Sitting of 30 July 1941

Preamble
[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.]
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  FOREIGN RESEARCH AND PRESS SERVICE.
  Mr. Manderasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the Foreign Research and Press Services Review includes amongst its duties the study of peace aims and world reconstruction after the war; and what progress has been made?
  The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Eden): The Foreign Research and Press Service are engaged in collecting and collating material of all kinds, including that bearing upon the problems of post-war reconstruction.
  Mr. Mander: Can my right hon. Friend say how far they have got with it, and whether they may be expected to present a report to the Government before long?
  Mr. Eden: There is no question of presenting a report. They are not making plans; they are collecting information for the use of others.
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Is there any intention of publishing it?
  Mr. Eden: I cannot answer that.

  ANGLO-MEXICAN RELATIONS.
  Captain John Dugdaleasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any statement to make about the relations of His Majesty's Government with Mexico?
  Mr. Eden: The position remains as described in the Reply given on 2nd April last to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Plaistow (Mr. Thorne).
  Captain Dugdale: Can the right hon. Gentleman say why it is so difficult to
  1378
  establish relations with a neutral country, when apparently we are able to continue relations with a country such as Finland which has definitely been fighting our Ally?
  Mr. Eden: The last part of the supplementary Question is not correct. As regards the first, the position is clear. In 1938 Mexico expropriated the oil companies, and hitherto no suggestion of a fair or equitable settlement has been made to us by the Mexican Government.
  Mr. Mander: Are the British Government working in close association with the United States Government on this subject, and have not the United States Government now come to some arrangement?
  Mr. Eden: If the Mexican Government are prepared to make any approach to the matter, we shall be prepared to examine it.
  Mr. Mander: My question was with regard to the United States.
  Mr. Lipson: Have His Majesty's Government made any approach to the Mexican Government?
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Is it not desirable that His Majesty's Government should reestablish relations with Mexico?

  CENTRAL CHINA (BRITISH NEWS AGENCIES).
  Sir John Wardlaw-Milneasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the enforced closing down, at the instance of the Japanese authorities, of the only British news agencies in Hankow, namely, Reuters and the "Central China Post," will have the result that large areas of Central China will, in future, depend for news on Axis sources alone; and what action he is taking in the matter?
  Mr. Eden: I appreciate the point to which my hon. Friend has drawn attention. A report has been called for, but has not yet been received. As soon as I have any further information, I will communicate with him.
  Sir J. Wardlaw-Milne: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider very carefully whether there are no steps which could be taken to counteract the

  1379
  stoppage of all British news in Central China?
  Mr. Eden: I entirely agree, and that is why I have asked for an inquiry.

  POST-WAR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.
  Commander Sir Archibald Southbyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any commitment has been entered into by the Government affecting the form of our international relationships after the war?
  Mr. Eden: No, Sir. I think it would be premature to anticipate the post-war structure of international relations at the present time.
  Sir A. Southby: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the name of the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs appears as a prominent supporter of the policy known as "Federal Union" in the literature and prospectus of the body called Federal Union, Limited, and is it desirable that His Majesty's Government should thereby be directly connected with the policy of federal union?
  Mr. Eden: I was not aware of that. I do not suppose that my hon. Friend's name has been added since he became Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
  Sir A. Southby: Would it not be desirable that my hon. Friend's name should be deleted from the prospectus now that he is a Member of the Government?

  UNITED STATES (POST-WAR AIMS).
  Mr. Priceasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has seen the declaration of Mr. Sumner Welles at the dedication of the new Norwegian Legation in Washington on Tuesday, on the post-war aims of the United States of America; and whether he will associate himself with them on behalf of His Majesty's Government
  Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir. I have seen a report of this speech. I think I need hardly say that His Majesty's Government are in cordial agreement with the general objectives which Mr. Welles outlined.
  Mr. Noel-Baker: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider some method by which this speech, which was not reported in the British Press, could be placed in the hands of hon. Members of this House?
  Mr. Eden: I am prepared to consider the matter.

  AIR TRANSPORT AUXILIARY (AMERICAN AVIATORS).
  Wing-Commander Jamesasked the Minister of Aircraft Production how many pilots of the Air Transport Auxiliary Service have been recruited in America at the rate of £1,937 17s. 9d. a year, free of United Kingdom Income Tax; what are the durations of their contracts; and upon whose direction and authority, and if with Treasury approval, such contracts were entered into?
  The Minister of Aircraft Production (Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon): The number of American pilots in the Air Transport Auxiliary is 162. Their contracts are for one year, but there is provision for termination at any time on notice being given in writing. The contracts were entered into under the authority of my Ministry, and their terms received Treasury authority.
  Wing-Commander James: Would my right hon. and gallant Friend take steps to have these extraordinary arrangements reviewed at an early date?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: No, Sir. The position is that these American aviators are doing extremely valuable work at the present time. They are flying four-engined machines, two-engined machines and fast fighters, and although the figure is high, it is no higher than what they could get in America; and many of them wish to return there.
  Mr. Garro Jones: May I ask my right hon. and gallant Friend whether their worth is five times more from the financial standpoint than that of those British pilots who fly the same machines on active service in the face of the enemy; and will he at least give the House an assurance that there will be no extension of the numbers employed on these terms?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: The first point has nothing to do with the

  1381
  Question, and the second point is that I have to move valuable aeroplanes about, I cannot get personnel from the Air Force —they are wanted for other matters—and I have to get the best aviators I can. This is the only way I can do it.
  Commander Locker-Lampson: Are not these aviators as good as any, and as valuable?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: I do not pretend they are better than our own.

  AIRCRAFT FACTORY (CLOSING).
  Mr. Manderasked the Minister of Aircraft Production why it is intended to close down an aircraft factory, particulars of which have been sent to him; and what reply has been sent in response to a letter of protest on behalf of the workpeople?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: This factory is being closed down and the work transferred in stages to other premises where it can be more efficiently executed. The management of the firm so informed the workpeople, the bulk of whom will be employed at premises very close to this factory. A small number is rendered redundant by this change.
  Mr. Mander: Can my right hon. and galant Friend say why it has taken 10 months to discover that this particular factory is unsuited for the purpose of manufacturing aircraft, and is he aware that the men concerned did not know on the day I put the Question down whether the factory was going to be closed, because a deputation waited upon me in order to find out?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: We took on this factory when dispersal was the order of the day and was very important. As the winter approaches we find that this particular factory suffers from flooding, that the road approaches are not good, the position of the A.R.P. shelters is not satisfactory, and also that the canteen arrangements are bad. We have another factory to which we are going to transfer this particular work.
  Mr. Mander: Then the canteen arrangements have been bad for 10 months?
  Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon: There has been a lot of trouble for a long time.

  JAMAICA.

    DETENTION (MR. W. A. DOMINGO.)
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any further information to give the House respecting the detention of W. A. Domingo; and whether he is aware of the indignation among the People's National Party of Jamaica and other democratic bodies both in the West Indies and the United States of America?
    Mr. Whiteley (Comptroller of the Household): I have been asked to reply. As regards the first part of the Question, I have nothing to add to the reply given to the Question by my hon. Friend the Member for the Consett Division of Durham (Mr. David Adams) on 16th July. The reply to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative.
    Mr. Sorensen: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the position regarding this man is most unsatisfactory, that the most important of all the political parties in Jamaica has protested on several occasions against his continued detention without any charge against him, and in the interest of better conditions, political and otherwise, in the West Indies, will he not expedite the release of this man?
    Sir Leonard Lyle: Is it not a fact that Domingo came from the United States of America with the special purpose of stirring up trouble on the colour question with the Americans who are at present engaged in building air and naval bases?

    IMPERIAL ASSOCIATION.
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give the House full information as to the Jamaica Imperial Association; why a private group of persons has been authorised to recruit for the services and civilian war work; and why work of this character is not undertaken by the Government?
    Mr. Whiteley: The Jamaica Imperial Association was founded in December, 1917, and comprises members of the commercial and planting community of the island. Among its objects is the consideration and promotion of all matters affecting the economic, social, agricultural, industrial or commercial welfare and development of Jamaica. My Noble

    1383
    Friend is not aware that this or any other group of private persons has been authorised to recruit for the services and for civilian war work. The Governor will, however, be asked for a report on the matter.
    Mr. Sorensen: Is my hon. Friend aware that I have in my hand a West Indian paper in which an advertisement of this Association appears, calling for recruits on behalf of the Government? It having been originally quite private in its conception, does not my hon. Friend think it quite inappropriate that a private concern should be authorised to recruit in this way?
    Mr. Whiteley: Perhaps my hon. Friend will hand that paper to us, so that we can have inquiries made.
    Mr. Sorensen: Can we have a report at an early date?
    Sir L. Lyle: Is there any harm in voluntary organisations aiding the war effort?

  MAURITIUS (SOCIAL INSURANCE).
  Mr. Creech Jonesasked the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies what action will be taken in Mauritius to establish social insurance schemes in respect of health, old age, widows, orphans, etc.; and whether the report of the recent committee will be taken as a basis for action?
  Mr. Whiteley: Proposals for the introduction of social insurance schemes in Mauritius raise administrative and financial questions of some difficulty, which are naturally complicated by war conditions. The proposals made in the Report of the Committee to which the hon. Member refers, are being studied, and I understand that the Governor has discussed them with the Secretary of State's Labour Adviser, Major Orde-Browne, who recently visited the Colony; but it is not possible yet to say what action will be taken on them.

