Sitting of 5 September 1940

Preamble
The House after the Adjournment on Thursday, 22nd August for the Summer Recess—met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.
NEW WRIT.
For the Borough of Bolton, in the room of Sir John Haslam, deceased [Captain Margesson].
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

  CLYDE LIGHTHOUSES CONSOLIDATION ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL.
  Order for Third Reading read.
  Mr. Kirkwood: Is there any way by which I can ask a question? This is the Clyde Lighthouses Consolidation Order Confirmation Bill. What does it mean?
  Mr. Speaker: This Bill has been through all its stages. This is the Third Reading, and the hon. Member ought to have asked his question sooner.
  Mr. Kirkwood: I object.
  Third Reading deferred till Tuesday, 17th September.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  ARMED FORCES PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
  Mr. Rhys Daviesasked the Minister of Pensions the number of persons at
  2
  present in receipt of pensions in respect of service in the South African War?
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Pensions (Miss Wilkinson): If, as I presume, the hon. Member has in mind pensions granted for death and disablement, there are approximately 4,900 disablement and 650 widows' pensions in payment in respect of service in wars prior to the Great War. The majority of these would undoubtedly be cases arising out of the South African War, but the records of the Department do not enable me to give the precise number.
  Mr. Davies: Can the hon. Lady say whether the pensions that are paid in respect of the South African War have been brought up to the scale of the pensions in respect of the last war and of this war?
  Miss Wilkinson: The pre-war pensions, that is, those prior to what we call the 'Great War, were brought up to the level of the 1919 to 1921 period, and have not been changed.

  INDIA (CONSTITUTION).
  Mr. Caryasked the Secretary of State for India whether he has any statement to make on the acceptance or rejection in India of the Viceroy's proposals to Indian leaders?
  The Secretary of State for India (Mr. Amery): The Working Committee of the Congress has passed a resolution rejecting the Viceroy's proposals. The Working Committee of the Moslem League has passed a resolution welcoming the Viceroy's statement but requesting recon-

  3
  sideration and further information as regards the proposed expansion of the Executive Council. The views of other parties have not yet been made known.
  Mr. Cary: Can my right hon. Friend say whether any other proposals are under consideration?
  Mr. Amery: No, Sir; the proposals stand.
  Mr. Gallacher: In view of the fact that Congress is the important and deciding factor, will not the right hon. Gentleman consider a new approach to this question?
  Mr. Amery: No, Sir.

  CHANNEL ISLANDS.
  Mr. Ammonasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has yet been able to get into touch with the Channel Islands; and can he now give any information as to the fate of the deserted people?
  The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir John Anderson): I am afraid I am not yet able to add anything to my replies to previous Questions on this subject.
  Mr. Ammon: Has the right hon. Gentleman any information as to the food situation on the Islands?
  Sir J. Anderson: Perhaps I can see the hon. Member afterwards.
  Mr. Mender: In view of the failure of the Home Secretary to obtain any information through the channels of the Red Cross, will he not consider asking some neutral consul to find out what is happening in the Islands?
  Sir J. Anderson: Other channels are being explored.
  Mr. McGovern: Could not the right hon. Gentleman pay a visit there himself?
  Sir J. Anderson: No, Sir.

  CIVIL DEFENCE.

    AIR-RAID WARDENS.
    Colonel Arthur Evansasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that
    4
    an American-born woman, who acquired British nationality by marriage 18 years ago, has been dismissed from her post as a senior air-raid warden by the local council of a Hertfordshire town, who informed her that they felt it imperative to eliminate from Civil Defence Services all persons of alien origin; and, in view of the fact that American pilots are now being accepted in the Royal Air Force, will he issue instructions to local authorities discouraging such dismissals from Defence Services of friendly Americans on technical grounds, particularly those who have subsequently acquired British nationality?
    Sir J. Anderson: My attention has been drawn to this case. The responsibility for deciding whether any particular individual is suitable to act as a member of one of the public Civil Defence Services rests with the local authority concerned. I have suggested to local authorities that they should take steps to satisfy themselves as to the reliability of individual members of these Services; but no instruction issued by my Department would justify the dismissal of a British subject from those Services solely on the ground that he or she was of alien origin.
    Mr. Pearsonasked the home Secretary whether it is intended to make a boot allowance to air-raid precautions wardens on the same lines as is made to the special police and observation post members, especially as many of these men are unemployed?
    Sir J. Anderson: No, Sir. It is not proposed to make a boot allowance to wardens.
    Mr. Pearson: Is there any reason why the air-raid wardens should be treated differently from people in the same Services?
    Sir J. Anderson: No, Sir; the treatment is similar in regard to the Civil Defence Services properly so-called. The police and observation post members, to whom reference is made in the Question, are under entirely different terms of service.
    Mr. Thorne: If the local authorities made an allowance, would that allowance rank for grant?
    Sir J. Anderson: No, Sir; it would not rank for grant.

    RIVER CRAFT, EAST NORFOLK.
    Mr. Adamsonasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that the recent order compelling the immobilisation of all small craft in Eastern England has been taken in East Norfolk to require the laying up of small craft on the Broads and adjacent rivers and the stopping of all facilities for recreation and fishing in this district, thus causing serious hardship to many persons whose livelihood depends on the use of such facilities; and whether he will make it clear that there is no objection to small sailing and rowing craft being used for short periods for these or other innocent purposes provided that such craft are kept strictly immobilised when not in use?
    Sir J. Anderson: I assume that my hon. Friend has in mind the direction issued by the Regional Commissioner in July. That direction was issued after consultation with the Service authorities and was based on military requirements. It does not apply to boats regularly used for trading or essential services or by professional fishermen.

    "ROMA" (CLUB).
    Mr. Ammonasked the Home Secretary the result of the police surveillance of the Fascist Club, "Roma"?
    Sir J. Anderson: Yes, Sir. The premises of this club were recently visited by the police in the execution of a search warrant: and as a result of the search and of various inquiries made by the police about the membership of the club, no grounds can be found for the suggestion that it is a centre for Fascist activities.

    FASCISTS.
    Mr. G. Straussasked the Home Secretary whether any decision has been reached yet in regard to sending British Fascist sympathisers, interned under Regulation 18B, to Canada or Australia?
    Sir J. Anderson: I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave on 22nd August to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Pickthorn).
    Mr. Strauss: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is now two months since the Government said they were considering this matter; and does it mean that any decision in this respect has been indefinitely postponed?
    Sir J. Anderson: I am not aware that the Government have said more than that note would be taken of a certain suggestion.
    Mr. Strauss: Does it mean that it is not the intention of the Government to send these Fascists abroad?
    Sir J. Anderson: The answer means that, if it were the intention to take such a step, the matter would have been brought to the notice of this House, and as that course has not been taken, hon. Members can draw their own conclusion.

    INTERNEES.
    Sir Richard Aclandasked the Home Secretary whether he has had the categories of enemy aliens to be released translated into German; and is there any form available in English and German on which applications for release can be made?
    Sir J. Anderson: Experience shows that the internees have no difficulty in understanding the White Paper. The few who cannot read English, if not helped by other internees, can obtain help from the official interpreters and the liaison officers in the camps. The question of a form of application for release has been considered, but there would have to be so many different forms to fit the different classes of cases that this method would not be helpful to the internees.
    Sir R. Acland: Would the right hon. Gentleman consider the case of wives and relatives of internees who are outside the camps and who also want to know these things; and does he realise that they write to Members of Parliament, who would be very much assisted if there was a translation sent to them?
    Sir J. Anderson: I am prepared to consider any suggestion of that kind, but I should have thought that most of the people are already in touch with refugee organisations, which are very willing to give all assistance possible.
    Miss Rathbone: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the need is felt so great that some of us have to issue our own printed form, and that many thousands have applied for them; and would it not be far better to have an official form?
    Sir J. Anderson: I am sorry to hear that, but if the matter had been brought to my notice earlier, perhaps it could have been done.
    Mr. Mander: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some camps there are no copies of the White Paper available even in English for the internees, and will he look into that matter?
    Sir J. Anderson: Yes, Sir; and perhaps my hon. Friend will send me particulars.
    Sir R. Aclandasked the Home Secretary whether Franz H. Weinberger was given facilities for attending at the American consulate in time for him to leave the country on the boat on which passage had been booked and all arrangements made, at the beginning of this month?
    Sir J. Anderson: I have ascertained that this boy has obtained his visa for the United States and that an exit permit has been granted, and he is now awaiting the sailing of his ship.

    RAID DAMAGE, DWELLING-HOUSES.
    Sir Irving Alberyasked the Minister of Health what action local authorities are responsible for taking immediately after bombing raids in their districts, as regards damage to dwelling-houses and as regards assistance to persons affected by the same?
    The Minister of Health (Mr. Malcolm MacDonald): Local authorities are responsible for carrying out repairs immediately necessary to avoid danger to health in the case both of houses on their own estates and houses of which the owners are unable or unwilling to take action. Responsibility for immediate assistance to persons rendered homeless rests with the public assistance authorities, who have made arrangements which include the provision of food and shelter for a short period, and, where necessary, temporary billeting. Where houses have been destroyed outright or are too badly damaged to be repairable and the families find it difficult to obtain accommodation, local authorities have been given special powers to take possession of houses or other buildings which can be made suitable for housing, and to let them at reasonable rents.
    Sir I. Albery: May I ask by what method one can quickly ascertain whether
    8
    an owner of a house is willing to put it in repair or not?
    Mr. MacDonald: I think the normal method is that officials of a local authority visit the spot where there are damaged houses as soon as possible after the incident, make appropriate inquiries, and so find out very swiftly whether an owner is ready to do repairs or not. I have been to a good many of these places myself, and I am satisfied that generally this is working very satisfactorily indeed, but if there were individual cases of complaint, I should be glad to bring them to the notice of the local authority.
    Mr. Thorne: If a local authority carries out that suggestion, will that rank for grant?
    Mr. MacDonald: The expenses of these repairs are charged on the owner of the property and regarded as a loan on which interest is not charged during the war and in regard to which no payment is required during the war. The whole matter comes up after the war.
    Mr. Thorne: What about people who lose their furniture and effects?
    Mr. J. J. Davidson: Are public assistance authorities limited in the amount of expenditure with regard to this question, and can they make any monetary grant?
    Mr. MacDonald: There is no limit to the expenses which local authorities can incur. The Government give assistance with regard to the raising of loans in order to carry out these repairs. With regard to the last Supplementary Question asked by the hon. Member for Plaistow (Mr. Thorne), where furniture has been destroyed, then the Assistance Board can make grants up to a certain figure for replacement in cases where the family income is below a certain level.
    Mr. Simmonds: Is not my right hon. Friend aware of the unsatisfactory state of affairs which exists where the public have been evicted from their houses because of time bombs or unexploded bombs? Will he see that these people are given shelter by the local authority?
    Mr. MacDonald: In these circumstances it is certainly the responsibility of the local authority that these people should be looked after in a similar way to people whose houses have been damaged or

    9
    destroyed. Again, if hon. Members will let me know of cases where that is not being done, I will look into them at once.

    MINISTRY OF HOME SECURITY (RETIRED INDIAN CIVIL SER VANTS).
    Mr. Stokesasked the Home Secretary how many retired Indian civil servants are at present employed in the air-raid precautions section of the Ministry; and which of them are paid £500 a year or more?
    Sir J. Anderson: There are in the Ministry of Home Security 38 persons who have retired from civil employment under Government in India. Thirty-one of these are in receipt of a salary of £500 a year or more.
    Mr. Stokes: Will the Home Secretary say how many of these Bengali tigers have special qualifications for air-raid precautions work?
    Hon. Members: Order.

    OLD AGE PENSIONS.
    Mr. Kirkwoodasked the Minister of Health whether he will consult with the Ministry of Information with a view to making special inquiries in selected districts of Great Britain with regard to the examinations which aged people have to undergo before the Assistance Board Appeal Tribunals when applying for supplementary old age pensions, in order to test the public feeling which has been aroused throughout the country about the hardships suffered by these old people and the ordeals they have to undergo when applying for more money to keep body and soul together?
    Mr. M. MacDonald: More than 1,000,000 persons have received supplementary pensions, and I cannot agree that applicants have to suffer hardships or ordeals in the examination of their claims. I do not think therefore that there is a need for the special inquiries which the hon. Member suggests.
    Mr. Quibell: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some instances the officers making the inquiries ask the applicants to produce even their laundry bills, and also their rates bills and their rent book, that in many cases they ask the
    10
    amount of wages earned by the son-in-law, and that if they refuse the information the supplementary pension is refused? It is a scandal.
    Mr. MacDonald: Parliament has decided that a certain investigation should be made. The only question that arises is whether these inquiries have been carried out properly and impartially. If hon. Members will bring to my attention any cases where harshness has been used or where improper inquiries have been made, I will look into them.
    Mr. Quibell: There are thousands of them.
    Mr. Buchanan: While admitting that Parliament decided upon the investigation, is not the Minister prepared, after months of its operation, to have an inquiry to see whether the intention of Parliament is being carried out in the proper spirit? Will he reconsider his decision and have an inquiry made?
    Mr. MacDonald: The authorised inquiry is being made. Many hon. Members have sent me cases from their constituents, and having looked into all those, I am not satisfied that the number involved is so great that a general inquiry is required. If hon. Members have particulars of other cases and will bring them to my notice, I will look into them.
    Mr. Buchanan: Is the Minister aware that the method of doing this is not to overburden any Cabinet Minister but to take up these cases locally? Will he not reconsider the matter and set up a neutral body to re-examine the position, as there is intense feeling in the country?
    Viscountess Astor: Is it not true that there are about four times as many people getting assistance as need it?
    Mr. Gallecher: Is not the Minister aware that there are bitter complaints being made about the questions being asked and the very small amounts allowed to deserving old age pensioners? Will he not make an inquiry into how these Regulations are operating?
    Mr. MacDonald: The opportunity which I have had of looking at this matter is of looking at the various individual cases, but if hon. Members felt that a whole category of cases are not being treated in accordance with the desires of Parliament, I would certainly like to consider those

    11
    cases with a view to seeing whether some inquiry by a Board or some other authority was required. I have not so far had such categories brought to my notice.
    Mr. Maxton: When the Minister asks us to send him cases, does that mean that he has taken over the Scottish aspect of this question as well as his own, or must Scottish Members send their cases to the Secretary of State for Scotland?
    Mr. MacDonald: Cases coming within the purview of the Secretary of State for Scotland should go to him and not to me.

  NATIONAL FINANCE.

    DOLLAR SECURITIES.
    Sir I. Alberyasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, when negotiating the sale of dollar securities, the Treasury are guided solely by the nominal market quotation for a limited number of shares, or whether they seek advice as to the real value attaching to the assets concerned?
    The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Kingsley Wood): The actual selling of securities is handled by a representative in New York of the Treasury, who keeps in the closest possible touch with the market and with expert opinion and is, therefore, in a position to advise the Treasury on all questions regarding the selling of securities.
    Sir I. Albery: May I ask whether in all cases a person who has given up dollar securities will receive in payment approximately the same sum as has been received by the Treasury on account of their sale?
    Sir K. Wood: I will look into that.

    AIR-RAID WARNING.
    Mr. Speaker: An air-raid warning has been given. [HON. MEMBERS: "Carry on."] I understand that an arrangement has been made whereby the Air Ministry will inform the House when the raid is more imminent. In view of that fact, I think the House can continue its proceedings now.
    Later—
    Captain Markham: On a point of Order. With regard to air raids, I understand that the public galleries have been cleared. May that not be reconsidered
    12
    in view of the fact that many of those attending Parliament in these days would much prefer to carry on in the Gallery rather than be shepherded to shelters?
    Mr. Speaker: The question has been very carefully considered, and we came to the conclusion that it would be best in the interests of the visitors themselves that, on a red raid warning being given, the public galleries should be closed.
    Mr. Markham: Could it not be revised and left to the discretion of the visitors?
    Mr. Denville: You do not close the theatres of the country and turn the audiences out.

    INTEREST-FREE LOANS (BANKS).
    Mr. Stokesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many banks have subscribed to the interest-free loan; and the total amount of those subscriptions?
    Sir K. Wood: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Financial Secretary to my hon. Friend the Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) on 23rd July.
    Mr. Stokes: As the banks create all the currency and the Government now control the banks, is it not possible for the Chancellor to give instructions to the banks that they should subscribe liberally to these loans?
    Sir K. Wood: I must leave that to the corporations and individuals themselves.

    BANK OF ENGLAND (DIRECTORS).
    Mr. Stokesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the whole or any part of the £30,000 a year increase in salaries and pensions to the seven active Directors of the Bank of England will be provided by the issue department before calculation of its profits or by the banking department of that institution?
    Sir K. Wood: I would refer my hon. Friend to my reply to his Question of 20th August. The profits of the issue department are calculated after allowing for all necessary current expenses, including such proportion of the general overhead charges of the Bank as may reasonably be attributed to that department, and the amount allowed as an expense of the issue department in respect of Directors' remuneration is less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. of the total costs of that department.
    Mr. Stokes: The Chancellor has not answered my Question. Will he tell me whether this sum is to be voted from the issue department or the banking department, and will he say whether he himself really considers that this extra payment to Directors is justified, and, if so, on what grounds?
    Sir K. Wood: That is not a matter for me. So far as the other part of the Question is concerned, I hope the hon. Member will study my reply. I think he will find I have answered the Question on the Paper. So far as my powers in connection with taxation are concerned, they will be fully exercised.
    Mr. Woodburn: Is a bank any more than any other firm entitled to issue great sums to its directors so as to escape Excess Profits Tax?
    Sir K. Wood: No, Sir.

    BANK OVERDRAFTS (SMALL DEPOSITORS).
    Commander Locker-Lampsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will introduce a moratorium now to relieve, in particular, the overdrafts of small depositors which are being called in by the banks?
    Sir K. Wood: On the question of a moratorium, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General gave him on 25th June, 1940. I have made careful inquiries into the suggestion that the banks are calling in the overdrafts of small customers, and as a result I am satisfied that customers who are in difficulties through no fault of their own are receiving sympathetic consideration by the banks.
    Commander Locker-Lampson: Did not the absence of a moratorium on the outbreak of the war force small and other investors to liquidate their securities, which were forced on to the market and bought up by waiting dealers at a grave decrease in value, to be sold later at a high price, while the original owners were ruined? Can we have an inquiry into this?
    Sir K. Wood: I will, if my hon. Friend has any particular case.
    Commander Locker-Lampson: May we have a Debate and a deputation?
    Sir K. Wood: Let us have the papers first.
    Mr. De la Bère: Banks should not be allowed to liquidate securities as they are doing. Have they not done this at uneconomic prices, which has caused great distress, and why has there not been some finished thought? There has been too much unfinished thought.
    Sir K. Wood: Perhaps my hon. Friend will make a contribution by sending me some of the cases.
    Mr. De la Bère: Perhaps my right hon. Friend will have a word with me afterwards.

    WAR SAVINGS (DETERMINATION OF NEEDS) BILL.
    Mr. Manderasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the present position with regard to the War Savings (Determination of Needs) Bill; and whether consideration has been given to the inclusion of allowances made by public assistance committees?
    Sir K. Wood: This matter is still under consideration, and I am not in a position to make a statement at present. The reply given to my hon. Friend's Question on 22nd August was the result of the consideration given to the point raised in the second part of the Question.
    Mr. Mander: Is not the Chancellor aware that this point was raised by the Leader of the Liberal party during the original discussion? Will he consult with the Secretary of State for Air?
    Sir K. Wood: I am glad to consult with anybody who can give me any assistance.

    ROYAL AIR FORCE (CASUALTIES, ANNOUNCEMENT).
    Mr. Lawsonasked the Secretary of State for Air what is the real meaning of the regular official announcement to the effect that when a British plane is lost the pilot was saved; and whether this statement includes the rest of the occupants of any machine concerned?
    Mr. Boulton (Lord of the Treasury): I have been asked to reply. Reference in an official statement to the pilot of an aircraft being saved normally implies that the aircraft was a single-seater fighter. With other types of aircraft, reference is

    15
    made, when appropriate, to members of the crew.
    Mr. Lawson: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in actual fact there is not any reference made to other members of the crew? At least I personally have not seen it. The only reference is to the pilot.

    AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION (ROOTES SECURITIES, LIMITED).
    Mr. Gallacherasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Aircraft Production whether he has considered a detailed statement from the shop stewards' committee of Rootes Securities, Limited, reflecting seriously on the organisation of production in which the suggestion is made that an official inquiry should be made into the conditions prevailing in the factory; and what steps does he propose to take?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Aircraft Production (Colonel Llewellin): Yes, Sir. I have myself read the statement referred to. On 17th and 21st June, the manager of the factory in question held long discussions with representatives of the workmen. I have read the accounts of these meetings and am satisfied that all the substantial points raised by the workmen which could be met were met. The output from this factory is satisfactory, and any further official inquiry unnecessary.
    Mr. Gallacher: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman not aware that the shop stewards and workers in the factory are not satisfied that the output is what it could be or that the organisation of the factory is what it should be, and will not the Minister take steps to have an inquiry of some kind made so as to make absolutely certain whether the workers or the management are right?
    Colonel Llewellin: We sent a representative of the Ministry to the factory, and the resident managing director came down to the Ministry. There is, it is true, some shortage in the supply of raw material, but an endeavour is being made to bring that up to date as quickly as possible.
    Mr. Gallacher: Did you not have any workers down at the Ministry?

  MERCANTILE MARINE.

    MOTOR LIFEBOATS.
    Mr. David Adamsasked the Minister of Shipping the progress made in the provision of motor lifeboats to vessels of the merchant navy?
    The Minister of Shipping (Mr. Cross): Yes, Sir. Motor lifeboats are being fitted on all merchant ships of 500 tons gross or over under construction on Government account, and I am advised that, of the ships now under construction for private shipowners, about one-third are being so fitted.
    Mr. Adams: What is the position with regard to second-hand tonnage?
    Mr. Cross: Owing to shortage of supply and labour in general, it is not possible to do more than I have already described in my answer.

    NAVAL GUNLAYERS.
    Mr. David Adamsasked the Minister of Shipping whether steps are being taken to man the guns of merchant vessels when in our ports by naval ratings and not by the customarily overworked ship's personnel?
    Mr. Cross: Yes, Sir. This is being done as far as possible. There is one naval gunlayer on each ship, and a second gun-layer is provided where possible, but my right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty informs me that the demands on the Royal Navy at the present time make it impossible for him to provide complete guns' crews for merchant ships in port.
    Commander Marsden: Is it not the case that the present arrangements made with the consent of all parties on the national Maritime Board in the Tyne area have been most loyally and efficiently carried out?
    Mr. Cross: I am extremely grateful to the hon. Member for mentioning that and I recognise the fine work done by the crews in manning their guns.
    Mr. Adams: Will the Minister call for the opinion of masters of vessels as to the effect on ships personnel of excessive hours of labour?
    Mr. Cross: I have obtained very full information on the point and I do not think they are excessive hours of

    17
    work. I have made the best arrangements possible in the circumstances and no man is called upon to work the guns two nights in succession. If it should occur that they have to man the guns on successive nights substantial payment would be made.

    COAL INDUSTRY.
    Mr. David Adamsasked the Secretary for Mines whether he can now make a statement relative to the position of the coal trade generally; and with particular reference to the export areas of the coalfields?
    The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell): I hope, if time permits, and if it is the wish of the House, to make a statement on the lines suggested on the Motion for the Adjournment to-day.

  FOOD SUPPLIES.

    POULTRY FEEDING-STUFFS.
    Mr. De Ia Bèreasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food why no suitable plan was thought out 18 months ago to meet, in the event of war, an inevitable shortage of European and Asiatic imported eggs by importing increased supplies of feeding-stuffs, and, with them, increasing home poultry breeding?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Mr. Boothby): I cannot accept the suggestion that 18 months ago a shortage of European eggs should have been regarded as inevitable, and there has been no shortage of Asiatic eggs, imports of which have increased since the outbreak of war.
    Mr. De la Bère: I wish only to prevent a recurrence of this. Will my hon. Friend use every endeavour to see that feeding-stuffs are available for small poultry keepers? Is he aware that it takes more than an air raid to put me off this subject?
    Mr. Boothby: I am well aware of that.

    TEA AND SUGAR RATIONS (RAILWAY WORKERS).
    Mr. Watkins (for Mr. J. Henderson)asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware of the special hardship imposed upon those railway employés who are compelled to lodge away from home by
    18
    the small rations of tea and sugar allowed; and if he will, in view of the special circumstances, consider the advisability of increasing the rations of these commodities?
    Mr. Boothby: Railway employés receive the same rations of tea and sugar as any other classes of the community, and my Noble Friend is unable in present circumstances to sanction an increase. The Food Control Committees are, however, authorised to issue special permits for the purchase of tea for industrial, business and clerical workers, for consumption during their working hours, in cases where they cannot obtain tea from a registered canteen. I realise that special problems arise in regard to the provision of rationed commodities to certain classes of railway employés, and I am in consultation with the Minister of Transport in an endeavour to find a solution of those problems.
    Mr. George Griffiths: Is the Minister aware of the fact that there is no canteen in a coal-mine and that the collier who takes down one bottle with him cannot get any more; and will he not arrange for those men to get more tea?
    Mr. Speaker: The Question refers to railway workers and not to coal miners.
    Mr. John Morgan: Will these special facilities for tea apply also to mobile units of men working at the ploughing-up campaign a long distance from their homes?

    IMMINENCE OF AIR RAID (SUSPENSION OF SITTING)
    Mr. Speaker: I am informed that an air raid is now considered to be imminent, and I will accordingly suspend the Sitting.
    On resuming, after an interval of 35 minutes—
    Mr. Speaker: The House will remember that when I suspended the Sitting, it was on the receipt of a message from the Fighter Command that an air raid was imminent. Since then I have received a further message that the immediate danger is passed, but the House must remember that the red warning is still in operation, and we are still on the alert. I have given orders that strangers should be readmitted to the Gallery. The House will also remember that when I suspended the Sitting at 20 minutes past three o'clock

    19
    we had not finished Questions, and on the present occasion I propose that we shall continue Questions for a further 25 minutes.
    Mr. Bellenger: In view of what has happened this afternoon, may I ask whether our procedure in this respect cannot be revised? This is not exactly a good advertisement for the House of Commons. We cannot hope to make successful appeals to factory workers to carry on their work during air raids, if the House of Commons itself is constantly to adjourn on receipt of air-raid warnings. I do not know what is the correct procedure to follow to have this matter reconsidered, and whether it rests with you, Mr. Speaker, or with the Prime Minister, but I earnestly trust that the whole system will be revised.
    Mr. Speaker: When the Prime Minister makes a statement later, I understand that he intends to refer to this matter, and perhaps the House will await that statement.

    HOUSE OF COMMONS (REFRESHMENT DEPARTMENT).
    Mr. Frankelasked the hon. Member for Dulwich as Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, what arrangements have been made with respect to the staff of the Refreshment Department during the coming weeks, when the sittings of the House will be intermittent; how many of the staff, apart from the few who are on full pay all the year round, are being dismissed; how many are retained during Recesses on half-pay; whether those on half-pay are expected to hold themselves ready for service without any opportunity of taking other employment; whether there is any arrangements for holidays with pay; whether, in the existing exceptional circumstances, he will consider maintaining a nucleus on adequate wages; and how it is proposed to ensure an efficient staff on the days when the House meets during the customary Summer Recess?
    Mr. Bracewell Smith: The Kitchen Committee found it necessary to rearrange the staff duties in view of the intermittent Sittings of the House, and this involved a reduction in the number of employés. 29 members of the staff were
    20
    engaged for the Session only, and their employment came to an end on Thursday, 22nd August, but the Committee were assured by the Employment Exchange that there would be no difficulty in finding work for them. In addition to the nine permanent members of the staff, 24 were retained on full pay for two weeks, and afterwards on half pay, and 16 members were offered half pay for the whole of the Recess. All members of the staff are at liberty to take up other employment. Holidays with pay were given to all members of the permanent and retained staff, and the Kitchen Committee have arranged to maintain an efficient service, at adequate wages, on those days when the House meets.
    Mr. Frankel: In view of the fact that many of the employés during intervals in the Sittings of the House are liable to be called on at short notice and are therefore unable to take other employment, is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that they are dealt with properly under this scheme?
    Mr. Bracewell Smith: I wish to assure the hon. Member that the Kitchen Committee made its decision with a full knowledge of all the facts and in an endeavour to cause as little hardship as possible, and at the same time to show some regard to the Treasury.
    Mr. Hicks: I understand from the hon. Gentleman's reply that some members of the staff are allowed to go on half pay. Do I understand that they can obtain other employment and still have the half-pay?
    Mr. Bracewell Smith: They can take the half pay and take other employment as well.
    Mr. McGovern: Was the decision of the Kitchen Committee unanimous?
    Mr. Bracewell Smith: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Davidson: Are adequate measures taken to enable members of the staff to make representations to the Kitchen Committee?
    Mr. Bracewell Smith: Yes, Sir, the Members of the Kitchen Committee prefer that members of the staff should make representations or complaints to the Committee.

    AIR RAIDS (REPRISALS).
    Sir Annesley Somervilleasked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to make the whole civil population of Germany realise the peril in which it is placed by the action of the German air force in bombing and machine-gunning purely residential areas in this country?
    The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Attlee): I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 23rd July last in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester (Mr. Lewis).
    Sir A. Somerville: Is it not possible to take more direct steps to protect our own women and children? For instance, if residential areas are machine-gunned and bombed here, is it not possible, after giving due warning so as to allow of the evacuation of the German women and children concerned, to wipe out corresponding residential areas in Germany?
    Mr. Gerro Jones: What possible object can be gained by throwing into so much prominence, in perspective, the dangers which the civil population incur; and would it not be better to concentrate on the smallness of those dangers in comparison with the dangers run by the Fighting Services?
    Mr. Attlee: I think those points are dealt with by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in his reply.

  BRITISH ARMY.

    CONTRACTS (ALLEGATIONS).
    Sir Waldron Smithersasked the Secretary of State for War whether he has yet received a report on the serious allegations of waste and extravagance and other irregularities preferred by Major Evans, Major Reid Kellett, D.S.O., M.C., and Mr. W. H. E. Carr, in connection with War Office works; and can he now make any further statement on these allegations, and the further steps he proposes to take in order that these allegations may, in the public interest, be substantiated or refuted?
    The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Richard Law): The allegations by Major Reid Kellett and Mr. Carr were the subject of two special investigations conducted by my hon. and learned
    22
    Friend the Member for Bolton (Sir C. Entwistle) and the Treasury Solicitor respectively. As a result of these investigations, it was decided that there was no reason for any further inquiry. My hon. Friend may remember that, in a letter to the then Secretary of State, he himself concurred in this decision. I am sending him a copy of the letter in question. As regards the allegations by Major Evans, these have been carefully examined, and, as a result, I am satisfied that no prima facie case exists which would justify further inquiry. I have written to my hon. Friend, enclosing the results of these inquiries, and I am hopeful that, when he has perused them, he will concur in the view which I have just expressed.
    Sir W. Smithers: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that since that letter was written I have been given to understand that no witnesses were allowed at the inquiry; and as these allegations are so serious, may I ask him to suggest to his right hon. Friend that a special inquiry should be held, at which these three gentlemen could be heard and could produce their witnesses?
    Mr. Law: In the case of the inquiry held by the hon. and learned Member for Bolton (Sir C. Entwistle), it is, I think, true that these witnesses were not present, but my hon. Friend should not take it that the officer in question had not every opportunity of putting his case. I would point out that this inquiry was not one which invoked the whole machinery of the law. Its purpose was to discover whether or not it was necessary to invoke that machinery, and it was quite clear from the evidence that that was not necessary. With regard to the Treasury Solicitor's inquiry, all kinds of witnesses were examined at it and it is clear that every one of the charges was of a completely frivolous character.
    Sir W. Smithers: In view of the most unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

    CABLED REMITTANCES.
    Sir I. Alberyasked the Secretary of State for War what facilities have now been arranged for reducing the charges for money remittances by cable to troops

    23
    serving in Malta or any other stations where a regular mail service cannot at present be relied on?
    Mr. Law: I am informed by my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General that while it is not practicable to reduce the cost of transmitting telegraph money orders to Malta, special arrangements are being made for a more expeditious method of advising ordinary money orders, which should result in a much speedier service and go far to render unnecessary the transmission of money orders to Malta by telegraph.
    Sir I. Albery: Can my hon. Friend say what measures he proposes to introduce, as great hardship at present exists and people have to pay as much as four or five shillings in order to send £2?
    Mr. Law: I am afraid that for obvious reasons I cannot yet give details of the measures proposed, but I can assure my hon. Friend that the great expense which he describes will not be characteristic of the new arrangements.
    Sir I. Albery: How are the people concerned to know what steps they can take, when there is no notice given to them?
    Mr. Law: When these arrangements have been completed, fuller information will be given, and they are being made now.
    Mr. Gallacher: If the Minister would pay the men sufficient wages, there would be no need to send them remittances.

    BRITISH PRISONERS OF WAR.
    Mr. Keelingasked the Secretary of State for War what arrangements have been made for the exchange of letters with British prisoners of war in Italian hands and for the despatch of food and clothing to them?
    Mr. Law: Pending the receipt of the camp addresses of British prisoners of war in Italian hands, letters and postcards which are posted to them in this country are being forwarded to the Italian Red Cross in Rome for re-direction. As regards parcels of food and clothing, the War Organisation of the British Red Cross Society and Order of St. John have requested the International Red Cross Committee in Geneva to send parcels,
    24
    from stocks in their possession, through the same channels for distribution to these prisoners of war.

    EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
    Mr. Edmund Harveyasked the Secretary of State for War whether steps are being taken to give fuller opportunities for the troops to attend technical, vocational and cultural classes, especially during the forthcoming months; whether adequate use is being made for such educational work of the teachers now enlisted in the Forces; and whether further use can be made of civilian organisations in arranging for classes, lectures and study groups?
    Mr. Law: Yes, Sir. Machinery already exists for securing the assistance of universities and voluntary bodies as well as of local education authorities through the Central Advisory Council for Adult Education in His Majesty's Forces and the Regional Committees associated with it. in providing for the educational needs of all types of the troops, and steps have already been taken to secure an expansion of the educational service to meet the requirements of the coming months. It is contemplated that the fullest possible use should be made of the resources for this work available in the Forces together with those offered by civilian organisations.
    Mr. Harvey: Would that include making use of the services of teachers of technical colleges, and lecturers of the Workers Educational Association, and others already enlisted?
    Mr. Law: Yes, Sir, I think it includes all those.

    OFFICERS' LOST KIT.
    Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore (for Lord Burghley)asked the Secretary of State for War whether, when deciding on the new assessment for the replacement sums to be paid to officers who lost their kit at Dunkirk, he will consider the practice of the Admiralty; and will he also take into account the greatly increased cost of this kit and the fact that depreciation of its value is unfair as the majority of officers could reasonably expect never to have to replace it?
    Mr. Law: While it is not proposed to adopt the Admiralty rules. I am glad to be able to tell my Noble Friend that instructions are being issued which will have

    25
    the effect of introducing considerable relaxation in the basis of the assessment of compensation, to the benefit of the officers concerned. The new basis will be applied with retrospective effect to cover the replacement of kit lost in Norway and France, and will take into account the present increased cost of kit.
    Mr. Bellenger: May I ask whether the increase will be given to those officers who have already had a settlement—there was a large number of them in the case of Dunkirk—without their making further application for it?
    Mr. Law: The details of the scheme have not yet been worked out, and I am not in a position to say whether the review will be automatic or whether applications will have to be made, but in any case the officers will be entitled to get the increase.

    ROYAL NAVY (MEDICAL OFFICERS).
    Commander Locker-Lampsonasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether doctors in civilian practice who served in the Navy in the last war will be given priority of appointment on application to join up as surgeons or otherwise?
    The Civil Lord of the Admiralty (Captain Austin Hudson): The Admiralty, who make appointments of temporary medical officers on the recommendation of the Central Medical War Committee, at present require only young officers, mostly for seagoing appointments in small ships. The rank and responsibilities which newly entered officers are given would thus not be suitable for medical officers who served in the last war and who have now had long service in their profession.
    Commander Locker-Lampson: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether these older officers are not better than the younger ones and have they not acquired skill in dealing with special diseases?
    Captain Hudson: We want up-to-date officers.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. Lees-Smith: May I ask the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the future Sittings of the House?
The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): Yes, Sir. We propose that the House shall adjourn to-day until Tuesday, 17th September, and meet also on Wednesday, 18th, and Thursday, 19th September, which will give hon. Members an opportunity of debating several important matters.
The following subjects are proposed for debate:
Tuesday, 17th September—The scheme for physical recreation of young people.
Wednesday, 18th September — The health of the nation, with special reference to National Health Insurance.
The subject to be debated on Thursday, 19th September, will be announced later.
If necessary, I will make a statement on the war situation on one of these days.
Mr. Gallacher: In the Debate on the Wednesday will it be possible to discuss the question of old age pensions and supplementary benefits?
The Prime Minister: I believe there is a desire that that should be the subject of separate discussion.
Mr. Woodburn: I wish to raise a point of Order. During the vacation a number of Questions have been sent in to the Clerk at the Table, and none of these appears on the Order Paper. I should like to ask whether it is intended that during the next interval in the sittings of the House no Questions will be accepted when the House is not sitting.
Mr. Speaker: It is contrary to the Rules of the House to accept Questions in those circumstances.
Mr. Woodburn: I was under the impression that if Questions were sent in 48 hours before the Sitting of the House, they would be in order. That has not been so during this vacation, and, therefore, I ask for your guidance as to what the proper procedure is.
Mr. Speaker: What the hon. Member says is correct only in the case of a long adjournment of the House. It is not the rule when there is a short adjournment. If the House sits on Tuesday, there will be no opportunity to put down Questions.
Mr. Kirkwood: Does that mean that any Questions that we desire to put must be handed in to-day?
Mr. Speaker: That is so.
Mr. Garro Jones: You were good enough, Mr. Speaker, to indicate a few minutes ago that the Prime Minister was to make a statement in regard to the Sittings of the House during air raids. As this is a matter to which many hon. Members attach importance, may I ask whether that statement is to be made now or during the general statement by the Prime Minister?
The Prime Minister: I propose to make it during my general statement.
Lieut.-Colonel Sir T. Moore: Further to the point of Order which was raised just now. Does your decision, Mr. Speaker, mean that those Questions which have been submitted to the Clerks at the Table during the last fortnight and have not been accepted or are handed in at the Table to-day will appear on the Order Paper on 17th September?
Mr. Speaker: Yes, that is so.
Mr. Frankel: In view of the fact that the House is working under exceptional procedure in these times, and that Questions which have been handed in lately cannot appear on the Order Paper until 17th September, would it not be advisable to make a new rule in view of the changed circumstances?
Mr. Speaker: I understand that that course might be considered, but it would require a special Order of the House.
Mr. Frankel: What is the procedure, Sir? May I move a Resolution?
Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member can move a Resolution, but he must give notice of it on the Order Paper.
Sir Henry Morris-Jones: Can the Prime Minister give the House an indication whether it is the intention of the Government that, when we re-assemble on 17th September, we should sit once a week or twice a week? I tabled an Amendment to a Motion which I understood might be moved. I have not seen the Motion on the Order Paper, but I read about it in the Press.
The Prime Minister: Although the Government naturally want to meet Members' convenience, we must see how we get on, and must arrange our sittings in accordance with the public interest.
Mr. Gallacher: In view of the importance and urgency of the discussion in this House of old age pensions, and in order to ensure a stronger feeling of continuity, would not the Prime Minister consider allocating a day next week for discussion of this subject?
The Prime Minister: These matters should be settled through the usual channels. I am very far from wishing to discourage the hon. Member, but some hon. Members are far more associated with the subject of old age pensions than I am aware the hon. Gentleman is.
Resolved,
"That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn till Tuesday, 17th September."— [The Prime Minister.]

PUBLICATIONS AND DEBATES REPORTS.
Third Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, brought up, and read;
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 160.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  NATIONAL EXPENDITURE.
  That they give leave to the Lord Cornwallis to attend in order to his being examined as a Witness before the Sub-Committee on Army Services appointed by the Select Committee appointed by this House on National Expenditure, if his Lordship think fit.
ADJOURNMENT.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."— [Captain Margesson.]

