when a periodical payment is due the Court withholds leave to enforce the remedy, but attaches a condition, and the condition sometimes takes the form that further payments, future periodical payments, must be paid promptly. The object of the present Bill, as your Lordships will see from Clause 1, is to secure that this sort of condition shall not be attached to the order of the Court, but that the Court should be free to consider the actual circumstances if and when a further default occurs, rather than bind itself beforehand as to the course to be taken. I think there is no doubt that in making this new provision we shall not be varying the intention of Parliament in the original Act of last year, but we shall be securing that the real intentions of the Legislature will be effectively secured.
Clause 2 deals with a further point—quite a separate point—on which some difficulty has arisen, not so much because actual amendment of the law is needed, as because doubts have arisen as to the course which the existing law intends to be followed. Your Lordships will notice that Clause 2 begins: "It is hereby declared for the removal of doubt…." and the doubt is this. It has been questioned whether, when the Court is asked to decide whether leave should be given to enforce the discharge of a particular liability of the defendant on the ground of his circumstances in war time, the Court is at liberty to look at all his different liabilities, or whether, on the other hand, it must only look at the particular claim which is then and there brought before it. Well, it is evident that the Court may be in a difficulty, for the right order to make must depend not upon one particular debt, but upon a survey of the whole of the different circumstances. To give an illustration, it is no good expecting the Court to decide wisely whether a man shall be made promptly to pay the interest on a mortgage debt unless the Court is informed what are the other liabilities which burden the shoulders of the man, who may be serving as a private in the Forces, and this Clause 2 is simply for the purpose of making it plain that the Court may consider all those circumstances. The clause will remove all doubts by giving express power to the Court to take into account other liabilities besides the particular liability that the party is claiming to

465
enforce. The remaining clause, Clause 3, deals with matters of minor importance, and I do not know that I am able to explain them to your Lordships any more clearly than by inviting you to read, if you so desire, the text of the clause. I hope your Lordships will accept this amending Bill and give it a Second Reading as carrying out the intentions which both Houses of Parliament had when the Act of 1939 was passed. The present Bill merely secures that those purposes will be more effectively and completely attained, and at the same time makes certain minor adjustments which will secure the smooth working of the earlier Statute. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committtee of the Whole House.

MIDDLESEX DEEDS BILL, [H.L.]
4.40 p.m.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I have to stand before your Lordships with another Bill of a technical character which I must also briefly explain. As its title shows, it is a Bill to provide for the closing, for all purposes, of the Middlesex Deeds Register and for granting indemnities in respect of losses which may arise from the closing thereof. The Middlesex Deeds Register has existed since the time of Queen Anne. The effect of the Statutes on the subject was that anyone who acquired an interest in land in the County of Middlesex protected his title by registering a memorial of the deed or conveyance in the Registry. That is the old system. In contrast with this ancient system of registering deeds, two modern methods have developed in this country and also in the Dominions—one, the registration of title to land, and the other the registration of charges upon land. Your Lordships will appreciate that a complete system of land registration really means this: it aims at providing, as it were, a complete map of the area, together with all the necessary information as to the ownership of, or charges upon, each piece of land in the area. On
466
the other hand this ancient system dating from Queen Anne, requiring the registration of deeds, besides having other defects, has this shortcoming, that it only records the contents of individual documents. It does not necessarily show how the land which is dealt with in one deed is geographically related to another.
Accordingly, when on January 1, 1937, registration of title to freehold and leasehold land, on sale, became compulsory in the County of Middlesex, as it did under an Order in Council made under Section 120 of the Land Registration Act, 1925, the County of Middlesex found itself under two dispensations—the old and the new—and it was manifestly desirable to arrange by stages that it passed entirely under the new arrangements and shed the old altogether. In consequence of the Land Registration Act, 1936, the Middlesex Deed Register became closed for future transactions, and since then the Register has not been resorted to except for the purpose of investigating title to land depending on the existence or otherwise of deeds executed before that date. What does the Bill propose? It proposes to close the Middlesex Deeds Register for all purposes, and when that has been done the County of Middlesex will enjoy the benefits of the new system without any remaining admixture of the old. During the period of transition certain technical difficulties may arise which are provided for with much precision in the clauses of the Bill.
I would refer your Lordships especially to Clause 3, which deals with the unlikely, but not inconceivable, case where the closing of the Register may lead to conflicting claims for the same piece of land. If such a case did occur, and fell within the conditions of Clause 3, the person suffering loss would, under the terms of that clause, be indemnified from public funds. Indemnification from public funds is necessarily an anxious matter, but I am informed that the Treasury which at all times exerts itself to protect public funds from unjustified burdens, is satisfied that the arrangements proposed in Clause 3 are entirely justified, especially as considerable annual loss is now being incurred by public funds through the expenses of staff and the like connected with searches of the Middlesex Deeds Register, which will be in substance avoided when the new system is com-

467
pletely established. I am aware that this is all very technical, although it is of great importance to many who will be affected by it. In a word, land in Middlesex is now passing from an old and, indeed, antiquated system to a new system which all competent authorities regard as immensely to be preferred. At present Middlesex suffers from the inconvenience of living under two overlapping régimes made up of these two systems and, since no one would propose that they should both continue to exist side by side, I can advise your Lordships with confidence that the proper course is now to move completely into the new system. That is what this Bill proposes should be done, and I beg to move the Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

LOCAL DEFENCE VOLUNTEERS.
4.47 p.m.
THE EARL OF BREADALBANE AND HOLLAND THE EARL OF BREADALBANE AND HOLLAND rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether they are satisfied with the efficiency and fire-power of the Local Defence Volunteer Force; and further whether all the necessary communication and transport arrangements are being satisfactorily co-ordinated; and to move for Papers.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I think it my duty to voice the anxiety and dissatisfaction which exist over a large part of the country as to our preparations for home defence. In raising this matter I am in circumstances of considerable difficulty, because it is obviously essential that nothing should be said during the course of this debate which can be of any assistance to the enemy. I shall try to confine myself to what is common knowledge—to what is mentioned in the public Press and must be obvious to any German Staff officer with a map of this country and who takes the trouble to study it. If by mistake I seem likely to go beyond that line, I would ask the noble Lord who proposes to reply on behalf of the Government to pull me up. It happened to be my fate after the last war to spend some months in Germany in the Army of
468
Occupation. One thing that impressed me very much was that all the German officers with whom I discussed the matter maintained that the German Army had never been defeated by force of arms, and that it was only forced to sue for peace owing to the collapse of the home front. This is a lesson the Germans took very much to heart and from which they intend to profit. There have been too many people in this country who have said, "The Germans will not come here." They adopt what, in their opinion, is an attitude of quiet confidence, but it might also be described as an attitude of negligent, supine apathy. They say, "We shall win the war," but they are doing precious little to ensure it. With the examples of Poland, Norway, and Holland before our eyes, it is folly to suppose that this country, which Hitler looks on as the home of his most formidable opponent, as the most determined foe of Nazi plans of aggression, will come through unscathed.
The Government have had eight months of respite to prepare, and the country at large is gravely disturbed as to what has, or has not, been done. It welcomes this change of direction on the part of the military authorities, and is glad to see General Sir Edmund Ironside and General Paget, with his experience in Norway, taking the helm. We are asked frequently to leave matters entirely to the military authorities, but this is a civilian affair, and people are not altogether ready to do that. Strategists claim that the Forest of Ardennes was impassable to troops; it was through the Forest of Ardennes that Hitler struck. Strategists told us that without command of the sea Hitler would never capture Norway. Look at Norway now—two-thirds of the country under the Prussian heel. What has actually been done? I would like to have seen in Scotland bodies of men raised on the same lines as were followed in Napoleonic times. This is perhaps a Scottish aspect but I think it would have been an inspiring and indeed unusual sight to see Scotsmen ranged in serried ranks not preparing to fight the English, not even preparing to fight among themselves, but prepared to defend a cause so right that it would have obliterated the feuds and quarrels which have marred the pages of Scottish history in the past. I am sorry that, in attempting a plan from a purely military point of view, an opportunity