  RHODESIA AND NYASSALAND (CO-OPERATION).
  Mr. Creech Jonesasked the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether any arrangements for the closer
  1384
  co-operation of Northern Rhodesia and Nyassaland with Southern Rhodesia have been made during the war; and whether discussions as to the future relations of these territories will remain in abeyance until the conclusion of hostilities?
  Mr. Edmund Harveyasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any further steps have been taken or are in preparation in respect of the proposed closer union of Northern Rhodesia, Nyassaland and Southern Rhodesia; and whether he can state the result of the study made by Lord Hailey, at the request of the Government of Southern Rhodesia, for the purpose of comparison of the principles and methods of native administration in the territories concerned?
  Mr. Whiteley: Arrangements are in progress for the establishment of a standing secretariat of the existing Governors' Conference for the purpose of securing more effective co-operation of the war effort of the three territories. These arrangements will be reviewed within a reasonable period after the cessation of hostilities. As regards the future relations of the three territories, it will be remembered that in September, 1939, it was announced that the outbreak of the war had made it necessary to suspend the discussions with the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia, but that they had not been indefinitely postponed. That statement still holds good, but further discussions of this problem have not, in fact, taken place up to the present. The views of Lord Hailey following on his visit to Africa are not yet available.
  Mr. Creech Jones: May I take it that the Joint Committee referred to will limit its examination to problems that are designed to further the war effort, and will not include larger problems of the administration of the three territories concerned?
  Mr. Whiteley: I think it would be better to wait to hear what the report is likely to be.
  Mr. Harvey: Will the views of Lord Hailey be made available eventually to the Members of this House?
  Mr. Whiteley: We cannot promise this under war conditions.

  CEYLON (CONSTITUTION).
  Mr. Creech Jonesasked the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies what is the present position in respect to discussions for changes in the Constitution of Ceylon; and whether consideration of changes is suspended for the period of the war?
  Mr. Whiteley:My Noble Friend is still in consultation with the Governor, but I am not yet in a position to say what the outcome will be or what progress will be found practicable during the continuance of the war.

  MINISTER OF STATE (STAFF).
  Mr. David Adamsasked the Under secretary of State for the Colonies whether an officer of his Department will be appointed to Cairo to advise the Minister of State on matters concerned with the Colonial Office?
  Mr. Whiteley: A member of the Colonial Office has been appointed to the staff of the Minister of State.
  Mr. Creech Jones: Will that member of the staff concern himself with Palestinian questions, or questions relating to the National Home in Palestine?
  Mr. Whiteley: I cannot say. That answer was given in response to the Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Consett (Mr. David Adams).

  CHINA (KUO MING TANG).
  Mr. Parkerasked the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether the ban on membership of the Kuo Ming Tang, the official Chinese Government party, can now be removed, in view of the friendship between our two countries?
  Mr. Whiteley: Although, by agreement with the Chinese Government in 1931, there are no central or branch offices of the party established in Malaya, there is no ban on Chinese becoming members of the Kuo Ming Tang.

  WAR TRANSPORT.

    IDLE MOTOR VEHICLES.
    Mr. A. Edwardsasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War
    1386
    Transport whether he will take steps to utilise the thousands of first-class motor-vehicles standing idle in many parts of the country; and, failing this, what provision is made to ensure that they are kept in good working order ready for emergency?
    The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport (Colonel Llewellin): I do not consider it necessary that the large number of private cars which have been laid up should be kept ready for immediate use. I have no reason to suppose that they could not be brought into use at short notice if they were required for emergency purposes.
    Mr. Edwards:Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that my Question refers, not to private cars, but to the hundreds and thousands of omnibuses lying idle all over the country, while munition workers cannot get to their factories for lack of transport, and that, when the time comes, these buses will not be in working condition?
    Colonel Llewellin: I am sorry if I misunderstood the hon. Member's Question. With regard to buses, there is a certain number of single-deck buses which are kept ready for immediate needs. The only difficulty about using them at the present time is that they are not as economical in fuel or drivers as double-decker buses.
    Mr. Edwards: Does that matter? Would it not be in the interests of the Army to see that these buses are ready for use, if required?
    Colonel Llewellin:I think the Army has plenty of vehicles. With regard to the other point, if there are places where munition workers cannot get to their work, we do take these single-deck buses and put them into use. If the hon. Member knows of any factory where that is happening, I do wish that he would let me know.

    RAILWAY TRAFFIC (PRIORITY).
    Mr. John Wilmotasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport whether the railways are still required, as common carriers, to accept any goods tendered to them for transport, without regard to their war-time importance; and whether he will give instructions to ensure that essential materials have priority over other classes of traffic?
    Colonel Llewellin: The obligations of the railway companies as common carriers are subject to the power of the Minister of War Transport under the Defence Regulations to control the transport of goods of any description. Instructions have already been given to the railway companies to accord priority to certain classes of traffic.
    Mr. Wilmot: Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that he recently informed me that he had stopped some traffic which had been going on all through the war because the railways were under obligation as common carriers? Has not the time arrived when the railways should be made a unified service, under public control?
    Colonel Llewellin: That is a much wider question. What happened about the case to which the hon. Member refers was that the railways were carrying that traffic, and we could, as soon as it was brought to our notice, have stopped it. Had not the company done so instead, we should certainly have taken that step.

    DOCK LABOUR.
    Mr. Priceasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport whether he has taken any steps, as recommended by the Select Committee on National Expenditure, Sixteenth Report, to appoint small committees at the ports where schemes are in operation for the decasualisation and better control of dock labour, with a view to enquiring into the working of these schemes in practice?
    Colonel Llewellin: An inquiry has been held into the operation of the scheme at one group of ports and constant touch is maintained with its operation at other ports. In these ways we have already given effect to the intention of the recommendations to which my hon. Friend refers.
    Mr. Price: Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether the report was satisfactory, and whether the report on these ports where the inquiry has taken place is satisfactory in regard to the working of these schemes?
    Colonel Llewellin: The report of the people we sent up there drew attention to certain points in the scheme that needed alteration. We have taken steps to effect these alterations. I think that, on the
    1388
    whole, a new scheme of this sort must be given a certain breathing period in which to get going, when, for the first time in their lives, you are getting a large number of dockers to come in, not just when they like, but at any time they are called upon.

  MINISTRY OF INFORMATION.

    PROPAGANDA TO GERMANY.
    Mr. Parkerasked the Minister of Information whether a copy of a broadcast on British war aims in the German programme on Thursday, 17th July, at 11 a.m., can be put in the Library of the House for reference?
    The Minister of Information (Mr. Brendan Bracken): Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Parkerasked the Minister of Information to what extent our propaganda to Germany is designed to back the Prime Minister's declaration that any man or State who fights against Nazidom will have our aid, and that the Nazi leaders themselves if not disposed of by their fellow-countrymen, which would save trouble, will be delivered by us on the morrow of victory to the justice of the Allied Tribunals?
    Mr. Bracken: I would refer the hon. Member to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs yesterday.
    Captain McEwen: Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the importance of avoiding any distinction between Nazism and Germany?
    Mr. Bracken: I certainly will bear that in mind. I do not think I should make any statement to supplement what the Foreign Secretary said yesterday. I do not see that in matters of foreign policy I can advise the Foreign Secretary.
    Mr. Silverman: Was there any difference at the time of Munich, or has the difference developed since?

    REGIONAL ORGANISATION (INVESTIGATIONS).
    Sir Percy Hurdasked the Minister of Information why he is using his regional organisation at the request of the Ministry of Food to set housewives and his local committees throughout the country to watch shopkeepers and report any suspicions they may entertain; and

    1389
    whether he will leave the public to use the accepted means of ventilating grievances and securing redress through elected local bodies or elected Parliamentary representatives?
    Mr. Bracken: On no occasion has the Ministry of Information been requested to set its regional organisation at the disposal of the Ministry of Food for the purpose mentioned by my hon. Friend, nor has the organisation been so used.
    Sir P. Hurd: Has not the Minister seen a detailed statement with the very text of the communication sent to headquarters? Is he aware that, in April last, a similar official reply was made from that Box about a similar investigation, and that it was proved afterwards that the denial was quite untrue?
    Mr. Bracken: I have not seen the document my hon. Friend mentions.
    Sir P. Hurd: Will the Minister be so kind as to make inquiries into this whole section of the Ministry to. see whether the same ends could not be obtained by elected local representatives and elected Members of Parliament?
    Mr. Bracken: I should certainly be glad to make inquiry into all these matters, and, if there is anything wrong, to put it right.
    Major-General Sir Alfred Knox: Will my right hon. Friend not do a great public service by abolishing this regional organisation altogether?
    Mr. Bracken: I must know more about the Ministry.

    RUSSIAN OPERATIONS (RADIO PICTURES).
    Mr. Granvilleasked the Minister of Information whether he is making arrangements for radio pictures of the Russian-German fighting to be received and published in this country?
    Mr. Bracken: Two large consignments of photographs relating to the war on the Russian fronts have been received from the Soviet authorities and distributed to the Press by the Ministry of Information. Measures are being pushed forward to enable pictures from Moscow to be transmitted to and received in this country by radio.
    Mr. Granville: Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the first pictures
    1390
    which came of Russian fighting were from the German Propaganda Bureau, and as the radio-picture system is the only system to get pictures over here, will he give all encouragement to it?
    Mr. Bracken: The only receiving office was blitzed some time ago, and apparently no great effort was made to repair it. When I was told about it I put an engineer on to the job, with orders to report to me every morning on the progress of the repairing of the machine. Yesterday I told him to report in the afternoon as well. I am assured that the machine will be ready before the middle of next week.