WAR SITUATION.
4.19 p.m.
The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): The memorable transactions between Great Britain and the United States, which I foreshadowed when I last addressed the House, have now been completed. As far as I can make out, they have been completed to the general satisfaction of the British and American peoples and to the encouragement of our friends all over the world. It would be a mistake to try to read into the official notes which have passed more than the documents bear on their face. The exchanges which have taken place are simply measures of mutual assistance rendered to one another by two friendly nations, in a spirit of confidence, sympathy and good will. These measures are linked together in a formal agreement. They must be accepted exactly as they stand. Only very ignorant persons would suggest that the transfer of American destroyers to the British flag constitutes the slightest violation of international law or affects in the smallest degree the non-belligerency of the United States.
I have no doubt that Herr Hitler will not like this transference of destroyers, and I have no doubt that he will pay the United States out, if ever he gets the chance. That is why I am very glad that the army, air and naval frontiers of the United States have been advanced along a wide are into the Atlantic Ocean, and that this will enable them to take danger by the throat while it is still hundreds of miles away from their homeland. The Admiralty tell us also that they are very glad to have these 50 destroyers, and that they will come in most conveniently to bridge the gap which, I have previously explained to the House, inevitably intervenes before our considerable war-time programme of new construction comes into service.
I suppose the House realises that we shall be a good deal stronger next year on the sea than we are now, although that is quite strong enough for the immediate work in hand. There will be no delay in bringing the American destroyers into active service; in fact, British crews are already meeting them at the various ports where they are being delivered.
40
You might call it the long arm of coincidence. I really do not think that there is any more to be said about the whole business at the present time. This is not the appropriate occasion for rhetoric. Perhaps I may, however, very respectfully, offer this counsel to the House: When you have got a thing where you want it, it is a good thing to leave it where it is.
The House has no doubt observed—to change the subject—that Rumania has undergone severe territorial mutilation. Personally, I have always thought that the Southern part of Dobrudia ought to be restored to Bulgaria, and I have never been happy about the way in which Hungary was treated after the last war. We have not at any time adopted, since this war broke out, the line that nothing could be changed in the territorial structure of various countries. On the other hand, we do not propose to recognise any territorial changes which take place during the war, unless they take place with the free consent and good will of the parties concerned. No one can say how far Herr Hitler's empire will extend before this war is over, but I have no doubt that it will pass away as swiftly as, and perhaps more swiftly than, did Napoleon's Empire, although, of course, without any of its glitter or its glory.
The general air battle, of which I spoke the last time we met together, continues. In July, there was a good deal of air activity, but August has been a real fighting month. Neither side has put out its full strength, but the Germans have made a very substantial and important effort to gain the mastery, and they have certainly put forth a larger proportion of their total air strength than we have found it necessary, up to the present, to employ against them. Their attempt to dominate the Royal Air Force and our anti-aircraft defences, by daylight attacks, has proved very costly for them. The broad figures of three to one in machines and six to one in pilots and crews, of which we are sure, do not by any means represent the total injuries inflicted upon the enemy. We must be prepared for heavier fighting in this month of September. The need of the enemy to obtain a decision is very great, and if he has the numbers with which we have hitherto credited him, he should be able to magnify and multiply his attacks during September.

41
Firm confidence is felt by all the responsible officers of the Royal Air Force in our ability to withstand this largely increased scale of attack, and we have no doubt that the whole nation, taking its example from our airmen, have been proud to share their dangers and will stand up to the position grim and gay. Now is the chance of the men and women in the factories to show their mettle, and for all of us to try to be worthy of our boys in the air and not make their task longer or harder by the slightest flinching. That, I know, is the temper of the nation, and even if the average attack is doubled or trebled—which last is most unlikely—and however long it continues, we believe that we can stand it and that we shall emerge from it actually and relatively stronger in the air than we were before.
Our Air Force to-day is more numerous and better equipped than it was at the outbreak of the war, or even in July, and, to the best of our belief, we are far nearer to the total of the German numerical strength, as we estimate it, than we expected to he at this period in the war. I asked that the German claims of British aircraft destroyed during July and August should be added up. I was curious to see the total to which they would amount. I found them to make the surprising total of 1,921 British air-craft destroyed. That total is rather like the figures we heard about of losses among our Fleet, many ships of which have been sunk several times over. The actual figure of British losses, which we have published daily for these last two months, is 558. Our loss in pilots is, of course, happily very much less. I do not know whether Herr Hitler believes the truth of his own published figures. I hope he does. Ons is always content to see an enemy plunged in error and self-deception. How very differently this air attack which is now raging has turned out from what we imagined it would be before the war. More than 150,000 beds have stood open and, thank God, empty in our war hospitals for a whole year. When the British people make up their minds to go to war they expect to receive terrible injuries. That is why we tried to remain at peace as long as possible. So far as the air attack is concerned, up to the present we have found it far less severe than what we prepared ourselves to endure and what we are still ready, if
42
necessary, to endure. One thousand and seventy-five civilians were killed during August in Britain, and a slightly greater number seriously injured. Our sympathy goes out to the wounded and to those who are bereaved, but no one can pretend that out of 45,000,000 people these are losses which, even if multiplied as they may be two or three times, would be serious compared to the majestic world issues which are at stake. Apart from minor or readily reparable injuries, about 800 houses have been destroyed or damaged beyond repair. I am not talking of what can be put right very quickly or what is worth while to put right, but 800 houses were actually damaged beyond repair out of a total in this island of 13,000,000 houses.
This, of course, is very different from the estimate of damage which was given to the War Committee which considered and decided against the possibility of an insurance scheme against air-raid damage to property. It would, in my judgment. be worth while for a further examination of such a scheme, particularly as it would affect the small man, and to make this examination in the light of facts which we now know and also of future possibilities about which we are in a far better position to form an opinion than we were before the war began. I have therefore asked my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider the best way of making such a review in the light of the facts as they are to-day. It is very painful to me to see, as I have seen in my journeys about the country, a small British house or business smashed by the enemy's fire, and to see that without feeling assured that we are doing our best to spread the burden so that we all stand in together. Damage by enemy action stands on a different footing from any other kind of loss or damage, because the nation undertakes the task of defending the lives and property of its subjects and taxpayers against assaults from outside. Unless public opinion and the judgment of the House were prepared to separate damage resulting from the fire of the enemy from all those other forms of war loss, and unless the House was prepared to draw the distinction very sharply between war damage by bomb and shell and the other forms of loss which are incurred, we could not attempt to deal with this matter; otherwise we

43
should be opening up a field to which there would be no bounds. If, however, we were able to embark upon such a project as would give complete insurance, at any rate up to a certain minimum figure, for every one against war damage by shell or bomb, I think it would be a very solid mark of the confidence which after some experience we are justified in feeling about the way in which we are going to come through this war.
In the meanwhile, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has to give so many halfpence and take so many kicks, and upon whose wisdom and practical good sense those who have been his colleagues have learned to rely—and I can assure the House that it is no mere flattery in order to get the money out of him—has agreed to the following arrangements, in addition to the satisfactory provisions which have already been made in respect of the personal injuries and immediate needs of those smitten. At present in cases where the income of the claimant's household does not exceed £400 a year and his resources are limited, payments are made to cover damage to essential household furniture up to a maximum of £50, and similar payments are made in respect of personal clothing up to £30, subject to income limits of £400 where there are dependants and £250 where there are no dependants. It is now proposed to abolish these upper limits of £50 and £30 respectively, so that payments for damage to the furniture or clothing of persons of limited means will now be made up to 100 per cent. of the damage, whatever that amount may be. Hitherto there has been no provision to enable workmen to replace tools which are their personal property and the use of which is vital to their employment. It is proposed to remedy this hardship by making provision for payments for these purposes, subject to the same income limits which apply in the case of the clothing advances. Similar payments will be made to professional people within the same limits of income. Finally, there is the case of the small retailer who is not insured under the Board of Trade Commodities Insurance Scheme. Here payments up to £50 will be made within the same income limits as for clothing and tools, in order to enable those retailers
44
to replace stocks essential to the continuance of trade. I may say that in all these three cases appropriate mitigating measures will be taken in the borderline cases lying just above the income limits.
Then there is the case of the coast towns which have been declared to be evacuation areas for the purpose of the Defence (Evacuated Areas) Regulations. Upon this a number of Members, as was their duty, have made representations to the Government. The Ministry of Health will be prepared, upon an application from the authorities of these areas, to make advances out of Exchequer funds to enable the authorities to meet liabilities for which collectable rate revenue will not suffice. These advances will be free of interest. The term "advances" in this case is understood to mean that the Government retain the right to call for repayment, but the question how far this right will be exercised will be considered after the war in the light of the financial circumstances then prevailing, both in the areas interested and in the country generally. These advances must be conditional upon the examination of the estimates of expenditure and of revenue, and for this purpose my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health will arrange for officers of the Ministry of Health to visit the towns concerned and to confer with the mayors and principal officials—very plucky fellows, some of them; one is proud to meet them. Such conferences will afford an opportunity for advising and assisting the local authorities upon the best means of securing reasonable economy consistent with the maintenance of essential services, and they will also advise them about the collection of revenue. These local authorities will not in the present circumstances be required to increase their existing rate of poundage as a condition of financial assistance. It is recognised that the shortage of rate income will involve a deficit in the sums collected by rates levied for meeting county council precepts. It is understood that some of the local authorities are, in fact, proposing to limit their payments in respect of county precepts to that proportion of the total rate which represents the county rate which they have been able to collect. The Government propose to recognise and validate these arrangements, and if in any

45
case an unreasonable burden was thereby thrown upon the country's resources, the Government would not refuse to consider the possibility of extending to the county council some measure of assistance.
I think the House will see that we have been endeavouring to meet the cases both of individuals and of local authorities as they are affected by the conditions into which we have moved. We must expect for some time to come to have to live our lives and to carry on our work under these strange conditions, but they are conditions to which the fortitude and adaptiveness of the British people will not, we feel, be found unequal. If, as was suggested in a recent oration, there is to be a contest of nerve, will-power and endurance in which the whole British and German peoples are to engage, be it sharp or be it long, we shall not shrink from it. We believe that the spirit and temperament bred under institutions of freedom will prove more enduring and resilient than anything that can be got out of the most efficiently enforced mechanical discipline.
In the light of what we have learned so far with regard to the arrangements for air-raid warnings—here I come to the point on which I have been asked by the hon and gallant Gentleman opposite me —we have come to the conclusion that the arrangements for air-raid warnings and what is to be done when they are given, which appears to be another question, require very considerable changes. There is really no good sense in having these prolonged banshee howlings from sirens two or three times a day over wide areas, simply because hostile aircraft are flying to or from some target which no one can possibly know or even guess. All our precaution regulations have hitherto been based on this siren call, and I must say that one must admire the ingenuity of those who devised it as a means of spreading alarm. Indeed, most people now see how very wise Ulysses was when he stopped the ears of his sailors from all siren songs and had himself tied up firmly to the mast of duty.
Now that we are settling down to the job, we must have different arrangements from those devised before the war. It is right that everyone should know now that the red warning is more in the nature of a general alert than a warning of the imminence of danger to any particular
46
locality. In many cases it is physically impossible to give the alarm before the attack. Constant alarms come to be something in the nature of no alarm. Yet while they give no protection to very great numbers of people, who take no notice of them, they undoubtedly exercise a disturbing effect upon necessary war work. All our regulations, and much preaching, have taught people that they should take a whole series of steps, mostly of a downward character, when they hear the siren sound, and it is no use having official regulations which point one way and enjoin immediate respect for the alarm when exhortations are given, unofficially or officially, to disregard them and go on working. In our own case to-day, it was felt that the red warning should be taken merely as an alert, but that if special circumstances indicated the proximity of danger then the conditions of alarm should supervene. That is exactly what we did on receiving information that there was danger of a particular kind in the vicinity; and when that special condition departed we immediately resumed our work under the conditions of alert until the "All Clear," which has now sounded, restored us to normal. Something like this unrehearsed experiment may well give us guidance in our future treatment of the problem. All our regulations require to be shaped to the new basis which is being established by actual contact with events.
The responsibility to give clear guidance to the public in time of war is imposed upon His Majesty's Government. In order to preserve the confidence shown them by the House and by the public, the Government must act with conviction. I have, therefore, asked the various Departments concerned to review the whole position as a matter of urgency. In these matters one must expect to proceed by trial and error, and one must also try to carry public opinion along. What we want, on the one hand, is the greatest measure of real warning that is compatible with what all our people are resolved upon, namely, the active maintenance of war production. I will not make any specific announcement to-day, because we are in negotiation with very important bodies concerned, employers and employed, throughout the country. We want to move in these matters with sureness, precision and clarity, and no uncertainty or doubt, and I would like to have the

47
opportunity of a little further consultation with the different bodies that are now in touch with the Government. This is a matter, of course, which affects scores of millions of people. Therefore, I will not attempt to make any specific announcement to-day, but such an announcement must be made within the next week, at the latest. I think I have given the House a pretty clear indication of what is in our thoughts, and of the direction in which we are thinking of moving at the present time.
There is another point which I should like to mention, and that is this business of lighting the streets, the centres of the cities of our country. [An HON. MEMBER: "Motor cars."] Well, it is a difficult question. When my hon. Friend says, "Motor cars," he does not simplify it, but raises a point which has to be borne in mind. Winter is coming along, and I hope we are not going through all that gloomy business that we went through last year. I have, therefore, asked a committee of persons deeply versed in this matter, responsible people in the Departments, to meet together, and to see in what way we can make more light and cheer in the winter months, and at the same time subserve the purposes of alert and alarm. Such a course is not at all impossible, and I hope to come forward with some proposals, necessarily of a highly detailed character.
I do not mean to trespass at any length upon the time of the House this afternoon, because our affairs are evidently very largely in the region of action. No one must suppose that the danger of invasion has passed. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War—to whom I would have gladly paid some compliments if he had not already forestalled me, in a very charming manner, and probably robbed any compliments of some of their intrinsic value—is absolutely right in enjoining the strictest vigilance upon the great and growing armies which are now entrusted in this country to the command of Sir Alan Brooke. I do not agree with those who assume that after the 15th September—or whatever is Herr Hitler's latest date—we shall be free from the menace of deadly attack from overseas; because winter, with its storms, its fogs, its darkness, may alter the conditions, but some of the changes cut both
48
ways. There must not be for one moment any relaxation of effort or of wise precaution, both of which are needed to save our lives and to save our cause. I shall not, however, be giving away any military secrets if I say that we are very much better off than we were a few months ago, and that if the problem of invading Great Britain was a difficult one in June, it has become a far more difficult and a far larger problem in September.
Indeed, while all this preparation for home defence has been going forward on a gigantic scale, we have not hesitated to send a continuous stream of convoys with reinforcements to the Middle East. In particular, a few days ago we found it possible almost to double the effective strength of our Fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean by sending some of our most powerful modern vessels to reinforce the flag of Sir Andrew Cunningham, the admiral in the Eastern Mediterranean. This movement, while plainly visible to the Italians, was not molested by them. Some of our great ships touched at Malta on the way, and carried a few things that were needed by those valiant islanders and their garrison, who, under a remarkably resolute Governor, General Dobbie, are maintaining themselves with the utmost constancy. We must expect heavy fighting in the Middle East before very long. We have every intention of maintaining our positions there with our utmost strength, and of increasing our sea power, and the control which follows from sea power, throughout the Mediterranean, not only in the Eastern basin but in the Western basin. In this way, both at home and abroad, we shall persevere along our course, however the winds may blow.

COAL INDUSTRY.
4.55 p.m.
Mr. Lawson: Before the House adjourns, may I draw attention to a question which, while appearing small compared with the general review which the Prime Minister has made, is of considerable importance to certain industrial communities in this country? It may be my lot this afternoon to say some rather strong things about the treatment of certain workmen, or, rather, of those who are deprived of work at present. No one has seen with greater pleasure than I have the increase of employment throughout this country, but in the

49
Special Areas, which have been hit for the last 10 years, there is rapidly developing a situation almost as bad as that which existed at the time when the Government took action in respect of those areas. It is all very well for great parts of the country, where people are working regularly, and in many cases receiving not only comparatively good wages but overtime as well; but the country and the Government have no right to forget those who are compelled by circumstances to be idle, sometimes for months at a time. In Durham and South Wales a situation is developing which is, to say the least, menacing so far as the good will of the people in respect of the war effort is concerned. Will the House believe that, while the unemployment figures generally have gone down this month, they have in limited areas in South Wales and Durham increased by some thousands, and that in some areas the miners have not done a day's work for the past 10 weeks? The concern which this fact is causing is illustrated by a letter that I received from a miners' lodge in my district after I had met a deputation. They are a body of miners who are very moderate in their outlook and opinions. They say:
"We have worked only eight days since the beginning of June and feel that something should be done urgently to prevent the rot which is becoming more and more apparent as the weeks pass on. … While we admit that the new conditions undoubtedly contributed to the present impasse we feel strongly that some measure of reorganisation should have now been effected, so that our members who are anxious to play their part in the war effort should have been found something to do. The fact that we have been idle for so weeks makes us wonder whether we are receiving the consideration and prominence to-day as was given to us or asked of us a few months ago? Or are we to feel that we are being neglected, that we are becoming a spent force? Here is a body of men unused to idleness, full of energy, and with a very strong will to play their part in the defeat of the common enemy."
The sense of frustration that is abroad in these two mining areas is almost pitiful. In my own district, within a radius of 10 miles, there are no fewer than 10,000 miners idle. The unemployed miners number nearly 40,000. There are 19,000 miners idle in Durham, and I think the rest will be found in South Wales. But the people who have been rendered idle during the last few months are employed at the collieries which have
50
been working regularly and are affected by the new conditions which now prevail. These people are not afraid of bombs—I speak with knowledge, because I have seen them during bombing and immediately afterwards —but they are terribly afraid of unemployment. With due respect to my hon. and very good Friend, no Government have the right to leave these people for 10 weeks without calling upon their services, particularly at the present time. Frankly, something has to be done. Although the enemy cannot get Fifth Column representatives into this country, we would certainly be doing him a good turn by allowing this situation to continue and letting our people go sour. My experience is that bitterness is growing. Long before now the Government ought to have been taking definite notice of this question. Nobody has been there from the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Mines, and nobody has said to these men that they have had any responsibility. I have occupied some responsible positions in my own area during the past 12 months, and I can tell the House that this situation is so bad that, if it is not met, I propose to give the whole of my time to trying to compel the Government to meet it.
It may be asked, What can be done? My right hon. Friend, very early, gave me a letter saying that the miners could go to other work. The Government have rightly said—and I support them—that certain men should be limited to certain work; that miners should be limited to the mines. The younger men have been reserved from the Army. Miners have been working in the pits at about half the wages that some workers are receiving in munition work. It is a well-known fact that the miner on the whole receives less in wages than those workers who are employed directly as a result of the war, but the miners have not complained. It is to their credit that they have not said anything about it. But they are limited to the mines. Could the House believe that it was necessary to ask the Secretary for Mines and the Minister of Labour to relieve these men so that they could go to other work? The Secretary for Mines was kind enough to send me a very explicit letter, as did also the Minister of Labour, saying that these men could go to other work, but recently when miners have got work in munition factories or at other places out-

51
side the mines, they have been refused their green cards by the Ministry of Labour.
There is scarcely a miner of my acquaintance who has got work in this way who has not had to come to me. A well set-up young man came to me last week. He had offered himself for service in the Air Force. The Air Ministry had grabbed him. They were very pleased to have a young man of that type offering himself for service. He is about 20 years of age, well set-up, very intelligent and industrious. He has enlisted in the Air Force on condition that he can get released from the mines, and the Ministry of Labour refuses to give him his green card even to join the Forces. That is a ridiculous position. It looks very much like the result of indecision, wherever the responsibility lies, as far as the Government are concerned. Is there any sense in having the Minister of Supply appealing over the wireless for increased pressure on the part of munition workers to work 12 hours a day and seven days a week, when, side by side, there are hardy, industrious adult workers who want to do some work but cannot get it? I suggest to my right hon. Friend that it is time that the Government had a system of work sharing, and I do not limit that merely to sharing the output of coal. Something should be done in that direction. There are all kinds of national factories and munition works where both men and women are working overtime, in some cases until they complain of exhaustion, and yet our men are refused an opportunity of playing their part in the national effort and sharing the work which is going. My hon. Friend may say that these men will be wanted at some time. That may be, although I doubt it. If they are wanted, no Government has the right to stand by and allow them to be idle merely because they may be wanted in the distant future. These men were being asked a few weeks ago to give of their best. They are so enthusiastic in their desire to participate in the service of the country that in my own county they have actually given out of their funds two Spitfires to the country.
The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell): And ambulances, too.
Mr. Lawson: And a considerable amount for ambulances too. These people
52
ought to receive immediate attention. My hon. Friend may have some answer to all this. The only answer would be to get these men work. He may be able to make some suggestion as to what should be done in some vague future. My complaint is that nobody comes near to these men. No representative of the Government has taken steps to explain the position on the spot. The Ministry of Labour actually seems to be taking steps which hinder men from taking work when they have the opportunity of getting it. I am not an advocate of transference. I know that men have received that offer. Transference is not a very pretty idea in peace time, and it does not seem to be very hopeful in war time. There is work going and men are idle and have been so for 10 weeks. A new Special Area has now developed, and the country apparently cares just as little about that special area as it cared about the old ones. I ask my hon. Friend, and at least my Labour friends in the Government, to see to it that an end is put to this situation very quickly. If it is not then there can be no more likely centres of disaffection and despondency than will he found among the groups of men in these colliery areas. It is not that they have any towards this country, but unless this problem is settled the Government will be responsible for that situation.
5.15 p.m.
Mr. S. O. Davies: I want to express my personal thanks to my hon. Friend for having raised this most important subject this afternoon. We all sensed and felt with him his difficulties in getting lip after the great statement made by our Prime Minister, but there is, nevertheless, in the situation that he has so strongly and justifiably referred to a great deal that cannot be dissociated from the war effort which is being made in this country. There is no section of the working-class population in this country which is more anxiously ready to make the maximum contribution towards our war effort than the miners of this country, but, on the other hand, while they are about the least squeamish section of our population, they are, possibly, as a result of their environment and their experiences, the most impatient section of the people of this country. Once it is driven home by circumstances that they