469
which may well have been unique in the annals of Scottish history has been missed. Perhaps, under an English Secretary of State for Scotland, an English Keeper of Edinburgh Castle, an English Commander-in-Chief of a Scottish Command, and, I believe, an English Commander of Perth, it was possibly too much for Scotland to expect; but I think there is a feeling throughout the northern half of this country that a chance has been missed because of lack of vision.
Take the plan that was actually put into force. Only a matter of days ago a meeting was convened in great haste and confusion, and scant attention or consideration, I am told, was paid to the views of the Lords-Lieutenant and none to the territorial claims of those who spend the whole year in Scotland, who know the people and to whom the people in turn are inclined to look in times of emergency for leadership. The first thing that was done apparently at this meeting was to divide Scotland by art arbitrary line. I will not specify the direction or the locality, but within twenty-four hours it was realised that this was a civilian force and that this line only appeared on military maps, and therefore not one member of the civilian force would have a map to show it. Does that look as if adequate preparation, prevision and foresight were given to a matter which is all-important to this country? That first decision was hastily corrected, an amendment was sent out, and another line was drawn which cuts across watersheds, lines of communication and other matters of strategic importance. To turn to the putting of this plan into practice, it is to be carried out by the voluntary services of many gallant, elderly military gentlemen, to whose patriotism I should like to pay a tribute of respect, but I suggest that in many cases they are too old to meet the menace of the young parachute troops specially trained in Germany for this very purpose of invading a country. There again with no disrespect I say we are facing a 1940 menace with a 1914 mentality. If you asked some of them to say how long it would take to go from London to Paris they would answer: "A couple of hours by train, then steamer, and so much by the Golden Arrow." That would be their first reaction. That is not good enough in critical times like these. What we want is someone who thinks in terms of
470
flying and not merely of the old out-of-date methods of locomotion.
Turning to the details to which I particularly want to draw your Lordships' attention, I tried to hold a practice the other day. In order to make the test something.like what would be actually required in case of an invasion, I suggested that the Germans might have seized some island on the west coast; it might be Mull, it might be Arran, or the Isle of Man, or it might be a larger island which it is not necessary for me to specify, but where I fancy there would be a large number of German sympathisers. Through the kindness of the military commander of the regular troops I arranged that he should join in. The night before, I decided to telephone to make sure that all was right for an attack at dawn the following morning. What was the result? The postmaster told me that owing to a thunderstorm the line was out of order. I asked him if there was not an alternative line, and he said there was no alternative line. I then asked him if he had any method of repairing the line and for getting over what were quite trifling difficulties which might easily be put right. He said that he had not. He added that he could easily repair the line if he had a length of cable, some pliers and a ladder, but, he went on, the official regulation which he must follow—and, my Lords, this is in the middle of a war—was to telephone his predicament to the nearest chief postal centre. I pointed out that he had already told me that he could not get in touch with that postal centre and that that method hardly seemed a quick one. I suggest that every village post office should be provided with some breakdown outfit of the sort required.
Then I tried to see if it was possible to get through to the same centre by railway telephone. I think it could have been done, but again I was up against a difficulty that there was no regulation entitling a defence commander to do anything with railway telephones, even to asking the stationmaster to accept an obligation to get through. There is too much red tape. It is too slow, too complicated. Later in the night the lines were put in order. The message was sent at 2.30 to the nearest Regular troops. It was nearly three hours before they arrived, although the distance was comparatively

471
short. That is to say, the parachute invaders would have had two clear hours during which they could have blocked the railway lines and interfered with the telephone line and done practically what they wanted.
A message was sent to the Local Defence Force, which had been on guard throughout the night. They turned up. I thought to myself what a magnificent lot of men they were. Some of them drove tanks in the last war or manned machine guns, and would make a real, useful righting force. As to their armament, it was most inadequate. They came out as though they were going to a hare drive, not to meet trained professional soldiers who already had the advantage of the initiative. They sent back for their supports, who were completely unarmed. I would like to suggest that this question of defence should be regarded almost on fire brigade lines, and that every local area should have something in the shape of a requisitioned lorry, armoured against splinters and bullets, to give the men manning it some protection; that it should be armed with a couple of Bren guns, equipped with first-aid outfit, tools and so on, and that it should be kept ready to be rushed out with audacity and determination to wherever trouble arose. Then we had some imaginary casualties. They were to be dealt with by the A.R.P. service. I went back to see what actually happened. The A.R.P. party, consisting of ten of the best men in the village, very sportingly turned out to help. I went to the first-aid post. I found it did not exist. It had been filled up with desks and tables for evacuated children.
Is this Defence Force a serious Defence Force, equipped with all ancillary services, or is it not? There is no power to the commander of the Defence Force to ask the A.R.P. to put their house in order. They are independent. The special constables turned out. They also are independent. They are unarmed. Their duty is apparently to apprehend the enemy. How is a special constable with only his bare hands to apprehend a parachutist? I inquired who is responsible for the provision of medical supplies. I was told that that comes under the county medical officer. He again is entirely independent of the Defence
472
Force. I urge that what is gravely required is some co-ordinating authority who can get all the services so necessary for efficiency to work together. They are all doing good work, but they are all doing it independently. There are three points, then, that I would like to stress—co-ordination of all the services, more fire power and more mobility. There is a magnificent spirit throughout the country. I have never seen a finer lot of men or men more determined that Nazi aggression shall not succeed. All they want is leadership and organisation. I need hardly point out that this country, after all, is the citadel of the British Empire. If this goes, all goes. The sands are running low. I beg that the Government will not, for lack of previous organisation, lose on the Home Front all that the superb heroism and the dauntless gallantry of the Fighting Forces have struggled so hard to preserve in France.
5.3 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, may I be permitted to thank my noble friend the Earl of Breadalbane for bringing forward this Motion? It really ought to be debated in Secret Session. Certain discussions are going on which I hope will be successful. There will be a Secret Session in another place and I hope it will be found convenient to have one here. I do not think my noble friend the Earl of Breadalbane has quite realised how much has been done in the last three weeks. I have had some experience, particularly in the Midlands, and I know that a great deal has been accomplished. I think a tribute is due to my honourable friend Sir Edward Grigg and to my noble friend Lord Croft for what they have done. The burden has fallen on them. With regard to what the noble Earl said about Local Defence Volunteers and A.R.P. workers, I am absolutely certain that these two forces will have to work together, especially in the country districts. There is no Lord-Lieutenant in your Lordships' House who will not bear me out in that. You have the flower of the rural dwellers—many of them ex-Service men—already enrolled in the A.R.P. service. Every man of public spirit and leisure has done that and these Volunteers may be the same people doing much the same thing. But the time has come when any sort of departmental