    NEWS AND PICTURES (RELEASE TO DOMINIONS AND UNITED STATES).
    Mr. Granvilleasked the Minister of Information what steps he is taking to expedite the release of spot-news and topical pictures to the Dominions and the United States of America?
    Mr. Bracken: I am continually discussing this matter with the Departments concerned with the production of such news and pictures.
    Mr. Granville: Will the Minister take into consideration the statements made by eminent American journalists, such as Miss Dorothy Thompson, who said, "We want more hot news in America," and also Mr. Quentin Reynolds? Will he give the same attention and vigour to this Question as to the previous one I asked him?
    Mr. Bracken: I am very much obliged to my hon. Friend. I regard this as the most important part of my job of all, and I am doing my best to get news to the Dominions and the United States.
    Mr. Leach: Could the Minister define "spot" news or "hot" news?
    Mr. Bracken: I do not think I should like to do so at the present time. I should like notice of that question.

  HOUSE OF COMMONS (LIGHTING).
  Mr. Pethick-Lawrenceasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works and Buildings whether his attention has been drawn to the inadequacy of the lighting in the Chamber in which the recent Sittings of the Commons have been held; and whether he proposes to have it improved?
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works and Buildings (Mr. Hicks): The answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative. In regard to the second part, I am quite prepared to have the lighting improved if hon. Members generally consider that the present arrangements are inadequate.

  BOMBED BUILDINGS (RECONSTRUCTION).
  Mr. Coveasked the Parliamentary Secretary to, the Ministry of Works and Buildings how many building workers are at present occupied in the reconstruction of bombed buildings; whether he is aware that Christie's showrooms and the Leicester Square Cinema are being reconstructed; and whether he is satisfied that all this work is of national importance?
  Mr. Hicks: It would not be in the public interest to supply the figure asked for in the first part of the Question. At Messrs. Christie's auction rooms debris is being cleared and materials salvaged, but I am not aware that any work of reconstruction has been undertaken. In the case of the Leicester Square Cinema, work to the estimated value of £700 was licensed, which has enabled the premises to be reopened.

  ROYAL NAVY.

    FILMS.
    Mr. Granvilleasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider the setting up of a film unit attached to the Royal Navy for the purpose of recording sea and air operations and co-operating in the making of special films with a propaganda and news value both here and abroad?
    The First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. A. V. Alexander): The Navy already has an organisation for making instructional and training films. In addition, a considerable number of news reel cameramen are attached to the various naval commands. The establishment of a film unit is already under consideration.

    NATIONAL LOAF.
    Sir Stanley Reedasked the First Lord of the Admiralty the extent to which the national loaf and national flour are used in the feeding of the Navy?
    Mr. Alexander: The Fleet has been informed that the national loaf is available for supply by Admiralty contractors at most ports in the United Kingdom and can be drawn by His Majesty's ships and naval establishments as desired. Consideration is now being given to the use of the national flour for bread-making in the Navy.

    AMERICAN NURSES (PRESS PHOTOGRAPHS AND INTERVIEWS).
    Mr. McNeilasked the First Lord of the Admiralty by whose authority newspaper men at a West-coast port were, on 18th July, refused permission to interview or photograph five American nurses, all of whom had been torpedoed, and some of whom had behaved with marked gallantry; and will he say why permission was withheld?
    Mr. Alexander: Through a misunderstanding, the ladies referred to in the Question were confused with another party of survivors who were expected to land at the same port. Information was received that these survivors were all hospital cases suffering from exposure, and it was considered undesirable, therefore, to subject them to the strain of being photographed or interviewed. It was never intended to forbid the representatives of the Press to interview the American nurses.
    Mr. McNeil: Cannot powers be delegated to someone on the spot, since in this case the people were in a condition to be interviewed and photographed and the Minister of Information has already told us that he is anxious to have hot news. Here was a chance to photograph American girls who were brave, and, doubtless, pretty?
    Mr. Alexander: I have indicated that it was a pure misunderstanding. There was another party of survivors coming into the same port, and we had been informed that they had been subject to severe exposure and were not in a condition to be photographed. There has been a misunderstanding, and we are having it cleared up.
    Commander Locker-Lampson: What strain is involved in being photographed?

  SOLICITORS BILL.
  Mr. Liddallasked the Attorney- General whether, in view of the need of

  1393
  putting on the Statute Book the principles of the Solicitors Bill, now awaiting Second Reading, he will confer with the opponents and supporters of the Bill with a view to arriving at an agreement which will allow the Bill to proceed as an unopposed Measure?
  The Solicitor-General (Sir William Jowitt):My right hon. and learned Friend has been in communication with the Law Society, who have themselves been in touch with certain Members of this House interested in this Measure. I hope that agreement may be reached on any points outstanding, so that the Bill can proceed as an agreed Measure.

  TRADE AND COMMERCE.

    CLOTHES RATIONING.
    Mr. John Wilmotasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that workmen engaged upon galvanising must wear rubber boots and have protective clothing; and whether he will make arrangements, with suitable safeguards, for such clothing to be obtained by the men or their employers free of coupon?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Captain Waterhouse):Discussions on the long-term needs of industrial workers for additional clothing are proceeding. In the meantime, industrial concerns, including mines and quarries, can obtain coupon-free supplies of essential protective clothing for the use of their employees by obtaining a certificate from one of His Majesty's inspectors of factories or mines stating that the garments are necessary for the safety and health of the wearer.
    Mr. Wilmot: While thanking the Minister for his Reply, might I ask whether it applies to the kind of clothing mentioned in the Question?
    Captain Waterhouse: I think it undoubtedly would, as these matters of detail are for the factory inspectors.
    Sir L. Lyleasked the President of the Board of Trade why detached coupons for clothes can be sent through the post yet it is illegal to carry a detached coupon with which to make a purchase; and whether he will consider modifying
    1394
    the law in the latter respect to enable a person to carry a detached coupon or two for emergencies?
    Captain Waterhouse:The use of loose coupons for retail transactions would facilitate illegal trafficking in coupons and so tend to defeat the purpose of the rationing scheme. It is, however, undesirable to have clothing cards transmitted through the post, and accordingly the sending of loose coupons (signed on the back) with orders placed by post is allowed. This facility cannot be extended as suggested by my hon. Friend.

    SMALL TRADERS.
    Lieutenant-Commander Hutchisonasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the importance of the individual small shopkeeper as a beneficial and stabilising factor in the economic and social life of the community, he will ensure that, in the framing of future legislation affecting Scotland, due consideration is paid to the interests of these citizens?
    Captain Waterhouse: I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that the interests of the small shopkeeper, in Scotland no less than in other parts of the country, will not be overlooked. I would refer him in this connection to the answer which I gave yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for Balham and Tooting (Mr. Doland).

  ARMY VEHICLES (CAMOUFLAGE).
  Sir John Graham Kerrasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the fighting services are still being supplied with vehicles painted in disaccord with the basic principles of effective camouflage; and what steps he is taking to remedy this?
  The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Sandys): Full instructions are issued both to manufacturers and to Army formations for the painting of vehicles in accordance with the basic principles of camouflage. Improvements in design are constantly being made and are incorporated in these instructions.

  LONG-TERM PLANNING POLICY.
  Mr. Denmanasked the Prime Minister, to whom Questions relating to long-term planning policy, for which the

  1395
  Minister of Works and Buildings is responsible as chairman of a council of Ministers, should be addressed in this House?
  The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): The formulation of long-term planning policy in the sphere of physical reconstruction is the responsibility of my Noble Friend, Lord Reith, who has arranged that Questions on this subject in this House shall be answered on his behalf by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works and Buildings.

  LORD CHERWELL (DUTIES AND STAFF).
  Mr. Stokesasked the Prime Minister (1) how many persons are working under Lord Cherwell; and the names and salaries of those paid more than £400 a year;
  (2) the position occupied by Lord Cherwell and the salary paid him?
  The Prime Minister: Lord Cherwell is one of my personal assistants, and advises me, as he has for many years, upon the scientific and statistical aspects of our national defence. He is the head of the statistical branch which I formed when at the Admiralty at the outbreak of war to collect and collate all the figures of the various Departments, and is now specially charged with the duty of warning me of short fallings in any part of our war supply. As Professor of Physics at Oxford University, he was in receipt of a salary of £1,400 a year. But, since practically his whole time was from the beginning of the war engaged in official work, I thought it right that £1,000 a year should be paid him by the State. The remaining £400 is still paid him by the University.
  Since his elevation to the peerage, Lord Cherwell has expressed his wish to serve in an honorary capacity, but I do not consider this would be right in view of the continuous demands I make upon him at all hours of the night and day. The number of Lord Cherwell's staff is 23, and I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT the particulars asked for by the hon. Member.
  Mr. Stokes: What position does Lord Cherwell occupy in regard to the com-
  1396
  mittees presided over by the Lord President of the Council? Is it one of the functions of Lord Cherwell to produce arguments and figures like those used by the Prime Minister in answer to the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Sir J. Wardlaw-Milne) yesterday?
  The Prime Minister: The first part of the Question is, I think, fully covered by the answer I have given, and the second part seems to me to be offensive.
  Commander Locker-Lampson: Is not Lord Cherwell worth a great deal more than he is getting?
  Following are the particulars:
  The number of Lord Cherwell's staff is 23. The names and salaries of those over £400 a year are as follow: —

  Mr. R. F. Harrod

  £1.300

  Mr. G. D. A. MacDougall

  £750

  Mr. G. L. S. Shackle

  £600

  Mr. H. W. Robinson

  £600

  Mr. D. G. Champernowne

  £600

  Mr. J. L. Tuck

  £600

  Miss H. Makower

  £480

  Mr. D. M. Bensusan-Butt.

  £355

  £120 allowance.