53
are receiving a raw deal, then we know from experience that we will have a very difficult lot to handle.
As my hon. Friend said, there is a profoundly conscious desire on the part of the miners of this country to make a maximum effort, and they cannot understand why the product that they are called upon, and are willing, to produce is not being used on a much larger scale and in an infinitely less chaotic fashion than it is being handled to-day. I know that the great historical happenings which have taken place have upset the somewhat uncertain equilibrium which existed in the industry up to a few months ago, but what makes the miners most anxious is this: They are not satisfied with the effort which is being made to bring back into the industry some measure of organisation or better equilibrium than exists at present. My hon. Friend has rightly complained—and I share his feelings entirely—about the unemployment of the miners. Side by side with that unemployment is, in some parts of the coalfields of this country, a considerable amount of over-employment. Overtime is being worked to such an extent that it is an absolute disgrace to the industry. I find it so within my own coalfields, where, as the Secretary for Mines knows, some collieries have been largely idle for several weeks. Quite near to them I see in my travels men from the day shift returning late in the afternoon and in the early hours of the evening, and I know there is considerable pressure being brought to bear on many miners to work at week-ends. I am not referring to the continuous shift workmen at all, but between one coalfield and another, and even within the same coalfield, these contradictory influences are at work.
May I very respectfully be permitted to say this? I am a lifelong friend of the Secretary for Mines, with whom I have had the greatest pleasure in working in my own coalfield for many years past, indeed, for more years than we are very anxious to count just now. I know the added difficulties which are immediately confronting him, so far as some of our coalfields are concerned, and I know that the winter months will make a problem in some parts of the country more difficult than at present, but I cannot possibly see that the conditions in our coalfields will be improved unless my hon. Friend is determined upon a complete reorganisation of coal production and
54
distribution, and has a central authority, with real authority, so that the whole activities of our coalfields shall be coordinated and directed by one body. Unless that is done, the competition that still exists between coalfield and coalfield will continue, although I admit that some good measures have been taken, up to a point, to reduce that competition. I should be more than delighted to find that that authority is the Department over which he presides. Unless the suggestion I have made is carried out, I cannot see the remotest possibiity of the present chaos being removed. There is no earthly reason why coal mines or coalfields should be working more than their normal time, while others, producing coal equally as rich and as varied in its qualities, should be working either half time, a little more than half time or not at all.
I feel that I should be wasting the time of the House if I merely dilated upon the present situation, but I would ask my hon. Friend to take this step and to encourage other uses for coal. There could be a substantial contribution towards the mining industry of this country if coal was used on the roads of this country in vehicles instead of the petrol that is being imported, although I know the difficulties of getting other materials to exploit that idea. I know the Secretary for Mines is up against it; the war conditions of the last three or four months have made his problem extremely difficult, but he must take possession of the mining industry of this country and have one central authority if the mass of contradictions that exists now is to be removed and there is to be an end to the stupid inhibitions that are handicapping the industry at the moment.
5.27 p.m.
Mr. David Adams: The House is greatly indebted to the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) for having raised this vital question to-day, and he has so effectively covered the ground that so far as the statistical position is concerned there is not a great deal to say of the unemployment of large numbers of miners, particularly in the North of England. The constituency which I represent—Consett and the County of Durham generally—is probably more severely hit by the present situation than any other section of our coal fields. The loss of our export

55
markets undoubtedly makes the situation most acute and difficult, and the House will sympathise with the Secretary for Mines in particular, and with the Government in general. Nevertheless, we believe that measures can be taken to deal with it. During the short Recess I have been invited to meet deputations of colliery owners as well as colliery workers, and while not presuming to be in any sense a technologist, or to impinge on the rights of the workers' associations, certain views have been expressed which may be in harmony with the views that the Minister himself holds. One need not enlarge on the fact that at -the moment a number of the collieries in Consett and County Durham generally are shut down and that large numbers of workers who were working short time have received 14 days' notice to terminate their employment.
That situation is very ominous in view of the attitude which the Government have hitherto adopted with regard to mine workers. Certain men who have received notice have advised me that they have had opportunities of full employment in other collieries and in other occupations, and that this has been specifically refused by their colliery owners. This seems as though they were chained to the mines until they received their notices. If for national reasons men must be retained in any particular occupation and cannot seek adequate and full employment elsewhere, in my view they are entitled to full remuneration during the time that they may be unemployed. That may seem an unorthodox view, but it is carried out in the case of ambulance drivers and others who must stand by in case of urgent military and other necessities, and what is sound for one section of the community owing to enemy action ought to be equally good as far as mining is concerned.
The Minister states in a communication to me dated 16th August that it is our policy to share orders as far as possible. Is this the key to the disabilities under which the Northern coalfields are suffering? Certainly the coalowners have declared that that would in their judgment solve the problem of equitable distribution of all orders which are available throughout the industry. The Minister
56
will be able to say whether that is or is not practicable. The owners contend that Durham and Northumberland coal is almost as good as the coal at present being consumed for domestic and industrial purposes and that, if a strong stand were taken with consumers—and the Ministry have powers to take whatever stand they think fit—this coal could be sent from Northumberland and Durham to different parts of the country. They advised me, with what accuracy I cannot say, that if such a distribution were made in face of the orders currently held and anticipated, it should not mean more than a day's short time throughout the whole industry. The Prime Minister used the excellent phrase, as far as the situation generally is concerned, "We all stand in together." That must apply to the mining industry also, and, if this strong stand that we call for is taken and they insist that our coal shall be sent to other parts of the country in order to employ our miners, that would be a solution of the problem. The Secretary for Mines stated in reply to a question:
"I am bound to ask domestic consumers in Northern Ireland, equally with those in other parts of the United Kingdom, to be prepared to use the same proportion of types and sizes of coal to which they are not accustomed."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 20th August, 1940; col. IIII, Vol. 364.]
If that applies to Northern Ireland and to domestic coal, it equally applies to other parts of the United Kingdom and to domestic and to industrial consumers also. Of course, there would be resentment shown by these consumers at having to make some departure from their normal consumption of particular classes of coal, but I am advised upon careful investigation that this is not an insuperable difficulty and that Northumberland and Durham coal, although largely of the coking variety, could be consumed industrially. If that is so, it is surely an imperious obligation upon the Secretary or Mines to take that stand and to undertake the unpleasant task of forcing this view upon consumers. In fact he obtains at once, with some relatively small sacrifice, by compulsion it is true, a solution of the problem of the distribution of orders generally and a solution of what may prove a very serious detriment to the sense of loyalty which is current among the mining section. We want no such change. We want the magnificent spirit

57
that prevails there, and the indomitable characteristics of the North, to be preserved, but we warn the Government that it will inevitably be sapped if, in the face of possible remedies, you force heavy unemployment on this most industrial section of the community.
5.37 p.m.
Miss Ward: I believe in proper and adequate planning for the mining industry, and I noticed the other day a case in relation to employment in the mines which I think merits investigation. A man who had been a stoker in the Navy, and had been employed subsequently on ships' trials at a very big shipyard as a stoker, went into the pits, I think since the war began, and was very anxious to come out and get back to the particular job in which he was skilled. I applied to the Ministry of Labour and was refused on the ground that the man is in a reserved occupation and that no one apparently wishes to use his services in the job for which he is really skilled, and consequently he must remain in the pits. If pit men who have worked in the collieries for years are to be put out of employment, it seems to me it would be a wise scheme, first of all, to see whether men who are not by profession pit men could not be absorbed into the industries for which they have adequate training. I suggest that my hon. Friend should investigate this side of employment in the mines.
A rumour has reached me, as rumours do, though I believe this is true, of a new scheme which is being fathered by the distributors, with the consent and good will of the Mines Department, to improve the distribution of coal. This is a very important question, and we would all wish to give the hon. Gentleman every possible support in seeing that there is no recurrence of what happened last winter. That the scheme had the support, and must have been within the knowledge, of the Mines Department is borne out by the fact that a very important official in the Department is going to be the director. I am a little uncertain, because trying to find out what the plans of a Government Department really are is almost beyond the human mind and the human machine. The scheme was either put forward by the distributors or by the merchants, or by the Mines Department, or all of them, but it was unacceptable, and part of it has been
58
withdrawn. I am certain that the part for improving the distribution of coal will be welcomed by all sections of the community, but I ask for an assurance that no scheme will be launched which involves the whole organisation of the coal industry unless adequate and proper consultation has taken place between the interests concerned, that is to say, the Mining Association and the Miners' Federation. Whether the distributors and merchants are part of the Mining Association or are represented by the Miners' Federation is almost beyond the lay mind, but when very vast and wide powers are being conferred, rightly, on the Government during the war, it is essential that no scheme shall be launched unless all parties concerned have been consulted and have been given an opportunity of hammering out a common policy which will be of benefit to all sides.
I am certain the hon. Gentleman knows all the innuendoes connected with the remarks that I am making. I only ask that we shall not be faced with a fait accompli and that all the interests concerned shall have an opportunity of studying the details of the scheme and expressing their view of it before it is launched. The original scheme raised a good deal of controversy. Having tramped around the streets of Whitehall from one Government Department to another, I am becoming a very wise woman. I have learnt a very great deal in the nine years that I have been in the House of Commons; I know the extraordinary things that go on inside Government Departments, and I know the barrier that there is between Government Departments and the House of Commons. Sometimes Members of Parliament know things which Government Departments would rather they did not know. All I ask is an assurance that all interests shall be consulted, and I am certain that we shall get a scheme which will be agreeable to everyone and which will avoid the difficult position which was created last winter and which will be of general benefit to the community.
5.44 p.m.
Sir Cuthbert Head lam: I have rather more faith in Government Departments than the hon. Lady. Perhaps that is because I have been in one and she has not. But I realise that she is of a hopeful disposition and, though she may not have the

59
confidence in Departments that I have, I think she will accord to the Minister the compliment of supposing that if he is making any arrangements such as she suggests, he would have the common sense to consult all those who are interested. I am very glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) introduced this subject to-night, because although I no longer represent a mining constituency, I live in a coal area, and I am very much in touch with the situation in the north of England generally. I realise that there is much truth in what the hon. Member said, and that the situation of the miners, in the County of Durham particularly, is a difficult one at the present time. We do not want to have any repetition of the state of things that existed in the northern counties after the last war, and unless the matter of coal production and distribution is better thought out than it has been in the past, I am pretty certain we shall be face to face with those conditions when the war is over. Therefore, I suggest that the present time is a good opportunity for those who are connected with the coal industry and for the Ministry which serves the coal industry to work out plans for the future and to make ready for the times that are ahead.
My opinion is that at the present time a great many miners are surplus in the county of Durham for the simple reason that the export trade in coal has gone down so enormously. The first duty of the Government is to try by every means in their power to increase the export of coal. Although the field for export in Europe is much reduced, there should be opportunities in South America, particularly, where we might increase very largely our coal exports. I am convinced that the Minister will have a word to say about that, because it is really the whole point as far as Durham is concerned. Our coal is largely export coal; although it can be used as other coals are used for other purposes in England and the British Isles generally, it is mainly an export coal. The Germans were obliged to use our coal for many purposes in the old days, and I have no doubt they suffer from the loss of it at the present time, but until better times come in Europe, it is clear that if we are to get new markets they must be in another hemisphere. That is the main direction in which, if I were
60
Minister, I would direct my mind at the present time. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Wallsend (Miss Ward) that is would be a good thing if we could improve the distribution of coal throughout the country, and I should like to know from the Minister whether he has made arrangements which he considers to be satisfactory for a better supply of coal throughout the country during the coming winter. In my opinion, there was last year a deal of suffering which would have been quite unnecessary if there had been any forethought or provision. I am not attacking the Minister for that, because he was not responsible for what was evidently gross mismanagement. If we could utilise Durham and Northumberland coal for distribution in England, Ireland and Scotland for other purposes than those for which it has been used before, it might help our trade considerably.
But it is obvious that, however much we strive to the contrary, there will be a great deal of unemployment in certain mines in the country, for the time being, at any rate. Therefore, miners who are so willing should be allowed to join His Majesty's Forces. They should be allowed to find other forms of work on the understanding, of course, that if their services are required again in the mines, they will come back to the mines. There is a feeling among certain people, the mine owners in particular, and to a certain extent, I understand, the Ministry, that if miners once get away from the mines, it may be difficult to get them back again. There may be something in that, but at the present time it is a risk that should be taken. Every man in the mining industry who cannot be employed as a miner ought to be allowed to find work of some other kind, and more especially ought to be invited or moved to join His Majesty's Forces. As the Prime Minister warned us in his speech this afternoon, there is no reason why every man who can do so should not make himself trained for the tasks that may be ahead of us. Let me conclude by saying that I do not agree with the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street or the hon. Member for Consett (Mr. D. Adams) that there is any danger of the miners in Durham or Northumberland becoming so disgruntled as to lose faith in their country or becoming useless members of society. I know how keen they are to do their work, I know how miserable

61
they are at the thought of not being able to do their work, but I have a high enough opinion of their loyalty and courage to know that, whatever happens, they can be depended upon to protect their country.
5.51 p.m.
The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell): I should be happy if my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) were present, because I want to acknowledge the very kind words he addressed to me and the way in which he approached me on this very serious question affecting the County of Durham and South Wales. This trouble is really localised. I am glad to find that at this time I can sit on this side of the House without being out of step or out of harmony with the opinions of my old friends opposite. There is a great deal of justification for some of the complaints that have been made, but the justification will not be assessed in its right proportion unless we take a general view of the whole problem. Speaking for the Mines Department, I would say that to-day we are more concerned about production and distribution than ever before in the history of the Department. We have undertaken certain obligations towards industry, and I am glad to be able to say that the relations between the Department and both sides of the industry have never been happier than they are at the present time, and that the relations between the two sides of the industry are far happier than I can ever remember them before. I can only attribute this fact to the common loyalty and common desire of both sides to play their part in this crisis.
When I came to the Department, I found certain problems the nature of which I knew before I arrived. Let me refer first to the general measure of our production and what it implies to us in this struggle; how important it is in the structure of our war machine, and what an important contribution it has made to the whole superstructure of the national effort which the country has built up in the last year or two. At the end of one year of war, we are producing at a rate per annum greater than a year ago. We are now producing, with a smaller number of men, more coal per individual working shift and more coal in the aggregate than we have
62
produced for many years past. I do not think it necessary to give details of the figures of production. My hon. Friends know them as well as I do up to 1939. They have been withheld since the war began, because it is not an advantage to publish too widely details of our war effort either in the mines or anywhere else. We are at the present time producing substantially more than we were 12 months ago. In a certain period in 1940 we have produced 3,000,000 tons more than we did in the same period of 1939. It should be a great comfort to us and a great reinforcement of our confidence to know that in proportion to our population we are producing a larger quantity of coal, a larger measure of motive power, a larger volume of industrial power, than any other country in the world has ever done.
We are producing now at the rate of five tons per head of the population each year and consuming for purposes of all kinds at the rate of four tons per head of the population. No country in the world has ever enjoyed command over such power as we enjoy in the production and possession of this regular output of coal. It is the secret of our war strength. A short while ago the Brussels wireless broadcast a German boast that Germany had invaded and overrun all the coal-producing countries of Europe except Soviet Russia, and that Germany had raised the production of coal under her control to 350,000,000 tons a year. That figure is somewhat larger than ours, but the 350,000,000 tons so produced have to serve the needs of over 300,000,000 people on the continent of Europe. When one divides the number of tons by the number of people who have to depend upon that coal for power, warmth and light, one finds that the continent of Europe under German domination has no more than one ton per head of the population, while we use every day for our comfort and strength four times as much. In addition, we have abundant supplies of liquid fuel in this country. The Germans have to consume some of their raw coal to provide themselves with liquid fuel. When all that has been done, there are reports of deprivations and hardships in all parts of the German-occupied territories.
I have great pride in this industry to which I belong. My hon. Friends and I belong to this industry as we belong to

63
nothing else on earth. It is an industry to which we have given the best years of our lives. We shall never have those years again. My hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street made me feel old when he referred to the long years when we worked together in happy association; those were the days of youth, and not the days of old age. In this industry the question of personnel is vital to production. One cannot train a miner in a few months; indeed, the time necessary for training a soldier is very much shorter than the time required to train a miner. One cannot make a job of that training unless the man is trained in a variety of occupations and under a variety of circumstances which may last five to 10 years. I was a far better miner after 15 years than I was after five years. The personnel of the mining industry can do their work. They are adaptable people, but they are better in the mines than anywhere else. I am trying to adapt myself, but I shall never be as good at this Box as I was in the pit. That is our trade, a highly skilled trade calling for considerable experience.
I had to safeguard the personnel of the industry if we were to achieve our mission in this great national effort. My predecessor had set up a committee. He had called in the aid of Lord Portal, and investigations had been made in each of the producing districts. The National Production Council was in process of being formed, and the organisations of employers, and the Miners' Federation had come together with a view to raising the power of production to meet the demands coming from France. This was a larger demand than w e had ever had to meet. The request from France was that we should multiply by three times our normal quantity of coal exports. The Mines Department and the industry prepared to face this responsibility. I came to the Department after the scheme had been launched, but I, too, had to play my part. I recognised the first thing was to try to obtain sufficient of all three vital factors of production—first, labour; second, material; and third, pit room. The country should realise the nature of modern mining. It is very hard work, and mechanisation has not made it easier but more onerous. Output has been considerably increased by the aid of mecha-
64
nisation, and we are now producing in this country, despite our inconveniences, 25 per cent. more coal per man than in the year 1918. Whereas we had 50 per cent. more men in those years to produce the coal.
I recognised that there was a limit to the amount of work to be exacted from each of the workers. I recognised that there was no question of increasing the hours of work, and that every man must work within the limits of steady "workability." To do that we needed more men in the industry. This was necessary if we were to fulfil our promise and supply to France all the coal she needed and also to maintain our exports to South America, Portugal and Canada and pay for our essential imports from all parts of the world. We required not only to keep all our men, but to add at least 40,000 or 50,000 more. I saw the Minister of Labour on this point. He has been involved in solving this problem, and I acknowledge his very great assistance and his understanding of the subject.
Mr. Lawson: Can the Minister tell us why the Minister of Labour's Department is not represented to-day? I gave special notice about this matter, and they should be here to reply on the question of men who have been refused work.
Mr. Grenfell: I made inquiries yesterday morning, and was told that the Minister would not be back until Monday next. However, it may be my fault because I really did not know that we were to concentrate so much upon this aspect of the subject. As I say, I asked the Minister to help me in obtaining the men, and he very sensibly asked, "Will you tell me what you want?" He pointed out that there was a Schedule of Reserved Occupations, for which he was not responsible, designed to conserve the necessary labour for each industry. "Do you want a larger number than you have at present?" he asked. I told him that I needed about 40,000 or 50,000 more men. I told him that we needed at least 800,000 men if we were to produce 20,000,000 to 24,000,000 more tons of coal. I made a personal appeal, and the result was that we had the assistance of the Minister of Labour, and an instruction was issued on 10th June that men were not to leave the mining industry. We could not increase the personnel in the industry if men were to be allowed to leave it freely. We issued