473
rivalry should be swept away. A.R.P. and L.D.V. must obviously be amalgamated.
I am going to put to my noble friend Lord Croft a very serious matter. This force has been put under a distinguished soldier, who cannot be expected to understand what I am now going to say, but perhaps it will be understood when I explain. It has been stated in the papers—you cannot keep these things secret in any case—that arrangements are being made to render unusable large open spaces where hostile aeroplanes might land. The same precautions are very necessary on large open stretches of water. The Broads, the lakes and the inlets and creeks along our coast are ideal places for Dormer flying boats to alight. They did so in the River Scheldt opposite Rotterdam with dire results, and the same thing will happen here unless we take precautions. The precautions are cheap and simple and local people can do the job. All that is necessary is to get some empty barrels and string them together with rope or get some baulks of timber and turn them into a temporary barrier or boom. That should be done at once and I hope that when this debate is over my noble friend will go to the War Office and get in touch with the Admiralty and issue instructions quickly—over the wireless, if necessary.
This matter is very serious. I agree with every word that has fallen from the noble Earl about the importance of this Local Defence Force. The more efficient we can make these Volunteers, the more troops we shall be able to send to France, and in the next few weeks we have to send every man and every gun that we can to France to stand on the Somme. I am astonished to find that there are tanks still in this country. There should not be a tank in England to-day. We do not need tanks. Very light tanks can be brought here by hostile aeroplanes but they can be dealt with in other ways. Tanks ought not to be in this country. I hope your Lordships will forgive me if I speak with some heat, but I have reasons for feeling strongly about it. I have just come from the Midlands, where I have been engaged without any instructions from anyone, but with the good will of many people, in taking certain precautions. We have been turning our factories there—we have three of them all
474
doing work of great importance—into fortresses ourselves. Some of our workpeople are ex-Service men and some have been brought back from the Army because they are skilled artisans. We bought our barbed wire, we made our steel bullet proof sheets for the windows, we bought rifles, and we have acquired a machine gun. I will not go into details of how we acquired that, but we got it. The factories are working twenty-four hours a day and we have a definite system ready for an attack at any time. If any enemy came to those factories to-morrow I would be very sorry for him. One of those factories has machinery which exists nowhere else in the country and which is very important to the Air Ministry. There is no question of official leadership. The leaders rise up on these occasions. One of the best men I have is an ex-Lewis gunner, a private from the last war. He is a skilled workman now. The only thing he wants now is a Lewis gun and he will be happy.
I went to the very charming, courteous retired officer, a major, who has been put in charge of the whole district. He was delighted, and he said: "I wish everyone else would do this on his own responsibility." Now I come to the serious part of the matter. This officer said: "I was appointed last Sunday"—this was on Sunday this week—"to organise the defences of this vitally important district. I have no staff, no money, and I do not know where I am, but I am doing my best." The question of which I have given notice to my noble friend Lord Croft is whether, in the case of officers called from retirement—some of them are excellent men—they are allowed staff and money. You cannot organise a big district without these things and you cannot expect these officers to put their hands in their own pockets beyond a certain limit. That is one question which I should like to ask my noble friend Lord Croft, and I hope the answer will be satisfactory.
The next question is this: these evacuations of children and so on from vulnerable areas, why are they not compulsory? How much longer are we going on playing with this question and leaving it to the desires and affections of the parents whether their children shall be evacuated or not? Of course when it is decided completely to evacuate a district, the evacuation should be compulsory, otherwise we only play with the problem. It may be