  PALESTINE (BALFOUR DECLARATION).
  Mr. Lipsonasked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government still adheres to the policy of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 to establish a National Home for Jews in Palestine?
  The Prime Minister: There has been no change in the policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to Palestine.
  Mr. Lipson: While thanking my right hon. Friend for that welcome reply, may I ask him if full account will be taken of that answer in any discussions which take place in Cairo?
  The Prime Minister: Yes, Sir, certainly.
  Mr. Price: Do the Government stand by the principle laid down in the White Paper?
  The Prime Minister: I have said that there has been no change in the policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to Palestine. That policy has been announced at various times over a considerable number of years.

  HOUSE OF COMMONS DISQUALIFICATION (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) ACT.
  Sir S. Reedasked the Prime Minister whether he will issue a statement showing in each case the salary of the offices for which certificates, under the House of Commons Disqualification (Temporary Provisions) Act, have been issued?
  The Prime Minister: I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate the statement for which he asks in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

  Office.

  Holder.

  Salary.

  Governor, B.B.C.

  …

  …

  …

  …

  Captain Sir Ian Fraser, C.B.E., M.P.

  £1,000

  U.K. High Commissioner in Canada

  …

  Rt. Hon. Malcolm Macdonald, M.P.

  …

  £2,500

  U.K. High Commissioner in Australia

  …

  Rt. Hon. Sir Ronald Cross, M.P.

  …

  £2,500

  Chairman of the Waste Food Board, Ministry of Supply.

  R. C. Morrison, Esq., M.P.

  …

  …

  Nil

  Member of the Waste Food Board, Ministry of Supply.

  Miss Megan Lloyd George, M.P.

  …

  Nil

  Chairman, Automatic Gun Board, Ministry of Supply.

  Sir Peter Bennett, O.B.E., M.P.

  …

  Nil

  Chairman and Director, National Vegetable Marketing Co., Ltd.

  W. P. Spens, Esq., O.B.E., K.C., M.P.

  £1,250

  Governor, B.B.C.

  …

  …

  …

  …

  Hon. H. G. Nicolson, C.M.G., M.P.

  …

  £1,000

  Director, National Vegetable Marketing Co., Ltd.

  L. R. Pym, Esq., M.P.

  …

  …

  …

  Nil

  Member of Advisory Council on Scientific Research and Technical Development, Ministry of Supply.

  Professor A. V. Hill, O.B.E., M P

  …

  Fees*

  Associate member of the Ordnance Board, Ministry of Supply.

  Controller of the Regional Organisation of the Ministry of Supply.

  G. Spencer Summers, Esq., M.P.

  …

  Nil

  *Amount dependent on number of meetings attended but subject to an overriding maximum of £600 p.a.

  OVERSEAS TRADE DEPARTMENT.
  Mr. Emeryasked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that no chamber of commerce has invited the Secretary of the Overseas Trade Department to visit or address it; that the principal functions of the Department, of assisting exporters in their difficulties, are now performed by the Export Council and export groups; and will he, as a war economy, merge the Overseas Trade Department into the Board of Trade and suspend the Ministerial appointment as temporarily superfluous?
  The Prime Minister: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on 17th July to the Question he addressed to my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department and the answer which I gave on 11th February to my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr. Liddall).
  Mr. Rhys Davies: Will the statement give the names of Members who are still drawing their Parliamentary salary?
  The Prime Minister: So far as the Government are concerned, I should have no objection, but I think it has always been the practice that whether or not a Member draws his Parliamentary salary is entirely a matter for him, and I should have to ascertain what was the opinion of the House before making any departure.
  Following is the statement:

  MINISTRY OF SUPPLY.

    NEW FACTORIES (ELECTRICAL POWER).
    Mr. A. Edwardsasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply whether he is aware that whilst instructions for new factories go forth, his Department is not making adequate provision for electrical power to run them; and what steps he proposes to take to see that certain districts do not become unbalanced with regard to power demand and supply?
    The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply (Mr. Harold Macmillan): The provision of electrical power is not the responsibility of the Ministry of Supply, but the availability of such power is one of the first considerations which is taken into account, in consultation with the Electricity Commis-

    1399
    sioners and the Central Electricity Board, before finally deciding upon the location of new factories.
    Mr. Edwards: Will the Parliamentary Secretary take it from me that this is not being done and that a serious situation has arisen?
    Mr. Macmillan: Provision has been made in full measure, but I would not like to give details of the steps that have been taken.

    SECOND-HAND MACHINE TOOL PURCHASES.
    Mr. Stokesasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply why the advisory panel on second-hand machine tool purchases, set up by his Department, has not been consulted by the controller since 31st October, 1940?
    Mr. Harold Macmillan: This panel advises not only on second-hand tool purchases, but on all questions affecting the supply and distribution of second-hand machine tools. The last meeting was held on Thursday, 24th July, 1941; the previous meeting was held on 31st October, 1940. No meeting was held in the interval, because there were no matters upon which the Controller-General of Machine Tools desired to consult the panel, nor had any requests for a meeting been received by the Controller-General from any member of the panel.
    Mr. Stokes: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is extreme dissatisfaction because the panel is not called there more frequently?
    Mr. Macmillan: I am not aware of that. No requests have been received from any member of the panel.

  FOOD SUPPLIES.

    WILD-ROSE HIPS.
    Dr. Edith Summerskillasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he proposes to use wild-rose hips as a source of vitamin C?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Major Lloyd George): Yes, Sir. It is intended to encourage the use of these and other hedgerow products this autumn.

    DISTRIBUTION.
    Mr. Lipsonasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that the fact that multiple shops and big stores are able to obtain vegetables and other articles of foodstuffs which are in short supply, when none can be obtained by the smaller shops, is having a disturbing effect; and how he proposes to bring about a more equitable distribution of available foodstuffs?
    Major Lloyd George: The fact to which my hon. Friend refers is the natural consequence of the greater purchasing power of a large and highly organised concern as compared with a small trader. As I stated in a recent Debate, proposals for effecting a more even distribution of foods which are not at present rationed—including fruit and vegetables—are under examination in my Department.
    Mr. Lipson: Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman agree that the system of distribution which enables a multiple shop to obtain five tons of potatoes at a time, when others cannot obtain them, is bound to cause trouble and queues? Will he try to alter this state of things?
    Major Lloyd George: I certainly will, but I had a similar case to this given to me from another part of the country recently, and on examination it was found to be entirely unjustified.
    Mr. Hannah: Is there not a danger of small traders being squeezed out altogether in many cases?

    RETAIL FISH LICENCES, MANCHESTER.
    Mr. Hewlettasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether Messrs. Lewis's, Limited, and Messrs. Marks and Spencer, Limited, hold wholesale and/or retail fish licences; and, if so, the dates upon which such licences were first issued?
    Major Lloyd George: I assume that my hon. Friend refers to the branches of these firms in Manchester. Messrs. Lewis's, Limited, were issued a retail licence on 6th October, 1939, by the Manchester Food Control Committee under the Food Control Committees (Local Distribution) Order, 1939, to sell fish (wet or fried or in cans, glasses, etc.). Messrs. Marks and Spencer, Limited, were similarly issued a retail licence on 4th October,

    1401
    1939, to sell fish (in cans and glasses, etc.). Neither of these firms has applied for or received a wholesale licence to sell any type of fish.

    VINEGAR.
    Mr. Mathersasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware of the widespread shortage of vinegar for pickling purposes; and whether he can indicate when supplies will be available?
    Major Lloyd George: My information is that there is no general shortage of vinegar for the pickling industry. I am aware, however, that there has been some shortage of vinegar for sale by retailers and my Department is in active consultation with the trade with a view to overcoming the present difficulties.

    IMPORTED CANNED MEAT.
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether canned meats imported under Lease and Lend arrangements will be shared equitably among all importers of such foodstuffs, whether normally deriving them from American or Continental sources?
    Major Lloyd George:The methods to be adopted for the distribution of canned merits from the United States of America under Lease and Lend arrangements are at present under examination.
    Mr. Sorensen: Will the Parliamentary Secretary keep well in mind the point embodied in the Question, in view of the apprehension in certain quarters?

    EGGS.
    Mr. Oliverasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that quantities of eggs are now allowed to accumulate in the hands of egg producers in Derbyshire extending over many weeks; and whether further steps will be taken to institute an efficient system of collection or permit the producers to otherwise dispose of them?
    Major Lloyd George: I am not aware eggs are accumulating in the hands of egg producers in Derbyshire, and if my hon. Friend will give me particulars the matter will be investigated at once.
    Mr. Oliver: Will the Parliamentary Secretary give instructions pending this
    1402
    information being sent out by his Department? Is he aware that the producer must sell eggs or permit them to go rotten?
    Major Lloyd George: I do not know exactly what the hon. Gentleman means by that. I have heard a lot of stories about home-produced eggs being allowed to go rotten, but in no case on investigation was there any foundation for such a statement. The eggs which went rotten were not laid in this country. The actual throughput of eggs at packing stations is three or four times greater than it was recently, and distribution is much better.
    Sir L. Lyleasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether licensed packers are allowed to sell cracked eggs; and, if not, what becomes of them?
    Major Lloyd George: Eggs with slight cracks may be marked with the Ministry's approved mark "S" and are bought by the Ministry at appropriate price. Any edible eggs of which the shells so cracked as to be unfit for stamping or sale in shell are broken out and sold as "liquid eggs"

    GREEN ONIONS.
    Mr. Tinkerasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that the statement fixing the price for salad onions to the grower of £1 12s. 8d. per cwt., the wholesale price at £ 2 6s. 8d. per cwt. and the retail price at 7½ d. per pound is causing concern because of the high rate charged after they leave the grower; and whether he will make a statement to show the cause of this increase?
    Major Lloyd George: The maximum grower's price of 32s. 8d. per cwt. for green onions is fixed on the basis of delivery at the farm or nearest railway station, and is exclusive of the cost of providing containers. The difference between the maximum growers' price and the maximum retail price is 37s. 4d. per cwt. When deductions are made for carriage, containers and delivery charges, and allowance has been made for waste and loss of weight by evaporation between leaving the farm and sale to the consumer, which has to be borne by the traders through whose hands the produce passes, the difference is not excessive. Maximum prices have to allow for maximum trans-