65
invitations and gave inducements, and, indeed, there was a form of pressure to be applied to bring men back, to increase the number of 760,000 to round about 800,000. This instruction was sent out on 10th June. The hon. Member for Consett (Mr. D. Adams) the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street and the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. S. O. Davies) and all in the mining industry ought to know that the instructions were explicit and well understood by all the men in all the districts at that time. No clearer explanation of these terms could have been given than was contained in a pamphlet issued by the Durham Miners' Association. Everyone in Durham knew the terms on which men were expected to stay in or to leave the industry. We wanted to get men back into the industry because as long as there was work they would stay there. In the case of trained men who came under the reserved occupation schedule they were expected to stay in the mines.
Then came the change. It is a story known to Members in this House. It was the cessation of demands from Europe. Europe was cut off. Holland, Belgium and France fell, and, unhappily, as a consequence there was no door for the admission of British coal except to Portugal. It meant that 2,000,000 tons a month were cut off as an "exportable possibility." We found we had no need for more men and that there was actually a surplus of coal in the export trade. My hon. Friends are entitled to express disappointment and even indignation that men in the coalfields, some in South Wales, have not worked a day, or only a few days, since 24th June. Men in Durham and the North have worked very little and have not been able to augment very appreciably their unemployment benefit, which has been the limit of their incomes during this time. We all regret it, and I am very sorry indeed about it, but we want to view it in its right perspective. These are victims of war conditions over which the Minister and the Government have no control.
Automatically, probably because of my old views, my mind turned at once to the possibility of sharing work—that is sharing work within districts and between the more prosperous districts and those who have become the victims of these unhappy changes in Europe. There are some cases in the Midland areas in the quarter just ended where they have pro-
66
duced very much more coal than they did in the corresponding quarter of last year. They have never worked so regularly, and never produced so much coal for household use in the summer. And so our minds turned naturally to the possibility of sharing orders, and giving everyone a chance, instead of keeping some people idle. But we came up against problems which we cannot eliminate and overcome. There is the problem, for instance, of divergences in quality between one pit and another. All my hon. Friends know quite well that it is no use asking gasworks to take dry steam coal or railway companies to burn steam coal which is not strong enough to stand the strain of the forced draught of locomotive boilers. You cannot send to a gasworks, coal which contains no by-products. The solidity of the coal industry in this country is due to the fact that we have a greater variety of coal for industrial purposes than any other part of the world.
Then there is the problem of transport, and that is not an easy problem. Our internal consumption of coal has been very much higher than it was in recent years, and we have had to shift about on our railways very much more coal than before. Further, there have been the restrictions on coastwise shipping. The Ministry of Transport met our requests from time to time and a record number of trains have been sent from the extreme North to the South. Never before has so much Durham and Northumberland coal come by rail into the London area and into the South. We have sent coal from South Wales to Lancashire and into areas where formerly it was not burnt. We made appeals to people to use the next best quality of coal available where they have not been able to obtain their usual supply. Although Durham and South Wales have lost between one-third and one-half of their previous orders, the loss of employment in Durham has, on an average, been one day a week during the last 10 weeks, and in South Wales it has hardly been half a day a week. My hon. Friends may ask what that means to a body of men who are not getting any work at all. We do not want to overload our transport system and to be unable to deliver the large quantities required for home consumption in addition to the coal we are trying to send abroad. I am sure I could convince my hon. Friends with

67
figures that large quantities of Durham coal are being taken to markets where it formerly did not go. Large quantities of South Wales coal are also going to such markets.
I do not see how we can get all these pits fully employed even if we listened to all the appeals that are made to us. Suppose that I said I would divide the whole output of all the pits among the men and found it worked out at five and two-thirds shifts a week. Suppose I then said that five and two-thirds shifts should be worked in every pit. Is it assumed that this would solve the problem of men who want to migrate from the mining industry, or of the men who are attracted by higher wages in the munition works? It would not. Complaints come to me in large numbers from pits where men are given the chance to work full time. They cannot hold their men. I could name pits where men are leaving because there is more remunerative work in the neighbourhood. It is natural that men should want to leave and we know why men want to leave the mining industry if they get the chance. This problem, therefore, is not solved by simply arriving at a flat arithmetical division of the orders for coal and of dividing the opportunities for work between the men in all the coalfields.
We have two months or more during which we can carry on a very extensive stocking programme. I want to assure the House then when the surplus coal made its appearance, when we called back from the high seas the coal that was being sent to France and we saw the door shut against our exports, we devised steps to distribute the coal at home. Every week in the last month and the previous month we have been adding to the stocks of this country at the rate of no less than 750,000 tons a week. One-third of that was added to the stocks of household consumers, either in their coal houses or in the yards of the merchants. At least 250,000 tons a week is being added to household stocks, while stocks for electricity and gas works have been totalling up week by week regularly. We have now saved up in this country for any emergency that may occur no less than 22,000,000 tons of coal, in addition to the coal that is nearly always liable to be standing round the pitheads amounting to 3,500,000 tons.
68
That stock will be added to day by day, unless something happens to prevent it. The House should remember the special conditions under which we live and we should not blind ourselves to the possibilities of accidents of all kinds. I am not sure that there might not be interruptions with rail transport which would considerably curtail the movement of coal, or that there might not be interruptions with road transport.
The Mines Department are anxious to keep all the mines in production as long as possible. The hon. Member for Con-sett quoted some words of mine. I will use them again, and say that we would not like to allow any pit to go out of production or the possibility of production, until we have a guarantee that all wants are supplied. While we are stocking we are trying to share work. I can assure my hon. Friends that we have really shared work, although it has not been as complete as I would like. I know what happens in the coal districts and I am anxious, if we can, to find these men something to do, even temporarily. Conversations are now taking place between officers of my Department and officers of the Ministry of Labour. I shall see the Minister of Labour next Monday, and I hope it will be found possible to let men go to other industries if they wish. I shall not dictate the terms on which men will be released. Suppose, say, in Durham or South Wales men have not been able to get three or four days' work for some months and there is no prospect that they will get work, they will be regarded as fit for transference elsewhere.
Mr. Cordon Macdonald: Will that privilege be confined to pits that are closed down?
Mr. Grenfell: I said pits in which work could not be found. In those cases men will be allowed to transfer to other districts or to join the Army voluntarily. A large number of men want to join the Army and we shall lose the cream of our manhood in the industry because of men going into the Army unless we can find regular work for them. Hon. Members must not assume that the Mines Department or the Miners' Federation or the Coalowners' Association want to keep men in the coalfields out of the Army. The miners are not that type. We must,

69
however, keep the industry going, for it is the groundwork of all our war preparations and war machine. We must keep young men in the industry because the old men cannot do the job, and if we raise the age of reservation it will cripple the industry. It must be remembered that these men will be taken not only from pits working slack time, but from pits which are producing to maximum capacity. We are discussing with the Minister of Labour how far w can relax the terms of the instruction sent out by him, in order that men who are unable to get a decent livelihood may go from the industry, on the understanding that if they are wanted back again in some reasonable term of time, they will come back.
Mr. Lawson: In his discussions with the Minister of Labour will my hon. Friend take into consideration the possibility of sharing the work in the munitions factories? In my own area there is a large munitions factory where people work overtime. Side by side there are good men who have done nothing for three months. Why cannot the shifts in factories like that be increased so that these men could be given work?
Mr. Grenfell: I am not entitled to say what should be done in the Ministry of Labour factories or in private factories for which the Ministry provides labour. I think I should confine myself to my own job.
Mr. George Griffiths: Does not the Minister know that in mines in certain parts men are working overtime practically every day?
Mr. Grenfell: Yes, but I am sure that the volume of overtime spread over the whole is not very large. It does not mean more than a fraction of a shift a day spread over the whole industry.
Mr. Griffiths: The men feel that it is not contrary to the law to work 8, 9 or 10 shifts a week.
Mr. Grenfell: More than six shifts a week can be worked by law and when there are special payments for afternoon and night shifts eight shifts may be done without violating the law. That is, however, purely an internal question into which I will not enter. I have tried to convince the House that the stocking programme has prevented worse results from developing but I am convinced that something much more must be done.
70
The next point to which I will refer is that raised by the hon. Member for Wall-send (Miss Ward). She has succumbed to the propaganda which has been very active from certain quarters and she was persuaded, until I saw her this afternoon, that this scheme of the Mines Department was a revolutionary measure which might inflict great injury upon the industry and and impair considerably the efforts of those responsible for the production of coal. I can assure the hon. Lady that there was never any intention of refusing to take into consultation those who produce the coal. There was no reason why the Miners' Federation should be asked to discuss the details of the scheme. It was of course proper that they should be informed that this general reorganisation was taking place; but they would have been angry if we had invited the Merchants' Association to be present at negotiations conducted by them, and there was no need for joining them in the negotiations. They were informed, and perhaps they might have been informed earlier, but this was all tentative. The first draft was very rough. I saw it, and after we met the Merchants' Federation we informed the Joint Consultative Council, who did not like the scheme too much. They have not, however, expressed any opposition to the general principle, which is that there must be better organisation. The hon. Lady herself said we did not want the same thing to happen next winter. Last winter was an unfortunate one and the long arm of coincidence might bring, next winter, the same extremities of weather. We want to avoid what happened last winter and the coal trade want to avoid it, too. Those responsible for the distribution of coal have found themselves very much handicapped. They have had their lorries requisitioned and their men have been subject to military service. We of the Mines Department have helped them to retain their men for the purpose of stocking coal. An extension was secured in the case of those to be called up in July, in August there was no calling up, and now there is a further extension for September and October. After October, when, as we assume, there will be large quantities of house coal in stock, we shall want to make sure that the organisation for delivery is capable of achieving its task.
Miss Ward: May I ask a straight question? It is the fact, is it not, that the scheme which is being negotiated with various interests concerned is not in detail the same scheme as was originally proposed by the distributors?
Mr. Grenfell: Certainly not. There have been negotiations—
Miss Ward: That is all I wanted to know.
Mr. Grenfell: —and negotiations always result in amendments and in compromise. There has been an interchange of opinion, and there have been amendments, and I believe the scheme will accomplish what needs to be done. Let me give an example of what has been done in my own part of the country. In the case of men who have had to leave their businesses, being unable to get further postponement of military service, their businesses are being taken over by their neighbours. Their registered customers are transferred to the lists of other distributors, who will carry on the distribution, carry on the "round" of the absent soldier, and when he returns his round will be handed back to him. That is the kind of rationalisation which is being done by agreement. If efficient distribution can be achieved by voluntary means, all well and good; but we in the Mines Department shall take the power to ourselves to see that coal is distributed to those in the country who need it. That is the whole purpose of Part 2 of the agreement, and I need not say anything more. I am sure that when the agreement comes to be promulgated the owners, the coal merchants and the public will feel that they have benefited from the agreement finally reached.
Next I would say a word about the pits themselves. We should remember that 750,000 men still work in the pits, and that about 600,000 of them work underground, under conditions always of great danger and great discomfort. I am very much concerned to see that we maintain the system of inspection and supervision. I have to report that we shall be appointing more inspectors to see that the work of inspection does not suffer, and an agreement to carry out workmen's inspections has been approved by the Department since the war began. There are measures of supervision which I think will result in benefit. I am very much con-
72
cerned to make sure that the essential conditions for safety shall not suffer. The price of safety is eternal vigilance, in the mines more than anywhere else. One of the essential conditions is that there shall be a system of ventilation which not only satisfies the tests of measurements but is adequate to dilute any gas and thus remove danger. I have had reports of two explosions since I entered office, and I am disturbed at those reports. They have been printed, but we shall not discuss them until they have been circulated. We are not quite happy over the reports upon those explosions. I will say no more than that now.
Then there is another aspect of safety with which I am concerned. We have had an increase in the number of multiple accidents, of falls of roof and sides, in which more than one man is killed. It has been suggested in some quarters that the immature timber grown at home which is now being supplied is not as suitable as the timber we formerly obtained from abroad. We have a sufficient supply of timber, I am glad to say, but we are using fairly substantial quantities of home-grown timber, necessarily, and we shall have to keep a close watch to see that the safety of the men is not impaired by the use of this timber.
On the subject of research, we are concentrating our efforts upon many aspects of it. There are new conditions of mining, there are new facts to be investigated. For some time we have been pursuing investigations into silicosis, nystagmus and other diseases, and I am happy to say that after a long inquiry we expect shortly to receive a report on the subject. My hon. Friend the Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) has been a party to that inquiry and knows about it in far greater detail than I do. I hope that we shall derive much benefit from the investigation into these very elusive, difficult and insidious evils in the mining life of this country.
I would say one final word in praise of my own Department. Lord Portal, who came there to do important work, has gone to join some other Department. I have worked happily with him and with the other officials of the Department—and I hope we have worked efficiently. My last word of tribute is to the men of all ranks in the industry. They are performing a job of work under conditions which have been made much more difficult by

73
the circumstances of the war. The miners in Kent, and the miners in areas elsewhere which have been attacked day and night, like Durham and South Wales, are living up to the traditions of a bold people, honest and hard working at all times, and we ought to be proud of the way in which they have responded to the country's need.
Mr. S. O. Davies: Can the Minister say what his Department is doing with a view to getting coal used as an alternative fuel for road transport?
Mr. Grenfell: My hon. Friend knows that it is a question of suitable fuel, and knows also that it is a question of obtaining sufficient steel to make the producers. In reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. Ellis Smith) about two months ago, on the question of producer-gas lorries, I said that we regarded 2,000 motor lorries as being the limit for which we could get the materials. I think we can now put the figure higher than that. Lord Ridley's Committee has made a most valuable report on the subject. It is worthy of special attention, worthy of a Debate by itself in the House, and I am hopeful that we shall get good results from it and that a far greater number of these vehicles may be seen on the roads.
6.37 p.m.
Mr. James Griffiths: I wish to join with my hon. Friend the Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) in paying a tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. D. Grenfell) upon his appointment to this Department, and upon the way in which he has approached what has become an extraordinarily difficult task. I do not suppose there is another Department which has found its task so completely changed over in so short a time as the Department of the Secretary for Mines. When he came to his post on the formation of the new Government he was confronted with an entirely different problem from the one which now faces him. It was not only the problem of mobilising the resources of the country for our continuously-expanding industry; he had also to budget for supplies of coal for those who at that time were our Allies and those whom we had counted upon to be our Allies to the end of the war. Then all the transformation in Europe took place. That has had its repercussion upon almost every phase of our lives, and is a con-
74
sideration to be taken into account in almost all decisions the Government have to make. All Europe is now—and we hope it is going to be a short now—under the domination of the Nazis, and among other consequences of that fact is the position in which the coal trade now finds itself. An hon. Friend here put the position in very simple figures, and I will repeat them. What the change means is that whereas last June, before the collapse of France, before the change in Europe, we had to budget for an additional export of 21,000,000 tons of coal to the Continent of Europe, that coal cannot now go there and that has changed the outlook in many coalfields.
I shall make only a short speech this evening, because I know that the House wants to get home in present circumstances, but I should like to make two or three suggestions. First, I would urge upon my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines not to allow himself to be rushed into making quick decisions to contract this industry at this time. An hon. Member has put the position thus: Markets have been lost, 2,000,000 tons less of coal per month which we had budgeted for to go to Europe is not needed now, collieries are closing down, there is short time working, the miners are idle. There is the kind of suggestion that at once something ought to be done to contract the industry, to bring it down to the level of the markets which are available at this moment. For several reasons I hope we shall be very careful before taking any action on those lines. The Minister has spoken of the personnel of the mining industry. It is a trained personnel, a skilled personnel, and it is in the best interests of the country to keep that personnel in the industry as long as possible. In many ways I would urge that, taking the long view, it would perhaps pay the State better to keep the miners idle, paying them full wages, and have them available at the end of three months, than to let them drift into another industry from which we could not get them back.
I say that for two reasons. One of them I do not elaborate in any great detail, because we do not want to speak about it in great detail. No one in this House would like to give a guarantee that the whole of the British coalfield will be available for work during the

75
whole of this conflict. No one would care to give that undertaking. We have to take into account the possibilities of the fortunes, or the misfortunes, of war. In saying that we are not talking defeatism, but facing the position; and if invasion comes we know that we are going to beat it back and not only beat it back but fight on to carry the war elsewhere. But if by the accident of war a part of the British coalfield is cut off, is it not desirable that we shall have in reserve other parts of the coalfield to take the place immediately of the part which is lost? For that first reason I want to urge my hon. Friend, though I do not think any urging is necessary, that there would be very great danger indeed in closing down too much of the mining industry and losing the personnel.
Further, there is a danger in losing not only the personnel but the pits. Here I would urge this consideration upon my hon. Friend. The mines are still privately owned, but in these days private interest must give place to public need, or we shall lose the war. The public need must come first. Many of the owners are facing this problem—let me say it without being controversial—in the traditional private-ownership way. If the demand for the coal is cut down by 10 per cent. they look around for the pit which they think it is best for them to close. Let us suppose that South Wales is faced with the problem of contracting the industry by 10 per cent. There are two ways in which that can be done. One way may be the best for the owners but may be the worst for the nation. One way would be to close 10 per cent. of the pits. The other way is to spread that 10 per cent. reduction over all the pits, keeping them all in production.
My hon. Friend knows very well, and no one better than he, with his wide experience and technical knowledge of the industry, that closing a pit and re-opening it shortly afterwards is very unwise. He knows that it may take three months after the re-opening of the pit to get it ready for production. It is essential, at a time like this, that the personnel should be kept intact and the pits kept open. I urge my hon. Friend to keep this matter in mind. He knows that there is an aspect of it which closely concerns my own constituency and a part of the coal-
76
field with which I have been familiar for almost all my life. A number of pits are threatened with closing, and, whether that may or may not be in the interests of the private owners, I say that it is not in the national interest that the pits should be closed now. I urge that the problem shall be considered in the way I suggest. As far as possible, keep the personnel, because it may be required later, and may be vitally necessary for this nation in its great effort.
I am well aware of all the difficulties which were mentioned by my hon. Friend the Minister, and particularly about coal being required for certain processes. I know that in recent years there has been a large growth in the selling of coal by calorific value and chemical composition. People come to the industry and say that they want coal which has a certain analysis. By mixing coals together, new qualities have been created. I therefore urge that this also should be taken into account. I do not regard the problem of the differences in quality between different kinds of coal as presenting insuperable difficulties. As a matter of fact, I believe that, in many ways, the young technicians who are coming into the industry are those to whom the industry must look for its future. If they were given a pool, consisting of all the coal in the country, so that they might combine coals to obtain qualities which are desired, it would be very good for the industry and, in the long run, for the nation. I therefore urge my hon. Friend not to accept too readily the arguments against the sharing of markets, and to look further at the question.
I have previously pointed out in this House that the export districts of the mining industry have for some time been in a terrible plight. They have had to carry the burden of the after-war settlement of Europe, and of the slumps of 1921–22 and 1931. They have also carried the burden of the export trade. Now they have to carry the new burden of the misfortunes of war. We are entitled to say to the Government and to the nation that the men concerned ought not to be allowed to suffer and to carry burdens for which they are not responsible. I hope that the Government will look at every possible avenue and endeavour to lift this burden from the export trade. They should share the

77
trade with the districts, and work out some scheme by which the inland markets are brought in to assist the exporting districts so that the burdens may be evened out and not again fall entirely upon Durham and South Wales, which are the two main exporting districts.
The best solution would be to find other markets, in which case my hon. Friend would then be faced with the problem we had last June of attracting men back into the industry and arranging for transport. I am not suggesting that the problem is easy, or that it is possible to find outside Europe new markets for all the 21,000,000 tons of coal that we had budgeted to send to Europe, but I urge that there are markets outside Europe. I am not satisfied that every effort that could be made is being made to exploit those new markets. I note from the trade columns of a South Wales paper that a United States trade commission, associated with their Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, has issued a statement showing the total export of coal from the United States to certain countries, including Canada, Central America, South America, Europe and other destinations. The totals were given, for example, for January and May of 1939, and for the corresponding months of 1940. The figure for January, 1939, showed that the United States exported about 2,734,000 tons of coal. In the corresponding period, this year, the exports had risen to 6,200,000. In other words, the American exports of coal nearly trebled between January, 1939, and January, 1940. It is obvious that America is getting the bulk of the export trade that is available.
I am not suggesting, at this stage and in these circumstances, especially after the speech to which we listened to-day and the agreement that has just been signed with America, that we can enter into a controversy with that country on matters of the kind to which I refer, but I would like to make a suggestion. If we can come to an agreement for the exchange of destroyers for bases, is it not possible for us to open conversations in order to find a way in which America and ourselves can share the South American market for coal?
Mr. Gallecher: That is a different story.
Mr. Griffiths: It may be a different story, but I see no reason why it should not be possible, and I hope that my suggestion may be carried out. I am told that the Ministry of Shipping are not too helpful to the coal export trade just now. I know that the Ministry have their difficulties and problems, but the problems of coal export are very important. No one who listened to the Budget Debates and who has seen the trade returns of our exports will need to be reminded that, in the last couple of months, our export trade has declined by 30 per cent. That is important to a nation such as our own, which has depended for much of its economic life upon the export trade and which has to buy so much of its food and raw materials from every corner of the world. We must either pay for these things by our exports or in very much worse ways, and it is essential that every Department should use the best efforts to help the coal export districts.
I do not think that these problems can be left entirely to the export districts themselves or to the industry. The Government must take a hand in the matter. I hope that the Government realise thoroughly that, in doing so, they would not only be helping the industry and the men concerned, but would be doing a great service to this nation, in recovering the export trade upon which our national solvency depends. I hope that the few suggestions I have made will be considered by my hon. Friend. I do not want to see this industry thrown out now. He knows the important part which it may have to play again very shortly, both in the internal economy of this country and in its export markets. Are we to assume that Europe will for all time remain as it is at the present stage of this conflict? Suppose that we one day release France, as I have no doubt we shall, from the grip of Hitler; it means that France will be a coal market once again. When Europe has once again become free, we can supply Europe with the coal it wants. For all these reasons I want to keep the industry as intact as possible, both in personnel and pits, because I want it to be able to take full advantage of opportunities when they come. In the meantime, I urge the Government that they owe it to the men in the industry to see that burdens are equally shared among all in the industry.