475
necessary to evacuate certain districts compulsorily of all the non-combatants. Has that been worked out and are the Government going to be firm enough to do it?
In this connection I am very surprised indeed that no instructions have been given through the Press, by wireless and so on, to people what to do in the case of an attack. An attack may come tonight. You must tell the people not to panic on to the roads and become refugees—I mentioned this to your Lordships last week—to be machine-gunned by these criminals of the air who may come over. Tell them to barricade themselves in their homes or, if the worst comes to the worst, to take to the woods, but not to panic on the roads and so prevent the Defence Forces from moving and open themselves to slaughter, as happened in France and Belgium and is happening now. No instructions have been given to that effect. My honourable friend Mr. Hamilton Kerr, in another place on May 30, asked a question. Now we come to another Department, the Home Office; I have already touched upon the Ministry of Health, the War Office, and the Admiralty, and now we come to a fourth Department. My honourable friend asked the Home Secretary:
"Whether he will issue an instruction that, in the event of air raids on this country, the civil population should remain quietly at home, and not attempt to evacuate in mass unless a definite order is received from the local authorities?"
This is the reply of my right honourable friend the Home Secretary, Sir John Anderson:
"Yes, Sir. Action is being taken in the sense indicated in the question."
Action has not been taken. Why not? When are you going to tell the people what to do in case of a landing? I suppose the matter is still being discussed between the different sides of Whitehall and between the different Ministries concerned.
That brings me to my last suggestion. I am sorry if I stand between the House and my noble and gallant friend, who has much more knowledge of these matters than I have, but in this I am sure he will support me. The noble Earl opposite made this point: for home defence nowadays, under modern conditions
476
and with modern weapons opposed to you, you must have one supreme authority. At present the police and A.R.P. are under the Home Office, the local authorities are under the Ministry of Health, the Army is under the Commander-in-Chief, the Local Defence Volunteers are under the Commander-in-Chief, and the coastguard is under the Board of Trade.
LORD MOTTISTONE: NO, it is now under the Admiralty.
LORD STRABOLGI: I am glad to hear it: the whole coastal defence has now come back to the Admiralty. Then you have this vitally important service of air defence under the Air Ministry. The air command is not so well co-ordinated at present as regards its own different functions. I do not know whether this has come to the notice of my noble friend yet, but I beg him, for the sake of his country and mine, to make some inquiries about it. He will find that there is a lack of co-ordination between the different commands of the Air Force to-day. We pointed out long ago that this would happen, and my noble friend Lord Mottistone has pointed out in the past the need for a combined General Staff, and we are still pointing it out now. I can find no real co-ordination at all between all these different authorities—I have mentioned half a dozen. You must have one man for Home Defence with power to act, and he must be of War Cabinet rank, and he ought to be the deputy to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is the Minister of Defence, and there ought to be a deputy Minister of Defence with the support of the Prime Minister behind him. Then he would be able to drive through this red tape and bureaucratic obstructionism which are strangling the magnificent effort that our people want to put forward. But I end as I began; a great deal has been done, thanks to the initiative and energy of the people themselves. They have not waited for instructions; they have just got on with the job. That is happening all over the country; men are working hard on it. I know many cases of men who go on watch on the hills at night and come back to their work in the morning without any instructions of any sort. That is the spirit that will defeat the Nazis; but do help it.
5.17 p.m.
LORD MOTTISTONE: My Lords, I cordially agree with the last words which fell from the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, on the general question of home defence. I am not here to grumble or complain—there is quite enough of that—with regard to the L.D.V. I think it has been very well done, and I would only make a few practical suggestions which, I hope, will be carried out. But since the issue has been raised as to lack of co-ordination, I must say, with a real desire to support the Government and with a real hatred of grumblers, that that is a gap in our armour which ought to be put right at once. I could give you many instances, and one of them—quite an important one—I was able to put straight myself owing to my position in a certain county. There is, however, a much bigger issue relating to home defence owing to the circumstance that for a hundred and twenty years we have never been menaced by invasion so nearly as we are now, there is a real lack of co-ordination. I think it could be put right. The suggestion of the noble Lord that the deputy to the Prime Minister should be the Minister of Home Defence and charged with this duty is a good one, and I hope that the noble Lord, whom I am glad to see and who I am sure will be welcomed in this House, will tell the Prime Minister that it was received—as I am sure it is—with interest and approval. Of the need of some reform I have no doubt whatever. Apart from that big issue relating to the Defence Forces which has been raised by the noble Earl, Lord Breadalbane, I do not share with him the gloomy view that things are all going wrong. As a Lord-Lieutenant I have been devoting all my time since this began, as has my noble friend Lord Crewe, to doing what we could to get the thing going. Of course, every kind of mistake has been made, but on the whole it is astonishing how well the thing has been done in its beginning.
THE EARL OF BREADALBANE AND HOLLAND: I really cannot allow the noble Lord to misrepresent me. I did not at all suggest that everything is wrong; far from it. A great deal is going very right, and I prefer to correct that at once.
LORD MOTTISTONE: I am sorry if I put it too high; and of course it is quite right for the noble Earl to correct me,
478
especially as he can see the way in which Scotland has been treated by these outrageous Englishmen, who must be put in their places. They have been criticised, and many of the criticisms have been fully justified. But I am here to ask what has been done and to ask for certain definite steps to be taken which I think will prevent the mistakes which the noble Earl rightly deplores and make the whole thing go much more smoothly. The first thing, and I believe it to be vital, is that in order to organise this force it must be on a county basis. The military mind tends, through no fault of its own, to want to draw straight lines across this country and say this is this military area and that is that. Now, in creating a force of this kind, in order to bring in all the other people, and notably those concerned with air-raid precautions and the police, it must be on a county basis, because there the whole organisation is ready-made. I have been much in touch with Sir Edward Grigg, to whom a tribute has been paid by Lord Strabolgi, and I should like to pay a tribute to him also, because he has worked very hard at this; and I believe that he is not unfriendly to this view.
If the Government would announce that they proposed to put the administration and equipment in the hands not only of the Lords-Lieutenant but of the county associations and their chairmen and representatives, on which associations all the civic authorities are represented, as well as the county authorities, and naturally, through them, the police, all kinds of mistakes which have been made would be avoided. In my county, the military and naval authorities have co-operated with me in getting the whole thing put on one central basis. My first point is therefore this: I beg the noble Lord, Lord Croft, to get General Sir Edmund Ironside, or whoever is the proper person, to make a broadcast as soon as possible, saying first of all that the administration and equipment of this new force are placed under the county associations. That would greatly facilitate the work. I am permitted by the noble Marquess, Lord Crewe, to say that that has practically been done in his case; and if he will support me when I sit down, I shall be most grateful.
Having got the organisation on a county basis, there then comes the difficulty of equipment. We all know that there is

479
a shortage of rifles, and we all know the reasons for it. The shortage is not really very acute; there are quite enough rifles if the business is properly organised to shoot all the possible parachutists who could land, and in fact many to spare. I am informed that there is excellent ammunition available for 12-bore guns, and there are plenty of them. I hope that the broadcast will encourage everyone to bring his 12-bore gun, and to use it as required. For that purpose, it is obvious that a very elastic organisation is necessary. In the case of the works in a town to which the noble Lord has referred, clearly he has his men on the spot and he is able to put up an admirable defence without any question of mobility. On the other hand, in the case of our scattered country districts—sometimes, as in my own case, very lonely places, but not very far from vitally important centres—it is important to have all the arrangements possible for rapid movement. It is important to bring fire-power rapidly to bear on the parachutists or on the men who land from submarines or in some other way on our coasts. It is important to bring fire-power to bear at once on the parachutists, while they are in the semi-dazed condition in which they have always been found by the many people I have met who have encountered them. For that purpose it is necessary to have proper means of communication. In the case of a small forest which some of your Lordships know well, there is an admirable corps of people on ponies, and they can get from one place to another at maximum speed; but in most cases the motor is preferable.
Then I should like to make this second point, and this is a real grievance which everyone feels. Quite rightly, the Treasury and finance branches keep a check upon expenditure, and they always want to know beforehand for what purpose the money is really wanted. In this case, however, where there is real urgency, it is a little fantastic for orders to be sent that it is under consideration whether third-class fares shall be allowed to organisers. I can give my noble friend the name of a distinguished Field Marshal who promptly enlisted as a private in this new force, and who received a communication that it was under consideration whether he should or should not get his third-class railway fare. It would surely
480
be better at once to relax the purse-strings and to say to a man organising a particular area: "Here is a lump sum for which you must account rigidly. If you want petrol, have it; if you want motor cars, hire them. Do not be extravagant, and report at the end of a week." I would beg the noble Lord, Lord Croft—I can assure him, having occupied his office as Under-Secretary of State and then having become Secretary of State, that he will not find it very easy; but it can be done—to insist that for the purposes of this new force little block grants shall be allocated through the Commands to all the subordinate people who are organising their areas. In my own case, and I have no doubt in others, they are all people of consequence in the county who can be trusted to do nothing wrong. That will enable us to get over this real grievance which is blocking the efforts of every county in England, Scotland and Wales—the difficulty of small finance.
I would go further and say this. This may sound slightly contrary to my view that we must have a county force, but I think it would be a wise thing to get these men into uniform when they go on duty, as soon as possible. That would be of help, and it is much better than a brassard. The men will feel more sense of responsibility when they are in uniform. The question of whether each man should have his own rifle to care for depends on the locality. When this force was first sprung upon us, it was suggested that arms should be kept in a local armoury. In many cases that would be ten miles away. The Swiss system, under which each man is responsible for his own rifle, is ideal for all our rural areas, and probably for most others. I do not know whether your Lordships are aware that at a moment of great peril to Switzerland at the end of the last war, when there was danger of attack from without and of risings from within, the Swiss President was asked by some more timid members of his Government to pass a law for all the arms of the citizens of Switzerland to be placed in central armouries. He refused to do anything of the kind, and by decree he announced that any Swiss man of military age who had not got his rifle should be liable to a fine equivalent to £10, or go to prison for a month. The danger to Switzerland passed away as though by magic, because it was seen that every Swiss could be absolutely