    1403
    portation and the cost of distributing produce of this kind in small lots is quite out of proportion to the initial farm price.
    Mr. Tinker: Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that when prices have soared 114 per cent. higher than they were, the feelings of the public are that they are being fleeced? Ought not a great deal of attention to be given to this matter before allowing such a great increase in price?
    Major Lloyd George: I can assure the hon. Gentleman that very careful attention indeed was given to this particular commodity. I have all the analysed figures here, and I should be glad to show them to him. The profits of the retailer are not excessive.
    Mr. Gordon Macdonald: Does not the Parliamentary Secretary think that sometimes between the grower and the ultimate retailer there are far too many factors?
    Major Lloyd George: In this particular instance the figures given concern only the grower, wholesaler and retailer.
    Mr. Evelyn Walkden: Where this margin is allowed, is it not inclined to persuade retailers to by-pass the market and therefore to raise another new black market of a commodity which at the moment is in short supply? Will it not induce them to make big margins of profit by the percentages reported?
    Major Lloyd George:I. rather gathered that this complaint was that the margin of the retailer was too high. Having regard to the highly perishable nature of the commodity in this case, I do not think the gross profit of the retailer is excessive.

    TOMATOES.
    Sir P. Hurdasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food in view of the necessity for further restriction of petrol and the continued tomato shortage, why tomatoes grown at Wiltshire centres are sent by road to Birmingham, while Wiltshire wholesalers regularly send their lorries to buy tomatoes in the London wholesale market and bring back Wiltshire with other tomatoes; and whether he will arrange for a quota of local-grown produce to be sold in the area where grown?
    Major Lloyd George: Inquiries are being made into the marketing of tomatoes grown in Wiltshire, and it would be helpful if my hon. Friend would supply me with specific cases for investigation. The suggestion in the latter part of the Question, is, I am afraid, not practicable.
    Sir P. Hurd: Is it not common knowledge in the Department who is the main wholesaler in tomatoes in Wiltshire? Cannot the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, through his local officer, make these inquiries?
    Major Lloyd George: My hon. Friend has made certain definite statements, and I asked him to let me have particulars. He knows perfectly well that it is not possible to carry out the suggestion in his Question on the Paper.

    STORAGE, NORTHERN IRELAND.
    Dr. Littleasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he will consider the need for providing additional accommodation for the storage of larger quantities of food in Northern Ireland and have the food stored therein at the earliest moment, thus making provision against every eventuality?
    Major Lloyd George:Large quantities of all the more important foodstuffs are already held in Northern Ireland. The question of creating certain special stocks is under consideration at the present time. If it is decided to create these special stocks warehouses will be provided, if necessary.
    Dr. Little:Will my right hon. and gallant Friend consult with representatives in Ulster who have a special knowledge of food questions and storage, so that whatever is in contemplation may be done to the best advantage?
    Major Lloyd George: Yes, Sir.
    Sir S. Reed: Will my right hon. and gallant Friend give an assurance that this distribution will be made in the national interest and not as a result of pressure from local groups?
    Major Lloyd George: The only object which my Department has in the question of food is the national interest, and food is distributed to the best national interest.

    LARD (MARCOM, LIMITED).
    Mr. Evelyn Walkdenasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry

    1405
    of Food why Marcom, Limited, the margarine syndicate, have been entrusted with the sole control and distribution of the present and future stocks of lard; and whether he intends to hand over to this same concern the control and distribution of butter?
    Major Lloyd George: Marcom, Limited, is an organisation brought into existence by the Ministry of Food since the outbreak of war and is the sole agent of the Ministry for the distribution of compound cooking fat. Shortly consumers will be able to obtain lard on the cooking fat coupon and from time to time adjustments, according to the supply position, will have to be made between the quantities of lard and of compound cooking fat distributed to retailers. It is essential that the distribution of lard should be handled by an organisation which is equipped to undertake distribution on a national scale and there is no body other than Marcom, Limited, which is so equipped. It is not intended to distribute butter through Marcom, Limited.
    Mr. Walkden: Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman agree that the name ''Marcom'' suggests the margarine companies, and is he not aware that he is affording an exclusive and preferential business advantage to an organisation which neither imported nor manufactured lard before the war?
    Major Lloyd George: The people who did so will, of course, be treated in exactly the same way as other component firms for this purpose.
    Mr. Walkden: Is it not the case that the people who were manufacturing and importing lard before the war have protested against this grotesque and unfair system?
    Major Lloyd George:I am not aware of that. I believe they have an association, and I gather that association, which is representative of the importing and manufacturing people, will be treated in exactly the same way as other components.
    Mr. Walkden: But not as part of the firm?
    Major Lloyd George: There is no firm Marcom is a collection of firms, and we are going to add one more to the collection.

    TUBERCULOUS PATIENTS (RATIONS).
    Mr. Rhys Daviesasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he can make arrangements for persons certified as suffering from tuberculosis to have extra rations of the commodities appropriate for that disease?
    Major Lloyd George: In view of the arrangements which have been made for making supplies of milk available I am advised that it is not necessary to grant supplementary allowances of rationed foods to persons suffering from tuberculosis.
    Mr. Davies: Will the Minister be good enough to reconsider this position, as tuberculosis cases are very tragic indeed?
    Major Lloyd George:I can assure the hon. Member that nothing is done in this matter without advice from people who are capable of advising us. Everything that is done in connection with the diet of sick people is done on the advice of experts. Of course, the milk scheme particularly applies to tuberculosis cases.
    Mrs. Hardie: Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider that butter is essential in the diet of people suffering from tuberculosis, and will he not consider increasing the butter ration for young women who are developing tuberculosis?
    Major Lloyd George: I do not think there is anything to prevent them from getting milk, and that is considered to be the most important of all articles of the diet.

    SMALL TRADERS.
    Lieut.-Commander Hutchisonasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether, with a view to safeguarding the interests of small shopkeepers, he will take steps, by means of a system of licences or otherwise, to prevent large retail trading concerns from selling foodstuffs of a category different from those normally sold in their premises prior to the outbreak of war?
    Major Lloyd George: Under the Food Control Committees (Local Distribution) Order, 1939, a licence from the local food control committee is required before a retailer can sell any of the 32 principal foods specified in the Order. Normally the issue of such licences is confined to retailers who were selling the goods con-

    1407
    cerned prior to the outbreak of war. The administration of the Order is, however, in the hands of the local food control committees who have been instructed in considering applications for new or extended licences to have special regard to the convenience of the public. My noble Friend sees no reason to amend the existing instruction.
    Mr. Rhys Davies: Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware of a feeling that the policy of the Government in relation to distribution tends to favour the large retailer against the small retailer?
    Major Lloyd George: That has often been said, but with regard to the Question which I am answering, the matter is in the hands of the local food control committee which is a local body, whose instructions are to have the greatest regard for the interests of the consumers. I think there are 10 consumers on the body, and it is in their hands as to whether they do this or that.
    Mr. De la Bère: Will my right hon. and gallant Friend always bear in mind the case of the small shopkeeper, who really has had a very difficult time?
    Mr. R. C. Morrison: Is the Minister aware that many people are surprised to see notices in Woolworth's windows asking the public to register with them for sugar and other commodities?
    Major Lloyd George: If they have a licence they are entitled to do this. The small man has to be protected, but surely everybody is equally entitled to protection.

  LIGHTING RESTRICTIONS (WINTER).
  Sir Henry Morris-Jonesasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether consideration is now being given, in consultation with the Royal Air Force, to the question of any modified system of lighting in the coming winter, bearing in mind the effect of a complete black-out on morale and public health and on production; and whether any improved plans are in contemplation for a more efficient ventilation of all industrial premises which are in use after dark?
  The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Home Security (Mr. Mabane): The question of lighting is under constant review in consultation with the Royal Air Force, but there are at present no grounds for making any change in the systems and standards now in force and based on the experience of the past. Special attention has throughout been given to the requirements of production and undertakings of national importance. Ventilation in factories is a matter for the Factory Department of the Ministry of Labour and National Service rather than for me, but I am informed that defects in ventilation due to improvised blackout arrangements in the early days of the war have now been largely remedied.
  Sir H. Morris-Jones: Have any experiments been made in a system of modified lighting in this country, and has my hon. Friend seen a report from New York about a system of modified lighting which at the same time makes it impossible for the enemy to see any target from the air?
  Mr. Mabane: Experiments in modified lighting have been made continuously, and very considerable alterations have been made in the standards both of street lighting and industrial lighting since the outbreak of war.
  Sir H. Morris-Jones: Is my hon. Friend aware that some time ago the Prime Minister promised us that next winter we should not be in gloom, and in order to enable the people of this country to be a little more grim and gay in the coming winter, will the Ministry allow us to have a little more light?
  Mr. Mabane: If my hon. Friend saw the reports coming to the Department, he would see that people are more concerned that there should be no guides for enemy aircraft.
  Sir H. Morris-Jones: In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

  IRAN (GERMAN VISITORS).
  Mr. Priceasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that there is an increase of German experts and so-called tourists in Iran; and whether he will make representation to the Government of Iran on this matter?
  Mr. Eden: I have already drawn the Iranian Government's serious attention to

  1409
  the danger, in their own interests, of continuing to permit an excessively large number of Germans to reside in their country. I trust that the Iranian Government will not fail to heed this warning and to take the necessary measures to deal at once with the situation.
  Mr. Mander: Is our Russian Ally taking similar steps in this matter?
  Mr. Eden: We have been working in this in close co-operation.