79
I want to say just a word about the problem of accidents, to which a reference was made by the Minister. I know how hard he has worked upon that problem. There are many aspects of the problem, associated with many parts of this country, that are very disturbing, and the present position leaves much to be desired in the way of safety. We shall look with great confidence indeed to my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines for some real and practical contributions towards a solution of the problem. I thank him for the information that the report upon silicosis will be available very shortly. I hope it will be possible for us to arrange to discuss these matters before long. We know that the men in the pits are doing their best under difficulties. The men in my district of South Wales went to the pits this morning at six o'clock, after an air-raid warning which had lasted from 9·30 last night to 4·51 this morning. I know some people may say: "Why don't they sleep?" but if a father has in the house little children for whom he is responsible, he believes it is his duty to remain alert during an air-raid, in case of danger. I am concerned about the effect of these things upon the accident rate, because, in such circumstances, men in the pit expose themselves to much more danger.
I look forward to discussing these problems on another occasion, but today's Debate will have been very useful in concentrating the attention of the House and of the country upon the immediate problems of the industry. The point which I end by making is that, in these difficult times, it is essential that the mining industry shall be kept as intact as possible, because the time will very soon come when it will have a very important part to play.
7.0 p.m.
Mr. Gallacher: The Minister for Mines paid a high tribute to the miners of this country for their courage, endurance and loyalty, but I am afraid that that tribute will fall with a hollow sound upon the ears of some of the miners and their wives, because the Minister did not draw attention to the fact that those qualities applied to the most dangerous occupation in the country, and the miners are actually the poorest paid workers in the country.
80
The hon. Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) rightly said that these men should be retained in this industry, which is the basic industry of this country, and without which there could be no other industry and no prosperity for any section of the community. Springing up in various parts of the country are different kinds of Government undertakings in which all kinds of work are subcontracted out to various contractors. These contractors are employing additional men. They are paying them not only for their ordinary day-time work but overtime. Attention has been drawn in this House to the fact that many men working in Government employment are making good wages, but those who draw attention to this fact do not mention overtime which goes to make up the wages. The Minister for Mines will understand that it is easier to do 80 hours on a surface job, such as is associated with some of this contracting work, than to do 40 hours' work underground.
Mr. Grenfell: The hon. Gentleman was not present when this point was referred to in passing. We were not discussing the comparative wages paid. I said that it was still better for men engaged in the mining industry, not only on short time but on ordinary time, to leave if they wished and to go to a better paid job.
Mr. Gallacher: I am sorry if I missed some of the Minister's speech in consequence of the schedule being interrupted to-day and because some of my engagements took up extra time. That which the hon. Member for Llanelly fears is actually taking place, because some of the most active young lads are moving away into other jobs which can only be considered as temporary employment. They may be a month, two months or more in those jobs, but actually it is temporary employment, and it is taking them away from this important industry. One of the first problems in connection with the mining industry is to ensure an adequate livelihood for the miner, his wife and his children.
Mr. Grenfell: And better conditions.
Mr. Gallacher: And better conditions. This brings me to the question of the reports in connection with explosions. We are not discussing this question to-day, but in passing I would like to say something in connection with it. I feel that one

81
side of the mining industry where there must be a rapid extension and change is in connection with workmen's inspectors. It is not possible to continue with the system of workmen's inspectors being maintained by collections at the pits or by the voluntary efforts of the trade unions, as has been the case up to now. It is essential that the present democratic electoral method of appointing workmen's inspectors should continue, but the Government should give them far greater powers, and they should receive payment from Government sources. I mention this point in passing because I hope that later on there will be a discussion on these reports. As the hon. Member for Llanelly says, every report makes disturbing reading, and one is always faced with the fact that if one method or another had been adopted, the explosions and the terrible calamities arising could have been averted. Therefore, it will be necessary to have such a discussion.
The hon. Member for Llanelly drew attention to the fact that there has been a big jump, to the extent of almost three times the amount, in the export of coal from America to the other countries in the American continent during the past year. It would be very nice if it was possible for the export industry in this country to obtain a better footing over there, but I have a feeling, now that America has secured an important strategical position in the North Atlantic and the West Indies, that we shall see this process of the great increase in American coal exports going up, not down. One step that we should take in the export business is to take measures to ensure that
82
everybody in this country has an abundance of coal this winter. It would be a good thing if we could see to it that the poorest of families are supplied with an abundance of anthracite coal. Of course, it would be difficult to start it going, but once it gets going, it gives a better fire and a better heat.
Mr. J. Griffiths: And no smoke.
Mr. Gallacher: And no smoke. Arising out of the various factors mentioned by the hon. Member for Llanelly, we are now in a situation in which there is a tendency towards a slump in the mining industry. But there is a sufficient market in this country if everybody could get the amount of coal he required during the coming winter. There is a sufficient market in this country, not from the point of view of people being able to pay for the coal but from the point of view of people being able to use it, to compensate for the loss of markets as a result of events which have taken place on the other side of the continent. There should be no question of taking from the coal industry these men whom the Minister has eulogised. Every effort should be made to ensure that every available ounce of coal is burned this winter by the people in this country, thereby ensuring that the men are kept in employment.
Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at Nine Minutes after Seven o'Clock until Tuesday, 17th September, pursuant to the Resolution of the House this day.

  EXIT PERMITS (SHIPPING RESERVATIONS).
  EXIT PERMITS (SHIPPING RESERVATIONS).
  ITALY AND GREECE (CORFU).
  ITALY AND GREECE (CORFU).
  INDO-CHINA.
  INDO-CHINA.
CIVIL DEFENCE.
  ALIENS.
  ALIENS.
  AIR-RAID SHELTERS (GRANT).
  AIR-RAID SHELTERS (GRANT).
  SOUTH WALES (SPECIFIED AREAS).
  SOUTH WALES (SPECIFIED AREAS).
  EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE.
  EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE.
  UNIVERSITY COURSES (DOMINIONS).
  UNIVERSITY COURSES (DOMINIONS).
FOOD SUPPLIES.
  NATIONAL DRIED MILK.
  NATIONAL DRIED MILK.
  PLUMS.
  PLUMS.
  WIRELESS COLLEGES (TRAINEES).
  WIRELESS COLLEGES (TRAINEES).
ROYAL AIR FORCE.
  HEADQUARTERS ESTABLISHMENTS (CLERICAL STAFFS).
  HEADQUARTERS ESTABLISHMENTS (CLERICAL STAFFS).
  CRASHED GERMAN BOMBER, EIRE.
  CRASHED GERMAN BOMBER, EIRE.
  STATE PENSIONS (COST OF LIVING).
  STATE PENSIONS (COST OF LIVING).
  NATIONAL WAR EFFORT (NORTHERN IRELAND).
  NATIONAL WAR EFFORT (NORTHERN IRELAND).
  DEFENCE AREAS (RELIEF MEASURES).
  DEFENCE AREAS (RELIEF MEASURES).
  POSTAL CENSORSHIP (NORTHERN IRELAND).
  POSTAL CENSORSHIP (NORTHERN IRELAND).
  OLD AGE PENSIONS (LEICESTER).
  OLD AGE PENSIONS (LEICESTER).
  MERCANTILE MARINE (SURGEONS, WAR RISKS BONUS).
  MERCANTILE MARINE (SURGEONS, WAR RISKS BONUS).
BRITISH ARMY.
  EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
  EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
  CASE FOR INQUIRY.
  CASE FOR INQUIRY.
Preamble
Reassembling after the Recess, the House met at four of the clock, the EARL OF ONSLOW on the Woolsack.

DEATHS OF PEERS.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DOMINION AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT CALDECOTE): My Lords, I regret to have to place on record that since we last met we have lost by death the services of two members of your Lordships' House who had rendered eminent public service, Lord Strickland and Viscount Home of Slamannan. At the same time I regret to record that another member of your Lordships' House, Flying Officer Lord Shuttleworth, has been reported missing for some time, after a fight in the air, and I fear that no hope can now be entertained of his survival. I am sure your Lordships will desire me to express your sympathy with the relatives of these noble Lords in their bereavement.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I am sure we all wish to be associated with the expressions used by the Leader of the House. Particularly, perhaps, I might be allowed to associate myself with what he has said regarding Lord Horne, because for some time it was my privilege to be a colleague of the noble Viscount, who rendered, as we all know, distinguished national service.

THE WAR SITUATION.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he has any statement to make on the war situation?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT HALIFAX):My Lords, my noble friend has asked me to reply. It is almost exactly twelve months since the outbreak of war, and we may perhaps ask ourselves how we stand after this first year. Many things have happened which we did not expect, and the war has spread into lands with which, in its origin, it appeared to have no concern. But at
366
least the progress of the war up to date, and not least the methods of our enemies, in dragging into the whirlpool their innocent and peace-loving neighbours, violating their neutrality, and destroying their independence, have served to make all the clearer to our own people of the Empire, to the inhabitants of Europe, and to the peoples across the oceans the avowed purpose for which we entered into the war.
To-day our own attention is naturally focussed upon the war which is being waged from the air against us here; but before I come to speak of that, I should like to take rapid stock of the swiftly moving events of the last few weeks in parts of the world hitherto not directly touched by the war. Your Lordships will be aware of the recent developments which have disturbed South-Eastern Europe, the outcome of which is still not clear. On June 26, your Lordships will remember, ten days after France had asked for an armistice, the Soviet Government presented an ultimatum to Rumania demanding the immediate return of Bessarabia and the cession of the northern part of Bukovina. The Rumanian Government yielded to that demand, and on June 28 Soviet troops marched into the ceded provinces. Four days later Rumania renounced the British guarantee and proceeded to demonstrate her subservience to Germany by a series of measures directed against the interests of this country. These measures I need not enumerate. It will, perhaps, suffice if I say that the Rumanian Government have been acting in a manner directly detrimental to British shipping and British oil interests in Rumania. In view of these actions His Majesty's Government have informed the Rumanian Government that so long as our interests are treated in this fashion, it is impossible for our trade with Rumania to thrive, and we have made it clear that we feel ourselves entitled by way of reprisal to hold up Rumanian ships.
Meanwhile Rumania's requital for throwing herself into the arms of Germany and renouncing the British guarantee has been quick and bitter. After abortive bilateral negotiations with Hungary, the Rumanian Government were summoned by Germany and Italy on August 29 to Vienna, where they were forced to accept an arbitral award—if

367
such it can be called—imposed by the Axis powers. Under this award Rumania was forced to cede about two-thirds of Transylvania and to evacuate the ceded territory within fifteen days. As we have all seen, the decision to cede Transylvania has been followed by disturbances in Bucharest and various other provincial centres and by an attempt to seize Government buildings in various Rumanian towns. The Rumanian Cabinet resigned yesterday and the King entrusted General Antonescu, former Minister of National Defence and ex-chief of the Rumanian General Staff, with the formation of a new Government. In return for the sacrifice of one of the most precious parts of the Rumanian motherland Rumania has received a guarantee from the Axis powers of what is left of Rumanian territory, and I have no doubt at all that Rumania is under no illusions as to the value of that guarantee.
I might perhaps explain to the House what attitude His Majesty's Government take towards this Rumanian-Hungarian settlement and towards other settlements reached under duress in time of war. We have, as your Lordships are well aware, never supported a policy based on a rigid adherence to the status quo. On the contrary, we have lent our support to the principle that we should be favourable to a modification of the status quo, always provided that such modification is just and equitable in itself and is reached by means of free and peaceful negotiation and agreement between the interested parties without aggression or compulsion. It is for that reason that His Majesty's Government are able to regard with satisfaction the conversations which have also been proceeding for some weeks between Rumania and Bulgaria in regard to the question of the Southern Dobrudja. It was stated on August 21 that Rumania had agreed in principle to the cession of this territory with its 1912 boundaries; and His Majesty's Government hope that from these discussions a final and amicable solution of that particular problem may be arrived at. It equally follows that we are unable to accept the settlement now announced of the Hungarian-Rumanian dispute over Transylvania since that settlement is the result of a dictation by the Axis Powers imposed on Rumania under duress. We do not pro-
368
pose during the war to recognise territorial changes unless these have been evidently and freely agreed between all the parties concerned. I have no doubt all of us in this House hope that at the end of the war there may be a general settlement on lines so just and equitable as to give hope of its durability and to that end His Majesty's Government will use all their influence.
Meanwhile, further south in the Balkan Peninsula, Herr Hitler's apprentice appears to have had it in mind to try out on his own the well-known Nazi policy of threat and intimidation, and towards the middle of August Signor Mussolini began to develop an agitation against Greece, well backed by troop movements, and no doubt timed to reach a climax at the same moment as Herr Hitler might launch his attack against this country. Certainly nothing could have been more devoid of substance than the trumped-up charge upon which this agitation was based. Two months before an Albanian brigand had been assassinated on Albanian soil by enemies from among his own people. The assassins had fled to Greece, where they were arrested. The question of extradition of these men was under discussion between the Greek and Italian Governments, when Signor Mussolini suddenly found it convenient to convert this common criminal into, as he called him, an "Albanian patriot, basely murdered by the Greeks."
Threats in the Italian Press were followed by Italian troop concentrations and these concentrations were followed by the cowardly torpedoing of the Greek cruiser "Helle" as she lay before the island of Tenos on the occasion of the great annual Feast of the Assumption on August 15, to which thousands of sick pilgrims flock from all over Greece in the hope of a cure. Such acts and such threats might intimidate a less courageous people, but it is greatly to the credit of the Greek Government and people that they have remained perfectly calm in the face of these dangers and provocations, resolved to maintain their neutrality and to give no pretext to their neighbour through any unneutral act, but at the same time determined to defend their own integrity and independence against all comers. The attitude of His Majesty's Government to Greece of course remains as it was defined by my right honourable

369
friend the Lord President of the Council, then Prime Minister, in his speech of April 13, 1939, when he said that:
"In the event of any action being taken which clearly threatened the independence of Greece…, and which the Greek… Government…considered it vital to resist with their national forces, His Majesty's Government, would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Greek… Government…all the support in their power."
Beyond the boundaries of Europe also events have moved swiftly and there have been notable developments in some of the French Colonies, in which His Majesty's Government are naturally interested. We have had reports that certain demands were presented to the Government of Indo-China by a Japanese military mission there, and that these demands were refused by the French authorities. On receipt of that information His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo was asked to draw the attention of the Japanese Government to the reports that we had received, and, at the same time, to remind them of the interest of His Majesty's Government in the preservation of the status quo in Indo-China. Your Lordships have no doubt seen the report in the Press of the statement made by Mr. Cordell Hull in which he declared that this was also a matter to which the United States Government attached importance.
We have naturally welcomed the decision of certain French overseas territories to adhere to General de Gaulle and the cause of Free France. Those Colonies which have already declared themselves include the New Hebrides and French Oceania in the Pacific, where a plebiscite resulted in an almost unanimous vote for General de Gaulle, while in Africa the territories of great importance of French Equatorial Africa and the French Cameroons have also declared themselves for Free France, and General de Gaulle's representatives have taken over the administration. It may well be that others of the French Colonial territories will follow their example and rally to the same cause.
Now, my Lords, if I may, I would say a word upon the subject which was made known to the world on Tuesday last, the day before yesterday, when the news was simultaneously published in Washington and in London that as the result of Notes exchanged the day before between the
370
United States Government and His Majesty's Government, fifty American destroyers were to be transferred at once to us and that His Majesty's Government had accorded defence facilities, as had indeed been previously announced, on the basis of 99-year leases, to the United States in Newfoundland, Bermuda, the Caribbean and British Guiana. The Agreement that is embodied in these Notes, which I think speak for themselves, provides practical means of increasing simultaneously the defence capacity both of the United States and of the British Commonwealth with its millions of British subjects, let us not forget, in the Western Hemisphere, each party to the transaction contributing materially and effectively to the security of the other.
The underlying principle of the Agreement is that of a mutual recognition of the value of sea power as a shield against aggression, and certainly I need not emphasize in this House the importance to us at the present time of the acquisition of the destroyers. Ever since the outbreak of war, in face of all the elements of nature and of all the machinations of the enemy, our destroyer flotillas have continued to discharge the heavy responsibility of keeping open the highways of the ocean for the Mercantile Marine, to whose courage also we owe much, and the impending arrival of these new flotillas in British waters is very welcome to us not merely as a reinforcement of our own defences but also as providing the means of developing the striking power of our sea forces in other theatres of war. The other result of the Agreement is of course to provide a major contribution to the national security of the United States and to its ability to strengthen what I believe is now called hemispheric defence in co-operation with the other nations of the Americas.
As my right honourable friend the Prime Minister pointed out in a speech he made in another place on the 20th August, the interests of the United States and of the British Empire so far coincide as to require that the former should have facilities for the naval and air defence of the Western Hemisphere. The lease facilities which are set out in the White Paper are paralleled of course by the discussions now proceeding between the United States and Canada; and the

371
acquisition of the similar facilities which are being made available in the Caribbean and British Guiana will of course have a very considerable value in providing for the effective protection of the Panama Canal, that vital strategic link between the Atlantic and Pacific.
The fact that the leases are to be for a period of ninety-nine years ensures that this Agreement, concluded as I have said for the advantage of both parties, shall not be of a merely passing or ephemeral kind. No question of any transference of sovereignty arises, and the Governors of the territories in which concessions are being made, as also His Majesty's Government in Canada, have been consulted at every stage and have fully concurred in what has been done. I think it is also true to say that, from all the reports reaching me, the Agreement has been received with warm approval and cordiality by the peoples directly concerned. Certainly it is true that this Agreement stands in singular contrast to the more tortuous processes by which the totalitarian Powers seek to enlarge their sphere of domination at the expense of others. Apart from its immense material significance, the whole transaction to my mind does illustrate how successfully freedom-loving societies, mutually confident in each other's purpose, can reach decisions which may sub-serve the cause of all peoples who desire to live together honourably and at peace.
Meanwhile our own island, now an outpost of freedom, has become the centre of a vast battle. Throughout July and early August the German Air Force was engaged in making good the losses sustained during the battle of France—air losses inflicted for the greater part by the Royal Air Force—and in concentrating on new bases close to the Channel and to the United Kingdom. With this concentration and refitting complete it became possible for the first time for the enemy to launch the full weight of his bomber force—short-range as well as long-range—against this country and to accompany these raids in the daytime by strong fighter escorts. The result of course has been twofold: first to increase the weight of attack, and secondly to increase the difficulty of dealing with it. Exactly four weeks ago the enemy launched the first of a series of massed attacks which have continued
372
without any serious intermission ever since. Every part of our air defence system has been called upon to play its part and every part has done what was expected and required of it. The greatest burden of the battle, of course, has fallen upon the Fighter Force, which almost hourly since the battle began has been called upon to intercept and engage wave after wave of enemy aircraft.
As was said in this House before we adjourned, the achievements of this force in the face of an enemy greatly superior to it in numbers have surpassed all our expectations. In the space of these last four short weeks more than 1,200 enemy aeroplanes have been destroyed for certain and many hundreds more have been severely damaged. No Air Force—there are noble Lords who can speak with authority on this subject—however strong, can sustain such losses as these with composure. But there is as yet no slackening in the attack and the great numerical strength of the German Air Force has enabled it to replace its casualties and to continue the assault. The principal aim of these attacks is clearly to beat down and crush our air defences, but so far these attempts have failed. The material damage inflicted has been small in relation to the size of the forces engaged and at no point have the defences failed to hold the enemy in check. But, my Lords, while we may on this ground feel confidence, let us make no mistake. The battle is very far from being over and there are indeed signs that it may shortly be intensified. No one with any knowledge of the issues involved can doubt that one of the decisive battles of the world is now being fought out at this moment in the air over Britain and Germany. While we have no doubt of the outcome I also have no doubt that a special and unremitting and concentrated effort in every quarter of this country continues to be called for.
We have, as I have said, many reasons for solid and for sober confidence. Many of our Air Force stations have been the subject of heavy attack, but sound organisation and skilful precautions have enabled them to continue to operate with scarcely a pause, and the control of the fighters, of the guns, of the searchlights and of the balloons has operated throughout with the most admirable precision. The Bomber Command, aided by the