481
trusted to defend his country. I think that it would be wise to follow that example and to let us be an armed people, but so far as possible organised in full consultation with the county police and with the city police.
Yet a further advantage of the county system is that it gets rid of the breach that is formed between the A.R.P. organisation and the new force, to which attention has been drawn. The county system gets round that difficulty, because the county organiser may generally very well be the head of the A.R.P. organisation. We can look forward with confidence, I think, to the success of this new force provided certain things are done, a few of which I have ventured to bring before your Lordships. The sooner there is a broadcast to explain all these things the better, and then I am perfectly certain that if any Germans land after that on these shores they will get so warm a reception that such a landing will never be effected again.
5.29 p.m.
VISCOUNT BUCKMASTER: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Mottistone has said that he has no great love for grumblers, but unfortunately I find myself unable to approach this matter from any point of view other than a highly critical one. I hope it will be appreciated that my criticisms are not directed towards those local organisers who are sparing neither their time nor their pockets and who, with no financial help from the Government, have done all that they can to make this scheme effective. It is not for me to emphasize the danger in which we find ourselves. A tragic example of what may happen from the air has been seen in Holland. Nor is it only from the air that the enemy may land. I cannot feel that the scheme as now proposed is in any way adequate to our needs. I am aware of course that in the first instance the defence of this country is entrusted, and rightly entrusted, to the Regular Army, but that is no reason why any auxiliary defensive body should have an unwieldy and imperfect organisation.
If we examine this Local Defence Volunteer organisation what do we find? To a large extent it is on a part-time basis. That very fact must prevent that adequate discipline and training which are essential for any military duty. The agreement provides that the Volunteer
482
cannot be asked to serve outside his own district, and nothing could be more destructive of mobility, one of the essential features of any defensive organisation. In addition, at a fortnight's notice the Volunteer may terminate his contract or his agreement altogether. I can imagine a most unfortunate position arising where, owing to local friction or other difficulties, the Volunteers decide to withdraw en masse. Can it seriously be suggested, in the position in which we find ourselves, that measures such as this are adequate to our needs? Do we really think that Hitler would entrust any part of the defences of his country to an organisation of such a nature? Would he have achieved what he has achieved on a part-time basis? The further we examine this scheme the graver are its defects. If your Lordships will bear with me I will give one or two illustrations.
In the first place there exists considerable confusion as to what is the duty of these Volunteers—I nearly said these unfortunate Volunteers. I notice the noble Lord, Lord Gorell, shakes his head, but I propose to give definite illustrations which I will verify with him after the debate is over. One of my friends in his district has been told that if parachutists descend the Volunteers are to advance in extended order. Those who, like the noble Lord, have had experience of the German machine gunners are well able to judge what the fate of those unhappy Volunteers would be. My noble friend Lord Mottistone remarks that it is a splendid thing to die for one's country, which reminds me of what Horace said. We know the quotation, but I would suggest to him that though it is a splendid thing to die for your country, it is a better thing to die for it after you have killed some Germans first. In my own district, where I have joined, I am told the instructions vary so frequently that they do not know what they are on a given day. In another district I have been told that if a parachutist descends, the Volunteer is allowed to shoot, but if more than one descends he may not shoot, he must instantly summon help—no doubt a very admirable precaution, one which he may well be tempted to adopt. But one should remember that, if I am correctly informed, when the parachutist descends he is at a disadvantage; he is encumbered with his apparatus and has to disengage himself, and unless he is shot at once he

483
will, on instructions previously given, seize some point of tactical advantage from which he cannot always be dislodged except with bombs or mortars.
With regard to co-ordination, one other illustration springs to my mind. Another friend of mine had been asked to defend a telephone exchange, and when his section got there they were denied entry because the post office had no knowledge of the instruction at all—a sad lack of co-operation between two different departments. Whatever the duties of these Volunteers may be, it is to my mind impossible that they can be performed without drill and discipline. And yet the very way in which they are organised makes discipline difficult, even where it is seriously attempted. On joining I was told that I should be given a rifle. It was a pattern with which I am not familiar. I asked if I might practise with it and was told, "Certainly not." I asked if I might have instruction in its use and was told that a sergeant instructor would attend in the evenings at 6.30. When I offered to attend on Saturday evenings I was told that on Saturdays and Sundays he would not attend. When such things happen, when you see the way in which these matters are approached, I personally lose all sense of reality. I find myself like a spectator at some rustic comedy instead of waiting to see the curtain rise on the greatest tragedy the world has ever seen.
I feel, after what I have said, that it would be right for me to offer constructive suggestions. I feel diffident in doing so as so many of your Lordships, from the positions they have held, have had opportunities and experience which have been denied to me. But it seems to me, placed as we are, in the peril in which we find ourselves, that nothing short of a permanently mobilised body incorporated in the Army, treated as part of the Army, is of any use at all. The material is ready to our hands. We have boys who have taken their school certificates, but are too young for active service. We have the British Legion, a vast reservoir of men upon which we can draw. In regard to mobilisation, I do not suggest that any such force should be put into huts or tents; they would be adequately mobilised, in my view, if the men were told that they should not leave their homes at certain hours. The sec-
484
tion commander would be on the telephone and would immediately collect his section if an emergency arose. It should be remembered that the parachutist does not necessarily come at night—the only time in the district in which I am at which the patrols are asked to function. Then with regard to the question of mobility, I see no reason why cars should not be commandeered, and why each section leader should not be told where the cars are; then, the alarm being given, the men could be quickly collected and taken to the district where they are urgently required.
The hour is late, but it is still not too late to deal with this matter with the urgency and seriousness which it requires. It is a matter the importance of which I cannot too much stress, though I do not diminish in one degree the equal urgency of sending to France every trained soldier. But the more we strengthen our Volunteer Defence corps the more we shall be able to release our trained forces for service abroad. It is a matter in which no mistake can be permitted. If we err here it will not be the least of our blunders, but to my mind it would certainly be the last.
5.40 p.m.
LORD GORELL: My Lords, I had no intention of taking part in this debate, but after listening to what has been said, and as my noble friend who has just spoken has made so direct a reference to me, and has been so unfortunate in his experiences, I should like very briefly to present the opposite case. I have the honour to command a platoon in this very much maligned corps. I do not speak as being in any way responsible for an urban area. The problems of the towns, big and small, are no doubt very important, but they are quite different from those of the rural areas. I speak for a rural area adjacent to that of my noble friend Lord Mottistone, and I have been a little more fortunate than I was able to gather from him in the arrangements which it has been possible to make.
If it be argued, as the noble Viscount, Lord Buckmaster, argued, that this force should be on a whole-time basis and not part-time, a completely different set of arguments comes in. Anybody who was to give his full time would obviously have to have means of subsistence provided for him. I can only say that, in a completely rural area, there is nobody who