  RUSSIA (ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE).
  Mr. G. Strauss(for Mr. Moelwyn Hughes) asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether any agreement has been arrived at between his Department and the economic departments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?
  The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Economic Warfare (Mr. Dingle Foot): I am glad to say that much progress has been made in fulfilling the promise of economic assistance given by His Majesty's Government to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and considerable quantities of goods are now on their way to Russia from various parts of the Empire and from other countries supporting our cause. In return valuable supplies are being made available by the Soviet Government for the common war effort.

  MINE EXPLOSION, CRIGGLESTONE.
  Mr. Collindridge(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary for Mines whether he has any information about the accident which occurred at Crigglestone Colliery?
  The Secretary for Mines (Mr. David Grenfell): I regret having to state that an explosion took place at about 6.30 p.m. yesterday, 29th July, in the Top Haigh Moor seam at Crigglestone Colliery. Over 20 persons are believed to be dead and a number injured. About 30 persons were known to be in the area of the explosion, but full details are not yet available. I feel sure the House will join in expressing sympathy with the bereaved and injured.
  Mr. Collindridge: May we assume that the Mines Department are rendering all assistance to this colliery and seeking all
  1410
  information regarding the cause of this explosion?
  Mr. Grenfell: Yes, Sir. I have received preliminary reports from the inspectors, but full details are not yet available. Perhaps I shall be able to give the House more information at an early date.
  Mr. James Griffiths: May I ask whether my hon. Friend does not share our concern—I am sure that he does—that explosions are becoming far too frequent? Can we have an assurance that he will closely inquire into the causes?
  Mr. Grenfell: Yes, Sir. I am very sorry that we have had five explosions since 3rd June. Some of them have happened under the most extraordinary circumstances—in one case ignition took place on the surface. These circumstances require the fullest investigation, and a special investigation is to take place in regard to two of these occurrences.
  Mr. Griffiths: Will the report be made public?
  Mr. Grenfell: Yes, Sir, I hope so.

FAR EASTERN SITUATION.
Mr. Eden: I wish to make a further statement on the Far Eastern situation. In my statement on 25th July I informed the House that, although there was as yet no official news of the conclusion of a definite agreement between the Japanese and Vichy Governments, or the occupation of further bases by Japanese forces, it was quite evident that both these events were imminent. It is now known that the Vichy Government have acceded to Japanese demands for the occupation of two naval bases, Camranh Bay and Saigon, and eight air bases in South Indo-China, and that the occupation is already in progress. With the permission of the House, I propose to circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a full account of the developments which have led up to the present situation and of the action which His Majesty's Government took to avert it. Hon. Members will, however, wish to hear what measures are now being taken to meet the threat to our own territories which the Japanese action implies. The House will not expect me to describe in detail the defence measures which, as I announced on 25th July, have already been enforced in

1411
Malaya. In the economic sphere the counter measures taken by the United States and Netherland Governments and the Governments of the British Commonwealth of Nations are now, I think, well known from reports which have appeared in the Press. As soon as His Majesty's Government learnt of the decision of the United States Government to freeze all Japanese assets, arrangements were made for a parallel measure to come into force as regards the United Kingdom on 25th July. Similar steps have been taken or are being taken throughout the Dominions, India, Burma and the Colonial Empire, which thus present a united front. The effect is to stop all financial transactions on Japanese account, whether for financing trade or for other purposes, which are not licensed by the authorities of the United States, the Netherland East Indies and the British Commonwealth of Nations.
At the request of the Chinese Government, steps have similarly been taken to freeze all Chinese assets throughout the British Empire. The object of this is, of course, to prevent evasion, through parts of China occupied by the Japanese, of the effects of the order freezing Japanese sterling assets and also to enable assistance to be given to the Chinese economy by releasing such assets only for approved purposes. Steps have also been taken to withdraw ships' warrants from Japanese shipping lines.
I would also like to take this opportunity to announce that His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo, on behalf of the Government of India and Burma as well as of the United Kingdom, has given notification to the Japanese Government of the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty of Commerce and Navigation of 1911, the Supplementary Convention of 1925, and the Conventions covering commercial relations between Japan, India and Burma. As a party to the 1911 Treaty, His Majesty's Government in Canada, and His Majesty's Government in New Zealand in respect of their own Trade Agreement with Japan, each made similar notifications to the Japanese Government.
Sir, it is a matter of regret to His Majesty's Government that their relations with Japan should have reached their present state, but the fault does
1412
not lie with His Majesty's Government. Japan complains of encirclement. Yet it is Japan herself, who, by successive acts of aggression, has drawn closer and closer together in self-defence the countries which lie in her path and whose territories and interests are ever more sharply threatened. I cannot believe that statesmanship in Japan is entirely dead or blind; and I sincerely trust that those responsible for the destinies of the Japanese Empire will reflect, while there is yet time, whither their present policy is leading them.
Mr. Noel-Baker: Will the Foreign Secretary instruct His Majesty's Ambassador in Tokyo to inform the Japanese Government that his statement to-day has the fullest support of all parties in the House of Commons? May I further ask whether we are right in understanding that the measures now being taken will effectively prevent the despatch of oil to Japan from companies under British, American and Dutch control?
Mr. Eden: As to the first part of my hon. Friend's Question, I will gladly do that. As to the second part, the position is that the steps we have taken give all the Governments concerned complete control of all financial transactions, including the financing of trade. Nothing can happen or proceed unless a licence is given. Naturally we shall act in this matter in the closest consultation with the other Governments interested, but I can say that the dominating principle which is to govern our own attitude in this matter in exercising the control will be the furtherance of our own war effort.
Sir William Davison: In view of the recent action by the Vichy Government, has it not now become quite clear that they desire the Germans rather than Britain to win this war?
Mr. Eden: Fortunately, I do not have to answer for Vichy, but I am very sure the temper of the people of France is quite different.
Mr. Maxton: I have listened carefully to the interesting statement of the Foreign Secretary, and I will take time to consider it, but, in the meantime, I do not want the statement of the hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Noel-Baker) to be taken as speaking for me. I do not know under what mandate, either of the Labour party or of the Liberal party, he speaks and

1413
assures the Foreign Secretary that all parties in the House are supporting his statement. I should imagine that all parties in the House would like time to consider it first.
Sir Percy Harris: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Liberal party is fully behind him in his statement, and that it represents the feelings of the bulk of Members in this House?
Mr. Leslie Boyce: Will the renunciation of these trade treaties take effect immediately?
Mr. Eden: Action has already been taken.
Mr. Boyce: Does that apply in regard to the trade treaties?
Mr. Eden: The action to freeze the credits has been taken, and therefore the effect on trade has already taken place. Long notice is required for the denunciation of commercial treaties, but that does not affect the position meanwhile under the other measures.
Mr. Pethick-Lawrence: I was not quite clear in regard to one passage of my right hon. Friend's statement. He said these licences were to be stopped unless they had the consent, and then he went on to say "of America, the British Empire and the Dutch." Do I understand that all three parties must countersign, or does my right hon. Friend mean each one of them respectively?
Mr. Eden: Of course, the matter will proceed as a result of consultation between them, but each Government must be responsible for its own action.
Mr. Mander: I have no doubt my right hon. Friend has seen the article in yesterday's "Times" indicating that oil will be permitted to be sent to Japan. Will he give an assurance that this attempted appeasement of Japan will not be permitted to go on?
Mr. Eden: I can assure my hon. Friend that so far as His Majesty's Government are concerned we have not taken this step lightly, and that there has not, I believe, for some time past been any delivery of oil to Japan so far as we are concerned.
Mr. Burke: Will the effect of the freezing policy nullify the Congo Basin Treaties?
Mr. Eden: I must ask for notice of that Question.
Mr. Stephen: Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Noel-Baker) seems to have gone a bit wide?
Following is the statement:
The occupation by Japan of bases in South Indo-China is the continuation of a process which began last September, when the Japanese were granted certain military and air facilities, in North Indo-China, ostensibly for the purpose of their military campaign against China, There followed an agreement in May which assured to Japan a substantial portion of the products of Indo-China, including the major part of the rubber and rice and the entire output of iron, manganese, tungsten, tin, antimony and chrome. Meanwhile Japan imposed her own mediation in a territorial dispute between Indo-China and Thailand, and exacted, as the price of her guarantee of the settlement, certain vague undertakings which could be used as a pretext for further encroachments on the freedom of action of both countries at any moment. The ratification early in July of this settlement and of the commercial agreement between Japan and Indo-China synchronised with a report that Japan contemplated the acquisition of naval and air bases in South Indo-China and Thailand. His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo was at once instructed to inquire whether there was any truth in this report and to emphasise the seriousness of the situation which would in that case arise. Sir R. Craigie received a categorical denial of its accuracy on 5th July from the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs. The report persisted, however, and there followed a concerted Japanese Press campaign designed to show that Indo-China was threatened by. Great Britain. The House will be familiar with what followed. Demands, accompanied by threats were made on the Vichy Government about the middle of July and the reorganisation of the Japanese Cabinet merely had the effect of postponing their fulfilment.
On 25th July the new Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs informed His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo of the agreement which had been reached and attempted to justify it on the ground of the alarming reports which had been circulating