373
lengthening hours of darkness, has been enabled to attack an ever-widening range of military objectives in Germany and in Italy. Production both here and in the United States has continued to increase. The training of pilots, of crews and of ground personnel proceeds at an ever-increasing tempo and thus steadily does our strength in the air develop. As we stand at a critical stage of this air battle we can see every reason for confidence but none for complacency. The Royal Air Force we believe will answer every call made upon it, but let us not forget that the whole effort of our people is required to back it up and the last ounce of effort is called for from that multitude of workers upon whom the vital supplies for our Forces depend.
Our own work on the Home Front, whether here or in the factory or in the countryside, which may often seem tedious and pedestrian in comparison with that of the Royal Air Force or of the other armed Forces, is in effect directly related to it and perhaps in its way just as vital. Let us therefore put into the work which we are doing the same determination, instant readiness, and courage in the fare of danger—since in these days it may always come the way of any of us—as they are hour by hour putting into theirs. It is a rare example to us all, of which I am quite sure that the country will not be unworthy. The enemy knows perfectly well that our effort must be continual, and I have no doubt that he hopes to disorganise that effort and to interfere with our productive work by continuous "nuisance" raids. We must see to it that that does not happen. The Government are at this moment considering whether some revision of the system of public warnings may not be desirable and possible. The problem is not an easy one; it is, of course, to combine the need for some warning of danger that is immediate and real with that which all our people will recognise to be their first essential duty, of not allowing the production of material vital for our Fighting Forces to be interfered with unnecessarily. I hope that it may be possible for His Majesty's Government to make an announcement on that matter in the very near future.
If it is our duty, as it is, to see that the line of the Home Front is unbreakable, we have not witnessed a year of war with-
374
out learning something of the methods by which the enemy would attempt to break it; and perhaps in that connection I may say a word or two about a matter on which I know that many of your Lordships have felt a good deal of concern, and with regard to which the noble Lord, Lord Newton, has a question on the Paper. I refer to the treatment of enemy aliens. I would ask that this matter should be viewed in the broad perspective that does, I think, surround the truth of it. In May and June we had before us the example of countries overthrown overnight, and we knew that in that overthrow resident aliens of enemy nationality had often played no inconsiderable part. Despite the obvious differences between conditions in those countries and in our own, His Majesty's Government felt that the crisis at that time did call for severe precautionary measures; and in face of what was then the acute danger of invasion, it became necessary to depart from the earlier policy, which had been to leave German nationals in general free, while combing out from the general body so left free those who were thought to be dangerous.
Instead of that, under the pressure of those times we resorted to the other method of adopting general measures of internment subject only to exemptions on special grounds. Personally, I cannot doubt that in those circumstances the safety of the State did demand the adoption of that second alternative, although we knew perfectly well, and stated publicly at the time, that it would necessarily involve hardships to many who were good friends of our cause. But that process of combing out those for whose release there are special grounds goes on, and I hope that it will be increasingly possible to adopt a liberal policy of release in the altered circumstances in which we now find ourselves. I quite understand that some of your Lordships have felt justifiable impatience to see the release of this or that alien whom they may feel that they know personally to be well disposed, and they may well wish that the whole process of release should, therefore, be speeded up. With that wish I think every member of His Majesty's Government would find himself at one; and it was, as I have said, with great regret, and only under military necessity, that we adopted the policy of general internment.

375
I would add that any modification of that policy, such as we hope to see, must, of course, continue to take account of military requirements and necessity, and we must face the fact that, whatever modification of the internment policy may prove possible, and however rapid it may be possible to make the process of sorting out persons for release, there will for a long time be many people—indeed, there may be some until the end of the war—who are in fact devoted to our cause but who nevertheless are not let out and left at liberty. To them we would say that the fact that they remain interned does not necessarily carry any imputation that His Majesty's Government consider them as enemies.
Moreover, we know well that we have with us in this country and overseas, working and fighting side by side with us, foreign contingents drawn from our Allies who share exactly the same ideals by which we are moved. They have given up everything—their homes, and all opportunity of returning to them, as far as we can see, at present—rather than abandon the struggle against the enemies of mankind. As the days pass these men from Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Norway, Holland, Belgium and France are doing their full share with the most conspicuous gallantry in the battle which we are waging together. Every day we see fresh evidence of the refusal of these people to be daunted by the physical force of which their countries have been victims. I do not know whether you have noticed in the last few days, for example, the demonstrations of loyalty and of affection which took place here and in many parts of the world—even in territory now occupied by the enemy—on the national occasion of the birthdays of the sovereigns of Norway and of the Netherlands. By such means, in part, is expression given to those things which we all know to be at stake in this conflict for the freedom of men. These are things of the spirit that do not die at the will of any dictator; and just as Herr Hitler will never begin to understand them, so we are confident that he will never be able to destroy them.
4.50 p.m.
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, the feeling in my mind, as I listened to the noble Viscount, was first and foremost an appre-
376
ciation of the value of Parliament. It is a great tribute to our institutions that a member of His Majesty's Government should frankly and freely take the people into his confidence by talking to them like this. It is this freedom, which our Parliamentary institutions enshrine and typify, that I think does more than anything else to solidify the common will to work together for victory; and it has a spiritual strength and appeal, which was referred to in the last sentence of the noble Viscount, which must be far stronger than any chains a dictator can impose.
I will not say much as to the statement of the noble Viscount, but as an illustration of the changeableness of this war and of the continued element of the unexpected, the fact that after only a fortnight's interval so many new events are presented to us show how rapidly things are moving. The only thing that is not changing, thank God, is the resolution of the British people. But when other matters are looked at in their relations to one another I think we shall conclude hereafter that the most noteworthy event of this fortnight has been the Agreement with the United States. It is surely a great and historic event, the importance of which in the future history of the relations between ourselves and the United States will become apparent. More than that, as an example to the rest of the world it will be of immeasurable and incalculable importance in history.
I was glad to hear what the noble Viscount said about the rallying of certain French Colonies to the Free French Forces. On that I would only express the hope that His Majesty's Government will spare no effort to assist Frenchmen who are similarly disposed in other parts of the world to follow these good examples. As to the tragic events in Rumania, I do not think it would be possible to add anything suitably to what the noble Viscount said. The Rumanians have had a bitter and swift experience of what the value of the protection of the Axis is, and I should think it is quite likely that they are not at the end of their troubles. I am glad that Greece, so far, has preserved a stiff back, and there again I hope that His Majesty's Government will continue to fortify that resolution by all means in their power.
We have all been reminded of the battle that takes place in the skies above

377
us and, if I remember rightly, on the last occasion we met we all paid a tribute to our heroic airmen. Our obligation and the obligation of the world to them continues. I need say no more on that, but I would like to refer to the more homely aspect of this matter, to which I was very glad indeed the noble Viscount alluded, and that is the effect of what are called "nuisance raids." Many people are somewhat perplexed as to what they ought to do when the sirens sound. One thing I am quite sure nobody wants to do is to play the enemy's game and to stop useful work when there is no occasion for stopping. After all, we all have to take a certain amount of risk, and it is not easy, on paper, to say precisely where common sense would tell one to keep at work and where ordinary good sense would tell us to stop work and seek shelter elsewhere. But I think it is of first-rate importance in the maintenance, not only of the national output but of the good temper of the people, that, as soon as possible—so far as it is possible—we should have a better understanding as to how our warning systems are to operate. It really is most important. The noble Viscount said it would not be very long before a statement was made. Well, I sincerely hope that means literally what it says. It should be very soon, because everybody wants to "keep at it," and nobody wants to be leaving his work unnecessarily or to be getting out of bed at night and going to some other place if it does not matter. Therefore it is very important that a better policy should be developed. Of course I am not attributing any blame: nobody does that. We have to learn by this bitter experience how to work these things, and I have not the slightest doubt-that, as we do in other things, we shall find that our wholesome national sense will develop a good working arrangement. That is the best we can say at the moment.
There is one matter to which the noble Viscount did not refer, and it arises a little out of what he said as to the treatment of internees, which I am sure we all welcome: that is that side of the war effort which I think we ought to develop a great deal more in rallying to our support the distressed millions of the subjugated countries. I am putting a Motion on the Paper in about a fortnight's time to call attention to this matter, not in
378
any hostile spirit at all, but because I think it is of first-rate importance that we should exchange views upon it. The thing that is uppermost, I should think, in the daily experience of every one of us who goes about his ordinary affairs as far as possible in an ordinary way is the temper and equanimity of the people. That is really magnificent; and whilst no tribute we can pay to the heroic airmen can be too high and equally must we acknowledge what we owe to the men of whatever branch of service and of the people who are working, without being intimidated, in our factories, we must first and last pay tribute to the endurance and resolution and cheerfulness of the mass of the people.
5 p.m.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: My Lords, on behalf of noble Lords on these Benches I desire to thank His Majesty's Government for the comprehensive statement to which we have just listened, and to express, as a matter of course, our continued and full support of the policies that are being pursued. That statement was animated by a spirit both of confidence and of determined resolution which is undoubtedly in key with the desires of the nation. Reference was made by the noble Viscount to the treatment of so-called enemy aliens, although many of those concerned are far from being enemy aliens. It is not only the policy adopted that has caused so much concern, but perhaps even more the manner in which it is applied. The Home Secretary has himself said that many deplorable things have occurred—grave words coming from a responsible Minister. There unquestionably has been gross administrative inefficiency in carrying out the general policy on which His Majesty's Government decided. Apparently it was especially in the War Office, in the early stages, that that inefficiency occurred, and I hope that Ministers will make careful inquiry into the persons who were directly responsible and who unquestionably are deserving of grave censure.
The noble Viscount made special reference to Greece, and what he said will, I am sure, be endorsed by your Lordships. There has been a long-standing friendship between the peoples of Greece and of this country, and among the Greeks, as anyone knows who has travelled through

379
that country, there is a feeling of real good will towards Great Britain, going far back into the history of both countries. We have all seen with concern the threats, and indeed the blows, that have been levelled against Greece by her aggressive neighbour. We hope she will not be involved in war, but if she is, as the Government have clearly indicated, this country will go to her assistance with all the opportunities that we can command. I have seen it stated that the Italian Navy has taken as a new motto the inscription we may see on the railway carriage windows in Italy, "E pericoloso sporgersi"—"It is dangerous to put your head out." But if Italy should extend the naval war in the Eastern Mediterranean, it might give opportunities to the Royal Navy of which it will not be slow to avail itself.
As the noble Lord who has just spoken has already said, apart from actual military events, and especially the great air battle which is now proceeding, the most important occurrence, by far, of these recent weeks has been the conclusion of the Anglo-American Agreement. That will have been received throughout the nation with the deepest satisfaction. History has left the British Empire with many naval bases scattered throughout the world, some of them the consequence of vigorous pioneer efforts of emigrants, some the result of past contests; but the United States has no such bases in the Western Atlantic, and they are strategically and tactically more essential than they have ever been, in these days of submarine warfare, with total attacks on commerce, and air warfare, with onslaughts on civilian populations. No doubt the United States might be able to obtain such bases by bringing pressure to bear on small weak countries in the Western Atlantic, or by purchase, or even in the extreme case by conquest, but it does not desire to take any of these courses. It is right that we, from the abundance of our territory, should proffer these military facilities of which the United States stands in need.
I am glad there is to be no question of monetary payment being requested from America for these long leases. In view of the history of the War Debt question, it would have been a wrong course to have contemplated for a moment the pay-
380
ment of any cash consideration for these facilities. Even without the destroyers we ought to have been glad to meet the wishes of the United States by conceding naval and air bases on the other side of the Atlantic, but the transfer of these destroyers is of course most welcome, particularly as they are the naval arm of which at the moment we stand chiefly in need. This historic Agreement will be most welcome to Canada and Newfoundland, and, if it should be found desirable to adopt similar measures in the Pacific, I feel certain that Australia and New Zealand would find that also a welcome step, as increasing their own future security and stability. If in the American Hemisphere from North to South the peoples had been as militarist and aggressive as some of the peoples are on the Continent of Europe, this troubled planet would be now in an even worse case than it is. Whatever strengthens the United States strengthens the cause of human liberty and world peace, and for that reason especially we cordially welcome this Agreement.
5.7 p.m.
VISCOUNT TRENCHARD: My Lords, may I intervene for a moment in this debate? I have recently, by the kindness of the Secretary of State for Air, been allowed to go round and visit most of the squadrons and aerodromes in this country, and I have seen some of them twice and three times while they have been actively at work. I have said before that I never thought that our pilots would equal what was done in the last war, but I do not want to bore your Lordships with that again. As to the pilots, and not only the pilots, but the whole crews, the maintenance parties who are keeping these machines in the air, and who are sometimes forgotten, and also the instructors at the schools, who are a vital necessity and whose work is not always in the limelight and is very boring, though it is of the utmost importance—I say I have never seen anything so splendid as their spirit is. I have been at an aerodrome when numbers of German machines were coming over, and though a squadron had not been on duty these pilots came running or bicycling back from their billets outside in order to join in although it was not their turn. I have seen some of these bombing squadrons coming back from their long trips, and there is nothing to equal their keenness.

381
If I may say one other word, the noble Viscount who made the Government statement talked of the great battle that is being fought over this country particularly, and then referred rather briefly to the subject of bombing. The battle that is being fought, as I see it, and which was bound to be fought—England being situated as it is—amounts to this. First of all, we have to bring down more of the enemy who come to this country than they bring down of ours who go to their country. That is the first half, of the battle. It does not matter what we lose so long as we keep that up. The second half of the battle is that our bombers going to Germany shall be more dangerous, and frighten and inconvenience the life of the nation there to a greater degree than the Germans do here. Situated as England is—an island with the sea all round us—we have this great advantage over every other country, that we have the Navy and the blockade; and the blockade plus the battle to which I have referred is bound inevitably to win the victory.

INTERNMENT OF ALIENS.
5.10 p.m.
LORD NEWTON: My Lords, I beg to ask His Majesty's Government how many alien civilians have been released from internment since the issue of the White Paper in July, No. 6217, and how many arrests and rearrests have taken place during this period. I have no intention of making a speech, but perhaps my noble friend who is to reply will be be able to give me an answer to this—namely, whether it is the case that there are now twenty-seven persons in the Home Office who really have the power of granting or refusing the liberation of the internees.
5.11 p.m.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: My Lords, before my noble friend replies I would very much like to say a word upon this question of aliens, because I admit I am still, very unhappy about it. My noble friend Lord Davies has a question the answer to which will be of great importance, but it is not only the question of the speed at which the internees are being released that is most important. There are a good many other questions which ought to be, and I hope are being, considered. It is not
382
a question only of the policy involved, though I think the policy of the Government is wrong, but it is mainly the question of the administration of that policy, and among other things the speed with which information is given in answer to inquiries about particular cases.
I have had several cases brought to my notice and no doubt many of your Lordships have had others. One kind of typical case I will mention. A woman has a husband who is suddenly arrested—she does not know for what reason—and he is removed to an unknown camp. She thereupon writes and tries to find out what has happened to him, and hears vague rumours that he has been carried off to Canada. She thereupon writes to the Commandant of the camp and asks: "Is it true that my husband has been sent to Canada?" After some little delay she gets a reply to say that they have no record in the camp as to whether he was being sent to Canada or not. She then writes to me, and I sent her letter on to a quarter where I thought it would probably be attended to. The result was that almost immediately she received information that the man had been sent to Canada, and was then living in that country. I think that is an awful way of dealing with these things. The poor woman was in the greatest possible anxiety about it because she did not know what had happened to her husband, and thought that he might have been drowned in the "Arandora" disaster or something of that kind. She was quite unable to get information until somebody outside altogether intervened, and then under that pressure the information was given.
I have had also a number of other cases in which I thought it right to ask for information. The position is getting worse. It is more difficult to get a reply than it was. After all, a Member of Parliament, even if he is only a member of this House, has a positive right to a reply from the Minister if he makes an inquiry on a matter of the Minister's duty. We get no reply at all, no answer of any kind whatever, not even an acknowledgment. I do not want to charge the Minister of Home Security with discourtesy. I am sure that would be a most unfair charge, but I do say that it shows the total inadequacy of the machinery for dealing

383
with these questions. That is what is really the trouble. There is not anything like the machinery that is necessary. In my judgment—I may be entirely wrong—there ought to have been a Minister definitely allotted to this subject when it was seen that it was going to be one of very great complexity and difficulty, and he ought to have had a proper staff to deal with it in a proper way with reasonable celerity and in a businesslike fashion.
So much for the administration. What I desire to say as to the policy—I do not need to repeat what has been said in this House—is that the policy is fundamentally wrong. It is based upon the principle that what matters is whether a person is a German or not, whereas what really matters is whether he is a Nazi or not. That ought to be the real test. Merely to imprison all the Germans would be as unreasonable as to imprison all the English or the French or the people of any other nationality. The question really is what is a person's attitude in the great controversy that is being fought out in this war. That is a matter which was investigated at the very start of the war, when a certain conclusion was arrived at, and persons were allowed not to be interned in consequence of that conclusion. Then many of them were interned without any kind of warning. I cannot believe that the emergency required that that step should be taken, nor do I believe that it was the right step to be taken, whatever the emergency was. I hope very much that now there will be greater liberality, as the Foreign Secretary promised, in the relief which is given in these cases.
I most earnestly beg the Government to reconsider the whole basis of this policy and decide upon a reasonable plan. The moment there is the slightest doubt what the attitude of a man or woman may be, then it is right to intern, but when there is no doubt it is fantastic to intern people who fled from their country because they could not stand the persecution and the danger to life and limb which was involved by remaining there. That is all I desire to say on that point, and I must not be led into saying anything else about what the Foreign Secretary stated, because that does not arise on this question, but I do hope the Government will really give this matter more attention than they have yet given to it.
5.17 p.m.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: My Lords, I feel bound to associate myself with what my noble friend has said not so much about questions of policy as questions of administration in regard to the difficult matter of these internees. It is useless now to consider and discuss the earlier policy. I fully understand the reasons which led the military authorities to insist upon even the internment of those whose circumstances had been carefully examined and who had been pronounced to be entirely friendly to this country and inimical to the Nazi system. All I want to do now is to call attention to the fact that still, in spite of all the admissions that have been generously made about the inadequacy of administration, these blots on administration continue in what is to me a most perplexing way.
I have to deal constantly with cases of this kind that come to me from all parts of the country. I find that the officials at the Home Office, including, and most of all, the Home Secretary himself, are always most courteous and most ready to recognise the justice of any case that is put before them, but unfortunate people who have not the same access to these high officials find the delays almost intolerable. Much time passes before an answer is given to the simplest possible question about one of these unhappy people. I am informed that wives still do not know whether their husbands have been taken to Canada or not. One of them was alluded to by the noble Viscount just now. I find that still, in what seems to me an unnecessary way, wives and husbands are kept separate from each other.
I particularly pressed some time ago upon the Home Secretary the desirability in the camps of keeping those who are admittedly anti-Nazi apart from those who are admittedly the friends of that system. It is almost intolerable that people who sacrificed everything because they could not endure the system under which they were living and came over here to get liberty from it should be compelled to associate day by day with those who are admittedly friends of that very system. The Home Secretary said he was taking steps to see that separation was made. I should like to know how far that has been consistently done. I hear no complaints about the camps themselves. In