485
can possibly give his whole time services unless we are to take the men entirely from agriculture. If we are going to deal with a completely rural area, which is the only one of which I can speak in this connection with any experience, it is only possible to take those who are living on the spot, of whom perhaps 90 per cent. are engaged the whole day long in work on the farms. It is a very surprising fact, but it is true, that the other 10 per cent. are people who can contribute in their spare time an extraordinary fund of military experience. I speak on behalf of an area of about twenty square miles of downland, as deserted from the population point of view as any area in the whole of the south of England. Yet, in one small section under my command, I have a man who was for four years a musketry instructor in the Regular Army, two or three others Regular soldiers, and, in the adjacent village, a man who is a Bisley rifle shot, and so on.
There has been no difficulty whatever in organising these people, in getting them to give of their limited leisure enough time to carry out the three duties with which, as I understand, this force is charged—namely, observation, communication, and obstruction. The noble Viscount, Lord Buckmaster, said it was quite uncertain what the duties of this force are. In that case, he is unfortunate in those who command him. In the area for which I speak, there is no doubt or dissension as to what our duties are. Every single person in that area who has enrolled knows perfectly well what his duties are and is prepared to carry them out. Though it is quite true that we cannot take the place of Regular forces, it is also quite true that we are not being asked to do so. It may be that what we are doing is not adequate, but what the Local Defence Volunteer corps is being asked to do in the rural areas it is adequately carrying out.
As regards the criticism made by the noble Lord, Lord Mottistone, that the force should be under county auspices, I am not quite clear what is meant by the word "county"—whether he is using it in terms of the Territorial Force Association or under the aegis or authority of the Lord-Lieutenant.
LORD MOTTISTOKE: It is the same thing.
LORD GORELL: As far as the area of which I speak is concerned, we are under what I consider a better authority, and that is the local authority. We are concerned with local defence. We know exactly the bounds of our responsibility, we know to whom we are responsible, and with whom we have to make liaison. I am not pretending for a moment that everything is for the best in the best possible world. There are many things to be desired—more equipment, more opportunities for musketry practice and so forth. The one real criticism that might justly be used is that this has been very hastily done. There would seem to be no reason, if foresight had been employed, why all this should not have been properly prepared months ago; but within the limited time set us it is quite remarkable the degree of preparation that has been made, and the efficiency of the protection that will be afforded in local areas, subject only to the statement that of course we cannot provide what trained, whole-time people could provide. Within the limits of part-time, and within the limits also of the area in which we are enrolled and are supposed to work, I do not think anything better could have been provided. Subject to these limitations, it is obviously for the Government to say how much more should be done, but it is only right that someone with actual local knowledge of what has been attempted in a rural area should try to dissipate some of the rather severe criticisms which have been made on this new force.
5.46 p.m.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD CROFT): My Lords; I am sure the War Office is grateful to the noble Earl who introduced this question to-day, and we have had a very interesting discussion as a result. I should like to disclaim any personal parentage of this movement, although I have been closely connected with it. It lies more within the immediate functions of my honourable friend Sir Edward Grigg, who keeps in contact with the Commander-in-Chief, although I am kept continuously informed. Before I answer the points which have been raised, I should like to make one or two very general observations which will not detain your Lordships for more than a few moments. I should like to say at once that the Secretary of State and the Army Council regard the Local

487
Defence Volunteers as a really vital part of our essential defences. It is no mere outlet of patriotic emotion which we are endeavouring to recruit, but a fighting force which may be at death grips with the enemy next week, or even to-morrow. That is the attitude of the War Office towards this force, and for that reason it has been placed under the command of the Commander-in-Chief of the Home Forces, and a leader of the calibre of Sir Edmund Ironside has been appointed.
As was remarked by the noble Earl, we have been warned. Norway was enslaved because she was staggered into confusion by treachery from without and within. Her vital air ports, her docks, and her communications were in the enemy's hands before she knew war had started. Holland, bravely fighting on her frontiers against a murderous assault, was attacked by thousands of men from the air in aeroplanes, in seaplanes, as the noble Lord opposite remarked, and by parachutes, all concentrating on the vital points of her life, with great knowledge, and evidently prepared for a very considerable time before the attacks took place. It brought that country in a few days to complete disaster. Neither of these countries could have been overwhelmed, as your Lordships, so many of whom have great military experience, will agree, if they had been in any way organised and prepared to meet these enemies. Everyone is absolutely determined that this must not—shall not—happen in this country of ours. For that reason we are organising, preparing, and training throughout the land.
After all, this call went out only about a fortnight ago, and our people made that response which has never failed when face to face with a peril to their homeland. The response has, in fact, been absolutely magnificent. I doubt if it has ever been equalled in any country in the world. In one small county nearly 6,000 men have volunteered. To-day we can claim we have more than 400,000 men who have been enrolled in that very short time. At last that great reserve pool of trained leaders and trained soldiers of the last war, who had been waiting for the opportunity to fight, now have their chance and have rallied instantly to the call of danger. I must protest against the idea which is put forward that the officers who are to build up the administration of
488
this force are too old. I think a very great deal of nonsense is talked in that direction, and, although I think it is generally accepted in military quarters that for a modern war of movement in the field to-day you must have very young and active men, and active young commanders, I believe also that on consideration it will be agreed that what we need in this particular matter is experience. From my own personal observation I can say that the men who are organising the counties and the groups and the smaller formations, although they may be very senior in military rank, are very active in mind and are getting on with the job extraordinarily well. I think we need make no mistake about this. We have got not only the quantity but the quality that is required. Now our task is to give them the best organisation and the best training possible for the particular job.
Before I answer the two or three questions which were put, may I just emphasize once more what the main functions of this force are? The main duty is to prevent small forces landing by parachute or from planes unobserved and assembling in formations and reaching their objectives, such as factories, public services, telephone communications, blowing up of bridges, and the seizing of aerodromes or anything to cause chaos or confusion before decisive forces can be brought to bear to wipe them out. These forces we are holding disposed in tactically favourable positions throughout the country. We are so disposing trained and well-armed mobile forces that they may deal with invaders wherever they may try to assemble—that is to say, very considerable numbers of soldiers in this country now comprising His Majesty's Army. But the Local Defence Volunteers can help the Regular Forces and help them to a very important degree in three vitally important ways. They are comparable, if I may put it so, to a line of outposts, except that it is a continuous and a circular line embracing almost every town and city of this country. They have to carry out duties somewhat comparable to the duties of outposts. Their three main objects have been referred to. If I may, I will put them in somewhat different words. They are to provide early and accurate news of any enemy landing and report instantly by definite means of communication. This work is organised by local commanders of proved