1415
that the existence and security of Indo-China were endangered. The Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that the agreement with the Vichy Government was strictly of a defensive nature and not aimed at any third country and that the Japanese Government intended to observe strictly Japan's obligations regarding respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Indo-China. If this step were misunderstood and measures were taken to oppose it, the matter would naturally be of concern to the relations between Japan and Britain, a development which the Japanese Government ardently wished to avoid. Sir R. Craigie at once pointed out in reply the action of the Japanese Government was in direct conflict with the categorical denial which the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs had given on 5th July and must produce the worst impression on the mind of His Majesty's Government. While the occupation of north Indo-China might be explained, though not justified, as part of the military campaign against China, this reason could not be given in the case of southern Indo-China. Sir R. Craigie referred to the frequent warnings which he had given to Admiral Toyoda's predecessor that the occupation of naval and air bases in Indo-China must necessarily constitute a potential threat against British territory and also to his various declarations to Mr. Matsuoka that reports appearing in the Japanese Press of aggressive intentions by Great Britain, or by Great Britain and China jointly, in regard to Indo-China or Thailand were entirely groundless. He then communicated to the Minister for Foreign Affairs the categorical denial of these allegations, which I myself gave in this House on 23rd July, and stated that so far as any British action was concerned our policy had been merely to maintain trade relations with Indo-China and our normal friendly relations with Thailand.
The Japanese Government on 26th July issued an official statement protesting the friendly nature of their agreement with the Vichy Government. By way of comment, I would only say that it is true that the Vichy Government have made a virtue of necessity, but even they must note with some disquiet the reiterated references in the official statement to the Greater East Asia sphere of co-prosperity
1416
—that latest euphemism for economic exploitation in the interests of Japan. The document also proclaims once more the intention of Japan to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of French Indo-China. On this point let the future speak for itself.

NEW MEMBER SWORN.
Cyril Edward Lloyd, Esq., for the Borough of Dudley.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Ordered.
"That this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 14, Business in Com mittee of Supply may be taken after the hour appointed for the interruption of Business and that the Proceedings of the Committee of Supply be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)"—[Sir John Anderson].

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.
Report from the Committee of Public-Accounts with Minutes of Evidence and Appendices brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table and to be printed.[No. 105.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—
Landlord and Tenant (War Damage) (Amendment) Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to—
East Worcestershire Water Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

LANDLORD AND TENANT (WAR DAMAGE) (AMENDMENT) BILL.
Lords Amendments to be considered upon the next Sitting Day, and to be printed. [Bill 51.]
Preamble
[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.]
ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY.
  [18th ALLOTTED DAY.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Sir DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair.]
  CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1941.
  CLASS V.
  DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR SCOTLAND.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £2,834,544, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1942, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of Health for Scotland; including grants, a grant in aid and other expenses in connection with housing, certain grants to local authorities, &c, grant in aid of the Highlands and Islands medical service, grants in aid in respect of national health insurance benefits, &c; certain expenses in connection with widows', orphans' and old age contributory pensions; a grant in aid of camps; and other services." —[Note. —£1,550,000 has been voted on account.]
  The Chairman: I have been asked if I will agree, on the Scottish Estimates, to follow the somewhat disorderly procedure to which I referred yesterday, and with the general assent of the Committee I propose to allow that to be done. It will be necessary to introduce some method into this disorder. There is a number of Votes down on the Order Paper I understand it is desired to take in one Debate the first three Votes, Class V, Votes 15 and 7, and Class IV, Vote 13. The Debate on those Votes will continue for about two and a-half hours. We should then go on to discuss together the remaining two Votes, relating to agriculture. Has that the general assent of the Committee?
  Hon. Members: Agreed.
  The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. T. Johnston): We have six hours of the time of Parliament allotted to us for the discussion of Scottish Estimates. In pre-war years we had two days of seven hours each. I never regarded the system itself and the amount of time which it allowed as adequate. I should not like this occasion to pass without placing upon record my hope that, when the war is
  1428
  over and we are free again to consider calmly the structure of government in Scotland and its adaptation to life and industry, we shall be able between us to devise a more efficient instrument than this for public criticism of the control of our national expenditure.
  The Votes that we are now about to discuss generally are those for health and education. I do not propose to absorb more than my share of the time allotted. I intend, if the Committee agrees, to listen to others and to have notes taken of any criticisms and observations that they may make and, if the time available for reply by the Undersecretary is insufficient, as it may well be, to send replies to hon. Members by post.
  The year under review has been a year of the restrictions and the disabilities of war, yet I would say that, largely thanks to the efficiency of our public Health Services, we have escaped without a major epidemic. It is true that our tuberculosis figures are increasing, our diphtheria figures are higher than before, and paratyphoid, cerebrospinal fever and influenza are slightly up, but, on the other hand, scarlet fever, measles and whooping cough are decreasing. The incidence of these figures is rather difficult of explanation. They are not due, I believe, to any one cause. No doubt among the causes are the black-out, window fastening at night, overcrowding due to evacuation, a diminution in our house building arrangements and so on. They are due perhaps also to intensification of toil. But above all I believe they are due to the long and severe winter. In regard to diphtheria, the campaign for immunisation of children has been given wide publicity, materials have been supplied to local authorities gratis. During the year, 500,000 children have been treated. That is equal to 50 per cent. of the total. But susceptibility is believed to be greater among young children, and local authorities during the holidays from school have been asked to concentrate their attention upon pre-school children.
  One word about our emergency hospital system. I see that Lord Craigmyle has been referring to the subject in a public speech and has asked why people were not told more tbout this wonderful system of hospitals which the foresight of the Department of Health had built up in our

  1429
  land. Well, the facts are simple. The emergency hospital service was created to deal with the war emergency. We had to reserve beds and equipment for possible and unknown casualties, but I agree entirely with Lord Craigmyle and other people who say that there ought to be a very much larger proportion of these beds taken for civilians who are on the waiting lists of other hospitals. We have seven new first-class well-equipped hospitals now. We have 20 new annexes to existing hospitals. We have many thousands of beds and we have already taken steps to draw the attention of every doctor and of all hospital authorities in Scotland to the fact that we are willing to see a large proportion of their waiting lists.
  Perhaps it would be well to note in passing that we have here one very considerable gain as the result of war arrangements. Here are seven well-equipped hospitals which I hope will be the nucleus of a great service, perhaps the backbone of a great organisation for a united attack upon physical suffering, not for the sole benefit of the citizens in the local government area in which those hospitals happen to have been built, but for all citizens in any local authority area who are in need. This with the stimulus of the Nuffield Hospitals Trust, will, I hope, remove from our midst the folly of the waiting list and enable us all to see more clearly the wisdom of co-operation among hospital authorities, municipal and voluntary, in wide areas for the treatment of human suffering.
  May I now refer briefly to hostel camps? We in Scotland are arranging for the provision of four big hostel camps in the Clyde Valley—one North, one South, one East and one West of our great industrial concentrations of population. Four hundred and eighty persons will be provided for in each camp and I hope that this will be some contribution to meeting the housing shortage after the war, because we have insisted in Scotland that these camps shall be so constructed and of such material that they can be readily and easily converted from the cubicle system into houses of two or three apartments and so on, for the local authorities in whose areas they are situated. On the subject of housing itself, I would say that during the year we succeeded in completing 14,206 houses in
  1430
  Scotland. We shall not be able to complete as many this year but that is the figure for 1940.
  Mr. Buchanan: What is the proportion in Glasgow?
  Mr. Johnston: Perhaps my hon. Friend will wait till the Under-Secretary replies. Then, on the question of evacuation, on which we had a two-days' Debate recently, I would point out that the scale of the problem is so vast and the organisation of any scheme of evacuation is so difficult, that it has been only with the great good will of the housewives in the receiving areas that the scheme, whereby 150,000 people in Scotland are billeted to-day, has been carried through to success.
  Mr. Kenneth Lindsay: How many of those are children?
  Mr. Johnston: I am coming to that question later.
  Mr. Sloan: When the right hon. Gentleman refers to the housewives, does he mean the working-class housewives?
  Mr. Johnston: Housewives of all classes. I do not wish to say that any one class of housewife has acted more splendidly than another in this matter. I can say that, of those 150,000 persons who are billeted in Scotland to-day, 40,000 are pre-school children, 80,000 are school children and the others are mothers and homeless persons. From Glasgow alone, the local authority informs us that nearly 50,000 school children, 25,000 pre-school children, 25,000 mothers and young children and 3,500 members of other priority classes have been evacuated between March and to-day. If we add to those figures, 12,000 children already evacuated before March we get a total of nearly120,000 evacuated from the city of Glasgow alone. We have been informed, from every quarter, that in the evacuation camps, where careful medical records have been kept, there has been an increase in height, weight and chest measurement of the children in those camps.
  There are also gains educationally. A new world has opened up to many of those children. I heard of one small boy who, arriving with his mother at a village in