385
most cases gratitude is expressed by the inmates of the camps for the considerateness and kindliness of the Commandants and of the officers of the camps, but often there is a real difficulty because of inability to provide suitable employment for the kind of men interned. It is quite intolerable for a man who has occupied himself before he was obliged to come to this country in the work of a university, or of a scientific laboratory or a very important business, to be obliged to spend day after day and hour after hour without any chance of reasonable and fruitful employment. I should have thought that a little imagination would have enabled the Government to put that matter right.
Similarly, although I know it is almost impossible to make discriminations as to comforts within these camps, I cannot but think that there are cases of persons of real eminence formerly in their own country, cases of very distinguished people who might be allowed a little more latitude in the way of personal comfort than is perhaps required by the great mass of the interned. I should like to say that, in my judgment, what is wrong at present—I say nothing about the original policy—is not so much the desire of the Government to put matters right as the extraordinary slowness and cumbrousness with which they seem even now to be carrying out their own desire.
5.22 p.m.
LORD DAVIES,LORD DAVIES, who had given Notice that he would ask His Majesty's Government what steps have been taken to implement the assurances given by the Home Office that the cases of friendly aliens now in internment camps will be expeditiously dealt with, and what administrative machinery has now been created to deal promptly with this urgent matter, said: My Lords, I have a question on the Paper with regard to aliens and perhaps when the noble Duke replies to Lord Newton, he will be good enough to reply to my question at the same time. I cannot help feeling that the speech of the noble Viscount, the Foreign Secretary, was not as reassuring as one might wish. He said that he hoped the Government would initiate a more liberal policy in the future, but then he went on to qualify that by saying that even those amongst aliens who were devoted to our cause and who could not be in any sense
386
regarded as our enemies might still have to look forward to a term of internment. I should like to ask the noble Viscount why, if these people are trustworthy, if they are not our enemies, we should wish to prolong their internment. Is there no service that they can render to us in the prosecution of the war and in the defeat of Nazism?
I gather from speeches which have been made in another place that similar assurances were made on August 22 last. As we have already been told, the machinery for carrying out these promises is woefully lacking and is very slow in its operation. I hope the noble Duke will be able to assure us when he replies that this machinery has been already expanded and that there will be far greater expedition in dealing with these cases in the future. So far as I can make out, there are two tests which the Home Office are going to apply. One is a test of trustworthiness, and the other is the test of serviceability, as to what help an alien can give us in the prosecution of the war. I cannot help feeling that a second test is superfluous. If a man or woman is untrustworthy, then no matter how clever that person may be, whatever gifts that person may possess, he or she is not a fit or proper person to assist us in any way in the prosecution of the war. I suggest that this test of serviceability is really superfluous if the test of trust worthiness is properly applied.
The second point I would like to bring to the notice of the noble Duke is this. Some time ago I ventured to put a question about internees who have served with our forces in France. These people, who I understand are called "prestataires," were originally enlisted by the French authorities at our request. They were transferred quite willingly, on their part, to British Pioneer units in France, contracts were actually signed and they were placed under the control of British officers. When some of these fellows managed to escape and landed in this country, they were promptly gaoled. Several of them were sent to Pentonville prison and some to one of the internment camps near Liverpool. Why they were dealt with in this manner when, at any rate, the majority of them had military papers, passes my comprehension. Why were they not sent to military camps where they could be sorted out

387
and their statements and papers investigated? It seems entirely wrong that these men who had signed contracts and were doing military work for our Expeditionary Force should be dealt with in this most extraordinary and stupid way. I am grateful to the Home Office for having investigated the case of eight men who were interned at Huyton. Seven of them, I understand, have been sent back to a Pioneer unit, but I understand also that one of them, a corporal, was degraded the moment he got here. I should like to ask the noble Duke whether this degradation from the position of corporal to private was done because he was supernumerary in this particular unit or whether it was done because his papers had been lost and he could not therefore substantiate the fact that he had acted as corporal in France. I must not weary your Lordships with the large number of other cases which I have had brought to my notice, but I feel that the fact that there are so many of these cases shows how vital it is that they should be dealt with in the most expeditious manner.
There is only one other point I want to put to the noble Duke. A statement has been made in the Press which purports to arise out of the publication of a book, and which I really cannot believe. The only reason for my drawing the attention of the noble Duke to it this afternoon is that I hope that he will be able to give us a categorical denial of it and to tell us that the whole thing is absolute moonshine, for I cannot believe that it is true. The statement is as follows:
"It was credibly reported that complete lists of the refugees in the internment camps had been handed over to the Swiss Legation which represents the German Government in London. After all, complete lists of prisoners of war were sent to Berlin via the Swiss Legation, so why should not a complete list of the refugees be sent as well? This report, which has not been denied, indicates the mentality of certain officials in positions of responsibility; and while such a mentality exists in the Home Office or the War Office, it is totally impossible to consider seriously any plans for organising"
the services of refugees for warfare in Europe against the Nazis. I venture to ask the noble Duke whether there is the slightest truth in a statement of that kind, because I think that otherwise he should at the earliest opportunity, and speaking for the Home Office,
388
repudiate it; for it is most damaging to our cause and most damaging to our reputation as a freedom-loving country, and as a country which would not give away any information about those who have sought refuge over here.
5.32 p.m.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA AND BURMA (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, the noble Lord who has just sat down will scarcely expect me to answer the various questions of detail which he has raised, such as that of the degradation of a corporal from the French Army to the rank of private in the English, because they are not questions with which I can be expected to deal without notice of some kind. He described as extraordinary the treatment of the Germans in the service of the French Army who were temporarily detained at Huyton. I really think that he is being somewhat unjust to the authorities in this case. Here were eight Germans who arrived in this country wearing a uniform to which they were not entitled, and who described themselves as belonging to a corps to which in fact they did not belong. It seems to me not wholly unreasonable, at a moment of very great crisis, that these people should be detained pending inquiry. The inquiries were completed in the course of a very few days and, as soon as it was found that these men were in fact Germans in the service of the French Government, they were given the opportunity of enlisting in the corresponding corps attached to the British Army, and were released. One of them, as I told your Lordships on the last occasion when we discussed this matter, declined the opportunity to enlist and is still detained.
The answer to my noble friend who asked this question is that since the White Paper, Cmd. No. 6217, was issued on July 31, up to last Saturday, August 31—that is to say, in one month—some 7,000 applications for release have been examined by the Home Office, and 1,953, or rather over a quarter of these, have been found not to fall within any of the nineteen categories in the White Paper, and had therefore to be refused. Not quite so many were found to be eligible for release, but the release of 1,687 persons has been authorised.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: How many have actually been released?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: 1,687.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: No, the release of 1,687 has been authorised. How many have actually been released?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: I will come to that in a moment; it is a question of only a very few days. These persons included 1,501 Germans or Austrians—1,443 men and 58 women—and 186 Italian men, but the number does not include a considerable number of volunteers for the Pioneer Corps, who will be leaving, we hope, before very long, as soon as the military authorities can make arrangements to receive them; nor does it include a very considerable number of persons who were here on their way to America, and who may, when the American authorities can make the necessary arrangements, be able to proceed to America as emigrants.
Thus 3,640 applications have been decided during the period of a month. In addition, well over 3,000 other applications have been examined, but inquiries were found to be necessary in order to confirm the claim that the applicant came within a particular category. The necessary inquiries in these cases are in progress. The answer to the last part of my noble friend's question is that during the same period twenty-four Germans or Austrians—one man and twenty-three women—have been arrested for internment on the recommendation of Regional Advisory Committees. So far as my right honourable friend is aware, no re-arrests have been made during this period.
My noble friend asked me a question about the number of officials in the Home Office who are qualified to make decisions about release. I am informed that it would not be quite right to say that there are twenty-seven such officials. It is not possible to make an absolute division, because there are more who can make decisions where no difficulty arises, and where quite clearly an internee falls into a particular category, and possibly fewer who can make decisions where some difficulty arises. My noble friend will be interested to hear, however, that whereas the total administrative, executive and clerical staff dealing with this question
390
was 202 on July 1, it was 320 on September 1; that is to say, there has been an expansion of over one third, and that expansion is still proceeding. I am also informed that the expansion has not yet had its full effect, in that the people who are being taken into the Department, and who are for the most part Consuls and people of that kind, with experience of foreigners, have not yet in many cases fully learned their work. The Department will be able to proceed with greater rapidity as time goes on.
My noble relative opposite referred to the question of delay. I shall come to that when I deal with the question by the noble Lord, Lord Davies, but there again I feel bound to make a defence of my right honourable friend. The volume of correspondence pouring into the Home Office is perfectly colossal, and it is a fact that many of these aliens—suffering as they do, of course, from every kind of mental stress and anxiety—set to work to pull every conceivable string on which they can lay their hands. I am told that in some cases letters from no fewer than thirty Members of Parliament, Peers, Prelates and other well-intentioned persons have been received on behalf of one single alien. Your Lordships can imagine that that great volume of correspondence must tend to clog rather than to accelerate the working of an already sorely-pressed Department. It is a fact that if those who receive correspondence on behalf of these aliens would find out from the anxious wife, or whoever it may be, whether she has already approached some other Member of Parliament, Peer or someone of that sort, and whether the matter is therefore already being dealt with, the work of the Department would be a good deal facilitated. My right honourable friend is taking steps to provide employment, and an increasing variety of employment is being found.
My noble relative referred to information. It is perhaps not fully known that my right honourable friend is circulating a Paper in the course of the next two or three days, I think, to make it more widely known that an Information Bureau has been set up. That has been made public, but it is perhaps not fully realised. The whereabouts of particular internees can be discovered by appealing to this Bureau, whose address is St. Stephen's House, and inquiries are being

391
received in larger numbers as the fact that this Bureau exists becomes better known.
In answer to the question of the noble Lord, Lord Davies, your Lordships have already been informed of the appointment of a tribunal to advise the Home Secretary on applications under the new Category 19 included in the revised White Paper Cmd. 6223, which deals with Germans and Austrians who claim that by their writings or speeches or by their political or official activities they have consistently over a period of years taken a public and prominent part in opposition to the Nazi system, and are actively friendly towards this country and the Allied cause. Your Lordships have also been informed of the appointment of an Advisory Committee to consider the cases of Italian internees who fall within the categories of eligibility for release and to advise the Home Secretary whether any Italian eligible for release could be regarded as friendly towards this country and so sympathetic towards the Allied cause that he could safely be released without prejudice to the national interest. Both these Committees will include persons with a special knowledge of the life and politics respectively of Germany and Italy, and will be able to have the assistance of other persons with special knowledge who could give advice and information on the loyalties and sympathies of individuals.
With regard to machinery, applications for release are being dealt with by the Administrative Division of the Home Office ordinarily concerned with aliens, the staff of which, as I have just said, has been specially augmented, and my right honourable friend is satisfied that applications which are still coming in are being dealt with as promptly and expeditiously as is consistent with considerations of national security. Special arrangements have been made to ensure that when a camp Medical Officer certifies that release is necessary on urgent medical grounds, the necessary authority for release is issued within twenty-four hours, if necessary by telegram. In this connection I should like your Lordships to remember—and this deals with my noble relative's point—that the delay in effecting releases which is sometimes attributed to the Home Office is not infrequently due to the irregularity
392
of the posts to the Isle of Man. Your Lordships will also appreciate that, even when the camp Commandant has received the documents, a short interval must occur during which the necessary preparations are made for collecting the property of the alien concerned, arranging for his journey, and so forth. All these small details must inevitably take time, and it cannot be expected that when a letter is received from the Home Office saying that the alien's release has been authorised, the alien will in fact arrive home the next morning. All possible steps are, however, being taken to expedite the procedure of releasing aliens as soon as they are found to be eligible for release.
To summarise the position, approximately one-tenth of the Category C aliens who were interned when the decision was taken to intern all aliens have been released. The cases of nearly double that number are under consideration now, because unhappily it is not always possible to accept the mere ipse dixit of the interned person. Inquiries have to be made as to whether in fact he is the individual described, because cases of giving wrong names have occurred. Arrangements have been made by which, as the applications for release under these different categories come in, the machinery can be made to work more smoothly and more expeditiously. There is the possibility of very considerable numbers going to the Pioneer Corps. That opportunity is open to all those of suitable age, and there is also the very considerable possibility of emigration to America. I do not say the position is to-day entirely satisfactory, but my right honourable friend has convinced me that the position is enormously better than it was a month ago, and I think the machinery is being steadily improved.
The most reverend Prelate asked a question about comforts. I have been through that particular question with my honourable friend the Under-Secretary, and I am bound to say that he convinced me that you would get into an almost impossible position if you began to make differences between internees. They are, I do not say luxuriously, but not badly housed, and, as the numbers are diminishing and congestion decreasing, the housing has improved. They are decently fed, many have considerable sums of money available, and the policy

393
decided upon is to give them pocket money week by week from the funds kept by the camp Commandant. These are adequate to provide a reasonable standard of comfort. Stamps, cigarettes and sweets are available in the camp canteen, and the payments are on a uniform basis. I am bound to say I could well understand the case that the most reverend Prelate made, but I believe you would get into great difficulties if you had differentiation, and if the pocket money were not given on a uniform scale.
5.48 p.m.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: My Lords, I am not sure whether I caught from my noble friend the exact number who have actually been released. That seems to me to be the thing that matters. It does not matter to have got an authorisation for release if the aliens are still detained. Can my noble friend give me the actual figure of those who have been released? May I say two things about the delay? I have here a note of four typical cases which I will hand to my noble friend. I do not want him to make inquiry into these cases particularly, but it will show him the kind of thing that we are complaining of, and I am sure he would agree that we have a very strong case for complaint. If it is true that application ought to be made to this new body, I cannot conceive of any difficulty in the Home Office just sending over the application to the new Information Bureau, and letting the new body deal with it directly.
5.49 p.m.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: My Lords, before the noble Duke gives a supplementary reply, may I ask a supplementary question? I have been informed, and I have reason to believe it is true, that a number of the passports and other documents, some of which are irreplaceable, that were taken from the aliens on the occasion of their internment have, in a considerable number of cases, been lost. The aliens have been in the Isle of Man. Before reaching the Isle of Man they had to surrender these documents, and now they have received a printed form to say that it is regretted that these documents have been lost. Is that correct, and, if so, are proper inquiries being made, and what action is being taken in respect of the persons who have been responsible?
LORD DAVIES: May I ask the noble Duke to reply to the question I asked about the lists of refugees being sent?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: Such inquiries as I have made lead me to believe that there is no truth whatever in the statement. With regard to what my noble relative opposite asked as to the numbers released, there again I cannot give him an exact reply, but I am told the numbers are approximately the same. There may have been a delay of a few days, but the numbers actually released are approximately the same as the releases which have been authorised. There may have been a delay of a day or two, but in most cases no more.
VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD: I am very glad to hear it.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: Will the noble Duke make inquiries about the papers I mentioned?
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: Yes.
5.51 p.m.
LORD RANKEILLOUR: My Lords, I am not sure that I was quite able to follow the noble Duke, and therefore I beg to ask what is the position of those who do not fall into any particular category. As I understand from his answer, the new Committee has the function of deciding whether persons fall into one category or another and also further questions as to their antecedents, but it must certainly be true that a great number fall into no category in particular. What is the procedure in regard to them? Clearly, many of them, if their history and record are looked into, would be just as eligible for release as some of those who fall into the categories. In this connection, my noble friend Lord Newton asked three weeks ago that Commissioners should be sent to the various camps who would have power either to release or to pass on a very strong recommendation for release after going into the matter on the spot. May I ask has anything further been done in that respect?
One further question. I have got complaints from people whose sons have been sent to Canada and they cannot communicate with them. Can they be sure, if they write to them, care of the Bureau at St. Stephen's House, that these letters

395
will be delivered, and have the authorities here got proper lists of those who are in Canada with their home addresses here? That would ease matters very much in a great many cases.
LORD NEWTON: My Lords, I have no intention of commenting in detail on the statement made by my noble friend, but I confess that, like the two noble Lords who have spoken, I find considerable difficulty in understanding it. Even at this moment, I have not the least idea of the actual number of persons released, but I gather one thing, and that is that the apprehension which some of us expressed during the last debate with regard to categories has, unfortunately, been justified. I can understand that a lot of people have been unable to describe themselves as belonging to any particular category, and therefore they remain in custody. I go so far as to say that it is a mistake in principle to rely on categories only. A man's release ought to depend on his guilt or innocence.
5.53 p.m.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, I do not wish to interrupt my noble friend, but these two questions are becoming a debate, and if my noble friend will allow me, with less experience, to say so, he is not, strictly speaking, in order in addressing your Lordships upon this question. I am not anxious to close down any proper questions which arise out of these two on the Paper, but, obviously, my noble friend who has replied already is placed in a position of considerable difficulty if the questions are enlarged into a debate on the whole subject. I suggest to my noble friend that, as there is no Motion on the Paper, he is not strictly in order, and therefore I hope he will be able to limit his observations.
LORD NEWTON: I shall be only too pleased to limit my observations. I was only doing what other people had been doing, if acting in an illegal manner. I have no desire whatever to prolong this debate, but I must warn my noble friend that we shall be obliged to return to this subject on another occasion.
LORD RANKEILLOUR: My Lords, this is an unstarred question, and the extension of the debate has been no greater than your Lordships have allowed
396
on similar questions on many occasions. The question is put: How many aliens have been released from internment? It obviously arises, how man more ought to have been released, why more were not released, and so on. The whole discussion really has been, so far as I understand it, in accordance with the practice of your Lordships' House.

IRON AND STEEL BUILDINGS.
5.55 p.m.
LORD DAVIES: My Lords, my first question has already been answered, and I beg to ask the second one.
[The Question was as follows:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the iron gates and railings recently erected at the headquarters of the Milk Marketing Board have been removed and utilized for war purposes and whether any steps are being taken to deal in a similar way with iron and steel structures in London and elsewhere erected for building schemes which have now been abandoned.]
THE MINISTER OF FOOD (LORD WOOLTON): My Lords, I have consulted the Minister of Supply, on whose behalf I am replying. The noble Lord is asking three questions here. The first is whether these gates have been removed, and the answer to that is in the negative. The second question is, have they been removed in order that they may be used for war purposes? There the answer is in the affirmative. They have been used for war purposes without being removed. We are in the peculiar position, I am advised, that this building is regarded as of importance from a security point of view, and if these gates and railings were removed then some fresh railings would have to be put up. I am sure the noble Lord would agree that, in these circumstances, it is better to keep the railings as they are.
The third part of the question is whether iron and steel structures in London and elsewhere, erected for building schemes which have been abandoned, are going to be taken down. My right honourable friend tells me that he has got a very considerable quantity of scrap from railings that are quite easily

397
accessible, and thinks it inadvisable to take down these steel structures which can only be used for scrap purposes and which can, in certain eventualities, be very useful as buildings in case it becomes necessary, as the result of the process of the war, for other building accommodation to be found. In these circumstances, although he recognises he has full powers, aid will not hesitate to use them, to take this iron and make it into scrap, he considers that at the present time it is inadvisable that he should interfere with these buildings that are half erected. I hope the noble Lord will be satisfied that full inquiries have been made into the question that he has raised.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
5.59 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Addison has had to leave the Chamber, and has requested me to ask the date on which we reassemble and what business will be taken. I have also to ask the Leader of the House a question which my noble friend had intended to ask when he made his remarks after the statement by my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and that is whether the leasing of these territories or bases to the United States of America will require legislation in your Lordships' House, and, if so, when it is proposed to present the Bills.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, with reference to the last question which the noble Lord has asked, it is a question that naturally has not been overlooked. It is a question of considerable interest, not only to Parliament, but to constitutional lawyers. Attention has been given to it in the Departments, and, so far as I am able to express a final opinion at present, I think I am right in saying that it is not expected that United Kingdom legislation will be necessary. With reference to the date upon which your Lordships will again meet, the date will be September 17, and it is expected your Lordships will sit on that day and the two succeeding days. I am told that my noble friend Lord Davies has a Motion on the Paper, and there are also two Questions, but otherwise no business is fixed for those days.
LORD STRABOLGI: May it not be that the Government may find it desirable to make another statement on the progress of the war?
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: I think it is quite likely another statement will be made on behalf of His Majesty's Government. That I assume may be taken almost without being expressed.
LORD STRABOLGI: But we meet definitely on the three days?
LORD NEWTON: My Lords, on the question of the adjournment, may I suggest to the noble Viscount that it would be much more convenient if we met at an earlier hour? What with the approaching black-out and raid alarms and so forth, it at all events would give us a better margin. It seems to me ridiculous to fix the meeting of this House for four o'clock when there is business on the Paper which will occupy several hours. I think I am right in saying that it would be for the general convenience of the majority of this House if we met habitually, say, at three o'clock or at the latest half past three.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: There is another point of view to be considered, and that is that many of us have a great many things to do and we find it difficult enough to get here even at four o'clock.
VISCOUNT CALDECOTE: My Lords, I should be glad to meet my noble friend Lord Newton if it was possible, but there is the judicial business of your Lordships' House to be taken, and that makes it practically impossible for us to meet until four o'clock. I think that indeed is a quarter of an hour earlier than it was customary to meet up to the time of the outbreak of war.

NATIONAL EXPENDITURE.
Message from the Commons for leave for the Lord Cornwallis to attend to be examined as a witness before the Sub-Committee on Army Services of the Select Committee appointed by that House on National Expenditure: Leave given for his Lordship to attend if he think fit; and a Message ordered to be sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith.

SUNDAY ENTERTAINMENTS ACT, 1932.
Orders made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, extending Section 1 of the Act to the

Urban District of Church-Stretton;

Urban District of Halstead;

400

Urban District of Northallerton;

Borough of Stamford:

Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) for affirmative Resolution and ordered to lie on the Table.
House adjourned at three minutes past six o'clock.