489
military qualities, with men under their command who, like themselves, know the locality intimately. Secondly, to prevent the attackers from moving fast to points of assembly and reaching their objectives; and, thirdly, to prevent the mobility of the invaders by denying them use of speed either by motor cars or motor cycles, which they might attempt to commandeer and use, and blocking all possible lines of communication and covering the blocks with rifle fire.
LORD MOTTISTONE: If the noble Lord will forgive me interrupting him a moment, what he has said as to the duties of these men is rather at variance with what we have been told. The first duty of the Volunteer surely is to go bald-headed for the German and shoot him. If the Volunteer's weapon is not adequate, then he goes with what weapon he can get. Surely his first duty is to go for the enemy. The other things come after.
LORD CROFT: I think that is not at the moment military opinion. The three principles that I have mentioned have been laid down as a general line on which these forces are being organised and trained. The noble Lord was a very gallant cavalry officer, and he may on occasion have gone a little bit ahead of instruction, but he will realise, I am sure, that until your defence is organised very completely and the training is complete, you might have a very serious mix-up when your mobile force is brought out immediately from the army formation in order to round up the invaders if your defence force was not carrying out its functions of blockading and preventing the assembling of enemies. If the noble Lord's idea were followed you might have a rather difficult position.
LORD MOTTISTONE: I cannot leave the matter there. Surely the first duty of every Englishman when he sees a German is the same duty as that of any Englishman who sees a man about to commit a felony. His duty is to shoot him. If people come down in parachutes, these men should be authorised to shoot them at once. All the rest is a matter of tactics. I hope it will be made plain that that is so.
LORD CROFT: The noble Lord will agree that it is not for me to attempt to vary the practical handling of these troops on lines which have already been laid
490
down. I would only say, when one of the principal functions of this force is to block the possibility of attack at vital points, that it would perhaps be a pity to create any confusion at this moment by suggesting that these men should leave their blocking line and outposts in order to go upon a fox-hunting expedition against individuals, although I quite agree that if the invader was within range you would certainly shoot him. I do not think, however, you should leave the defensive position which has been allotted to you. The third principle is to guard tactical points and places of industrial importance. By these means, with training proceeding rapidly, and with local defence work nearing completion, we can, I think, already say that we have the machinery for preventing the mobility of the invader and defeating any large-scale assembly of enemy parties by local defence measures. We are thus giving time for mobile columns of Regular troops to bring overwhelming forces into action before any objective is reached by any considerable assembly of troops arriving by air carriers, such as were used with disastrous effect in Holland. Within a few days all units will have full plans for these defence tactics. I know the noble Lord will be interested to hear that the Commander-in-Chief is meeting group commanders almost at once. I think within two days a large number of them will be met, but I am not sure that it is possible for commanders from all over the country to be met then. They will be given the considered instructions which the Commander-in-Chief and his staff have been able to devise for dealing with this matter in the very short time that has elapsed since he was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Home Forces.
If I may I will now deal briefly with the actual questions that were asked. The noble Earl, Lord Breadalbane, referred to the difficulties of this organisation in his part of the country. I have made inquiries, and I am informed that the opinion is held in the Highland areas that the control is under very experienced officers, with a very experienced general officer at the head, assisted in every case by officers with fine war records. I think he will agree with me that, although we have had a very interesting discussion, it is not right for us here to give any information to the enemy or to any possible

491
Fifth Columnist in this country—I trust there are not many of them—which would disclose our arrangements for communications or transport. I can, however, tell him that in Perthshire there has been an admirable response and that the opinion is held that in that part of the country the attention which is now being paid to this question will result in arrangements in very difficult country being as good as may be. Telegraphic and telephonic communications have been referred to, but we must go much further than that. Those methods of communication might be completely cut, and in our organisation we must take that into account. That is being done and there would be speedy methods of communication which are not unknown in war.
The noble Earl spoke very strongly about the need for greater co-ordination. He suggested that we were slow on the uptake and that such a force as this should have been in existence before. I would ask your Lordships to remember, however, that from the outbreak of the war we have been continually calling upon the people of this country, and that, apart from the normal flow of conscription, we have recruited over 300,000 volunteers. Mostly they have been of higher ages than those coming under the National Service Act. We have recruited a very considerable National Defence Corps for the very purpose of relieving Regular soldiers of the duty of protecting aerodromes and docks and other places. Then, too, we have raised a very large force of Pioneers, who although they may be old gentlemen like myself, put up an extraordinarily fine fight when what was thought to be a safe rear suddenly became a vital flank in Flanders. The fact is that there has been a remarkable response. I have not been able to check the figures this afternoon, but my recollection is that there are something like a million people in the various A.R.P. services. Some of the very best volunteered first of all, but with regard to co-ordination, men in country districts who are now needed for this Volunteer Force are in many cases engaged in A.R.P. I am not myself convinced that in the villages, at least, it might not be possible for men to carry on the dual function, and I will certainly convey to my right honourable friend that that view is held by some of your Lord-
492
ships. Of course that may not be possible in big cities where there is liability to great bombing. The noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, mentioned the need for a very careful watch on rivers and lakes.
LORD STRABOLGI: Not a watch, but providing temporary booms.
LORD CROFT: I am sorry if I mis-described what the noble Lord said, but he referred to the defence of the waterways. I had this question brought to my notice some days ago, and with regard to certain waterways I know the matter is receiving immediate consideration. I rather gathered that my noble friend wants me to get into contact with the naval authorities and suggest that there should be greater co-operation.
LORD STRABOLGI: Would my noble friend permit me to explain? All he has to do is to issue instructions over the wireless at 9 o'clock to-night at the end of the news and the local people will do it. All they have to do is to go to the nearest publican, get all his empty barrels, string them together and put them across the water. It is not a matter for the naval authorities. They are far too busy with other things.
LORD CROFT: My noble friend will forgive me if I imagined for a moment that this was a matter affecting seaways in charge of the Navy, but I will look into the matter at once.
LORD STRABOLGI: Some are salt waters.
LORD CROFT: In the places I was thinking of defence is carried on by the Admiralty and there is incessant control, but perhaps I should not go further into that matter. "Barrels" will be written on my heart when I leave this House, and I will take as my motto on the way home "Roll out the barrel." The noble Lord raised another question with regard to officers in charge of this force, and pointed out that although administrative work was involved there was no payment of staff. Up to now the whole idea of this movement has been that it should be absolutely voluntary, and the most remarkable part of the thing is that we have had this astonishing response when everybody knew that there was no reward other than service. It may be necessary at a later date, if the work increases in volume, to see whether some assistance

493
should be given in the way of meeting expenses, but I think we must acknowledge that up to now there has been no demand from the officers running these districts for any sort of payment.
I would point out further—this brings me to the point raised by my noble friend Lord Mottistone—that this work is under the administration of the Territorial Associations, which of course have some staff. Some staffs were disbanded, but for the most part the associations have a skilled secretary and probably a clerk or two who could assist in the organisation of the works. Generally speaking, I think it is the desire that if this movement can continue its wonderful voluntary spirit it should so continue. I would like to say in this connection that I did not quite understand the point raised by my noble friend Lord Mottistone about a Field Marshal who was a private and wanted third-class fare. It seems to me that if he is a private he ought to be training in his area and not wandering about the railway. There are, I know, Field Marshals in this House who are taking humble positions and are helping to organise their countrymen. Before I leave the speech of the noble Lord, I must say that we will take great notice about what he said about possible panic evacuation. The history of what has been happening in Belgium is the most ghastly story in the world. There is no doubt we could have inflicted far greater damage on the enemy but for the terrible, uncontrolled panic of refugees going first east, then west and north and south, countermarching in their despair and misery. I hope that we shall see nothing of that kind in this country, and I will convey to my honourable friend what has been said. The noble Lord, Lord Mottistone, particularly urged that the whole question should be put upon a county basis. At present, as I understand it, the organization is, first, the Command, under which are zones and then groups. I think I am right in saying that practically throughout the country the zones correspond to the Chief Constable's areas, and are roughly, therefore, I think, in every case the county boundary.
LORD MOTTISTONE: It would be much better to say so: it would be a help.
LORD CROFT: What the noble Lord has said will, of course, always receive
494
attention; but I think that, broadly, it is so at the present time, and what is so important is that it corresponds with the police area, where you get such great co-operation in this matter. He was also very anxious to see greater co-ordination of defence, and entrusted me with the duty of bearding the War Cabinet and the Prime Minister in order to set up some new system by which a Defence Minister should be brought into the Cabinet as Deputy Minister. I have no doubt that the Prime Minister will receive that suggestion with interest. We all know that for many years the noble Lord has been pressing that point, and some of us now say that it might have been desirable that there should be greater co-ordination of defence before the war took place. He was very anxious indeed that there should be an early broadcast. On reflection he would probably agree that it would be better not to have any more broadcasts until the Commander-in-Chief had met group commanders and they had had time to think out a definite scheme with the evidence which has come to hand. We do not want to tell the enemy any-thing which might give him an indication of the kind of way in which we are meeting the difficulty. At the same time, I agree that it is always good that the country at large should understand the greater principles on which this force is being built up. Actually on Thursday, as I think I mentioned, he is meeting a very large number of group commanders.
Finally, Lord Buckmaster advanced a principle which I think we must resist. He said that—I hope I am not misquoting him—surely the most important function of this force should be its mobility to go from area to area. That is exactly what the force is not intended to do. Except perhaps for mobility in communications within the group—the small area—the mobility must be left to the large fighting formations where there is any large concentration of German troops. The function of this force is to stand and fight—to die if necessary, but I do not think that will be necessary if their barricades are good; to block the roads, and, if the parachutists come within range when they are standing guard over factories and industries, to do as the noble Lord would encourage them to do: to open fire and see that the parachutists are rendered harmless.

495
The noble Lord asked would Hitler use the German Army or would he rely on this kind of defence for his country? No, I think not; I think he would rely on that on which our main reliance must always be placed: that is the crushing effect of our organised mechanised forces which are brought to bear at the earliest possible moment against any serious concentration of troops. With great confidence, from what I have already seen in the country, I can assure your Lordships that on every hand we see a very remarkable growth of spirit and patriotism. The machinery is going forward, and I think we can say that it is going to be so good that we may be able to abandon some of the defensive complex which has been so noticeable in Parliamentary circles, and may give even greater freedom to our striking Army to take part in offensive warfare elsewhere.
6.15 p.m.
LORD MOTTISTONE: Before the noble Lord leaves the subject, we know that many county associations and Lords-Lieutenant would be very grateful if he could say that it is finally settled that the administration and equipment of this new force should be under the county associations. Having been a member of a county association himself, he knows how well they have worked. I think it is the unanimous opinion that it would be a good plan. The noble Marquess, Lord Crewe, who has had to leave, begged me to say to your Lordships that he was quite sure that it was the best plan; it is actually happening in the County of London, but in many counties they do not know. If it could be made plain that you want to use that organisation, it would greatly add to the efficiency of the force.
LORD GORELL: My Lords, I would ask the leave of the House to put one further question. The noble Lord spoke about the possibility of meeting the expenses of this movement. It is, of course, quite true that everyone has done it purely voluntarily. Would he undertake to place in the proper quarter the consideration of the cost of telephonic communication in scattered areas? It comes very heavily on section leaders and platoon commanders.
LORD CROFT: I can only say that I will certainly convey the suggestion to my right honourable friend the Secretary of
496
State, that it should be definitely understood that the organisation is on a county basis. Lord Gorell's suggestion that the necessary expenses should be borne by the authorities I will also undertake to convey.
6.18 p.m.
THE EARL OF BREADALBANE AND HOLLAND: My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord who has replied for the Government for the very long and helpful explanation of the various points which he has been good enough to give us. It is not a very easy job to appear to criticise a force which has done so splendidly in the short time during which it has existed. One criticism to which I should like to refer very briefly is that the noble Lord has told us that the force is to be a static one. I must say I understood, with the noble Lord, Lord Mottistone, that if the force saw Germans they were to go for them. It certainly makes a great difference to any criticism of age if they are merely to remain a static force guarding strong points. Before I leave the whole matter, may I make it clear that the very last thing I wish to do is to criticise a force which has done a unique thing in the history of this country? All I criticise is that it was not done earlier, and all I want to do is to try to remove the red tape which is strangling the efforts of the force and to get it efficient quickly, now. I beg to withdraw my Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, would my noble friend the Deputy Leader of the House be in a position to make any statement about future business?
LORD SNELL: My Lords, the House will meet at four o'clock to-morrow. There is a question on the Paper by the noble Lord, Lord Lamington, respecting the twenty-four-hour system. Beyond that there is no formal business. The House will also meet at four o'clock on Thursday, and I believe that at the present time there are no Orders on the Paper for that day.
House adjourned at twenty minutes past six o'clock.

Preamble
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:

Bournemouth Gas and Water,

Cornwall Electric Power,

London County Council (Money),

Wey Valley Water.

The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

SOUTH-EASTERN GAS CORPORATION, LIMITED (ASSOCIATED COMPANIES) BILL, [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.

LEAMINGTON PRIORS AND WARWICK GAS ORDER, 1940.
Special Order proposed to be made on the application of the Leamington Priors Gas Company and the Warwick Gas Company.
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) for affirmative Resolution and referred to the Special Orders Committee.

DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY PENSIONS (DETERMINATION OF NEED AND ASSESSMENT OF NEEDS) REGULATIONS, 1940.
Report from the Special Orders Committee, That they have examined the Special Order as required by the Standing Orders of the House; that in their opinion the Order raises important questions of policy and principle; that the Order is not founded on precedent; that in the opinion of the Committee the Order cannot be passed by the House without special attention, but that no further inquiry is necessary before the House proceeds to a decision on the Resolution to approve the said Order:
Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

MOTOR VEHICLES (GAS-PROPELLED VEHICLES) (VARIATION OF SPEED LIMIT) REGULATIONS, 1940.
Report from the Special Orders Committee, That they have examined the Special Order as required by the Standing Orders of the House; that in their opinion the Order raises no important questions of policy and principle; that the Order is not founded on precedent, inasmuch as no analogous Order has previously Been approved by the House; that in the opinion of the Committee the Order cannot be passed by the House without special attention, but that no further inquiry is necessary before the House proceeds to a decision on the Resolution to approve the said Order:
Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.