  1431
  Inverness-shire, complained when he got out of the train of the strange smell, and another little fellow said to him "Whisht it's only the fresh air" Those who have seen the children have rejoiced in the new vim and vitality which have come to many of them. In Kirkcudbrightshire, 10 large houses have been taken as hostels, most of them set in beautiful grounds and the avidity with which the children have taken to gardening has been remarkable. In Scotland we have 100 hostels, with another 50 ready for use. We are anxious that every local authority shall explore the possibilities of requisitioning every suitable large available mansion house in its area. We propose to issue a new appeal to these authorities, particularly in the rural areas, and to follow it by visits of officers of the Department to assist the local authorities in their work. Some of the local authorities have their own difficulties, but nevertheless we must take every step to ensure that in the coming winter there is no available house unused in any part of Scotland. Out of 743,800 children on the roll only 3,600 are not now receiving any education. This figure is being steadily reduced. When one considers the destruction of schools and rest centres, overcrowding, and so on, that is a remarkable figure. It is too big, however, and we are taking every possible step to reduce it.
  Mr. Maxton: Can the right hon. Gentleman say where they are?
  Mr. Johnston: Most of them are in one county. There are 160,200 who are receiving only half-time education. That is a serious problem, but we are taking every possible physical step to ensure that the retardation, particularly in the primary schools, is diminished.
  I would like to conclude by saying a word about teaching in the schools. I would refer to an old theme of mine about history teaching. Perhaps at last we shall get a revision of our curriculum, at any rate with regard to other countries. Now that an opportunity -has come to us to show good will in international affairs, we might at least purge our school history books of offensive and inadequate references to our Allies. Voltaire once said something to the effect that all histories are but fables. At least we can diminish the number of fables that are taught to
  1432
  our school children, and I would like any assistance I can receive from hon. Members in all parts of the House towards that end.
  Mr. McKinlay: It will not be in Order to discuss the provision of shelter accommodation, because it is the prerogative of the Home Office. The Debate would have to be restricted to the shelters that have been provided and their effect on the health of the people. I will content myself by making this observation. I would not try to discuss the effect on health, because it is too horrible to contemplate, and as we cannot discuss the type of shelters, it would be much better to leave the discussion to a later stage. I was interested in the reference by the Secretary of State to the building of houses or cubicles—I do not like that term, because it smacks of the model lodging houses—which could be used after the war as two, three or four apartment houses. I do not intend to deal with housing to-day, but I would warn the Secretary of State and the Department not to be swept off their feet by the enthusiasts who suggest every form of type and construction as being speedier and cheaper than the orthodox method of building houses. There is no one more enthusiastic than somebody with something to sell. If a man has poor cement to sell, he can almost persuade a man with hair on his head that his head has been shaved. I am satisfied that you could only introduce such alternatives as methods of construction supplementary to the ordinary methods of supply. I want to say a word about reception and evacuation areas. Without offence, Mr. Secretary, may I state that the Department has become bogged—
  The Chairman: The hon. Member must address the Chair and not the Secretary of State.
  Mr. McKinlay: Perhaps you will excuse the familiarity, Sir Dennis. This is a Scottish discussion, in which we are not really politicians but all Scotsmen.
  The Chairman: I am sure that Scotsmen are the first to want to keep in Order as much as they can.
  Mr. McKinlay: I wanted to point out that the Department of Health has become bogged in the use of the phrases '' reception area" and "evacuation area." May

  1433
  I give an illustration which is somewhat personal? I live in a reception area which is on what is called the perimeter of the city of Glasgow. According to the law, it is in order to billet children where I live, despite the fact that to the right and left of me houses have been blown to the ground. All that separates a reception area and an evacuation area may be the: width of a street. I appreciate the difficulties, and we have had explanations of them, but the people outside do not know the Department's point of view on this matter. If you take Dumbartonshire, people have been compelled to return when accommodation was available to live in areas surrounded by bomb cavities simply because they are reception areas. In Glasgow we have the position that it is in order to evacuate children from one part of the city and get all the allowances, while in another part of the city that does not exist. I suggest that what ought to determine whether an allowance is payable or not is the safety margin of any district where people are working and the danger margin in the district they have been removed from.
  There is no such thing as an absolutely safe area, and while appreciating the difficulties of the Department, may I suggest that it is absurd to expect the ordinary man and woman to realise the distinction between evacuation and reception areas? I can illustrate it by the sending of workmen back from Stirlingshire to Dumbartonshire. One man had to bring his family home because the allowance was not payable, while another man could come back and the allowance was still payable for his children although there was only the width of a 60-foot road between them. I suggest that while orders may say, "This is a reception area, and that is an evacuation area," surely a little common sense could ensure that we do not have cases in which two men are employed in the same establishment and one is getting an allowance to leave his children in safety and the other getting no allowance, because of the width of a street.
  I have made a suggestion to the Secretary of State about the billeting of workmen in areas which have been blitzed. He has told us that so many hundreds of houses were completed in Scotland during last year, despite all the difficulties. There
  1434
  is any number of houses in such an advanced stage of construction that at very little cost they could be made wind and weather tight and brought into use. I am not suggesting that the walls should be plastered or the finishing touches put on the houses. All I am suggesting is that we ought to keep a reserve of these places not for the billeting of children but for the billeting of workmen. A five-apartment house would provide ready-made billets for 15 men. There are houses being erected by the Glasgow Corporation contiguous to Clydebank which, if they were provided with doors and windows, could be very useful for that purpose. It is not necessary to trouble about the condition of the walls. One of the virtues of leaving the walls in a rough state is that anyone occupying the house will know that it is only temporary accommodation, whereas if the houses were finished one would need almost an order of the court to get the people to leave. If such houses were used all that one would have to provide would be canteens for feeding the men at night and in the morning. No woman would be needed about the place at all. In making this suggestion I hope that something may come of it.
  I wish to speak also of the feeding of evacuees. There was one part of Dumbartonshire in which 1,500 people were billeted. It is true that the Ministry of Food arranged to have supplementary supplies of rationed foods taken into that area, but anyone who has to depend upon rationed foods is in for a very lean time, and my complaint is that traders in reception areas into which thousands of people have been sent have not been provided with extra supplies of non-rationed foods. The consequence of this is that the people sent to these reception areas consume a big share of non-rationed foods which are only sufficient for the ordinary requirements of the normal population of the areas. If it is in Order to do so, let me demand on behalf of Scotland that the Secretary of State should have some authority over the allocation of additional foodstuffs. I am sure all Scottish Members will be behind that request. At the moment there is a food executive officer in Edinburgh but he is neither more nor less than a figurehead. I have reason to know that, and I am not blaming the figure-head. It is no use making protests to Colwyn Bay,

  1435
  because there they are so busy that they regard such protests as very small items in their work. In view of the effect of an inadequate supply of non-rationed food, on the health of the people sent to reception areas, Scotland ought to demand some autonomy in the matter of the allocation of food to Scotland.
  The Chairman: The hon. Member must not go into that question in any detail, because it comes under the Ministry of Food.
  Mr. McKinlay: Again I must apologise, but when my constituents come to me and say, "The ersatz sausage has disappeared, there is no meat roll, there is no anything," and I go to the Ministry of Food about it, they say," Those are unrationed commodities; we can do nothing at all," and I am going to pin somebody down to responsibility for seeing—
  The Chairman: Probably the best thing the hon. Member could do would be to send these complaints from his constituents to the Ministry of Health doctors.
  Mr. McKinlay: I do not think there would be sufficient doctors to go round, and in any case not all doctors agree. I am suggesting that there has been a definite evasion of what we have always looked upon as the absolute prerogative of the Department of Health in Edinburgh. Surely it is not too much to ask that the chief executive of that Department should make representations along the lines I have indicated, and I am certain that he would receive the wholehearted support of Scottish Members in doing so.
  Mr. G. A. Morrison: I think it is well that this year again we have been given the opportunity of hearing how the education services of Scotland are functioning under the heavy handicap of war conditions. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not told us very much, but what he has told us was, in all the circumstances, very satisfactory. The handicap is indeed a very heavy one. Many schools have been out of commission, and still are, owing to the increased demands of the military, greater demands than those made during the last war owing to the larger number of troops
  1436
  at present in the country. One would like to know whether progress is still going on towards the restoration of school buildings to their proper use. Other school buildings have been unused, and pupils have been idle for long periods, because the buildings were not considered to afford adequate protection against air raids. One would like to know whether there has been improvement in this also.
  Then we have had, during the past two years, the great social experiment of evacuation. In reception areas local schools have had to share with visiting schools the use of the one school building, neither getting full time education as we used to understand that phrase in peace time. Elsewhere, schools have been combined, with all the disadvantages that entails, all the difficulties owing to the changes in curriculum, in methods and in text books. In the evacuation areas even where school work has been carried on—and, as I have said, many schools have been out of use— depleted schools have had to be combined because of depleted staffs. I can give one instance brought to my notice in which a teacher, a lady, is fully responsible for one class of 50 pupils in the morning and responsible also for a different class of 50 pupils in the afternoon. That may be an extreme case, and I hope it is.
  Some months ago I asked the predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman for statistics showing the numbers of children in Scotland receiving full-time, part-time or no instruction, and the figures which he gave were disquieting. Later figures have been less unsatisfactory, while the particulars just given by the right hon. Gentleman were very much more satisfactory.
  Another matter which makes me as well as other Members "definitely uneasy is the supply of men teachers. Some years ago the Education Department made graduation the only qualification for men, but they did not feel able to do it for women. The teachers of Scotland have for years advocated a graduate profession, and we were rapidly coming towards that. About 1931, when the number of teachers admitted was rather less than the normal, the quota of graduates was 800, against 200 non-graduates. That year there were more graduate applicants for the teaching

  1437
  profession than would have filled all the vacancies in all the training centres. The number of non-graduate women who applied was 160. The figure for non-graduate women completing the course this year is 374. Last year it was 318, an increase of 17½per cent. The number of graduate women this year was 259, against 279 last year, a drop of 20. Taking the two sets of figures together, it is plain that non-graduate women are being employed in place of men called up for military service.
  Most of those appointments are not temporary, and they will seriously affect the proportion of graduate and non-graduate teachers. If this is to continue, the cumulative effect will be very serious, and will last for 40 years. May we not hope that something will be done to check the drain of men teachers? Men below a certain medical standard should be exempt or should be released for the work for which they were trained. Men teachers should not be taken away for full-time Civil Defence. The best Civil Defence a teacher can do is to continue his ordinary work. The men are perfectly willing to do A.R.P. work in the evenings.
  A war bonus scheme has been set up for teachers which is not over-generous. Such as it is, in spite of the unanimous recommendations of the National Joint Council, the bonus scheme has not been acted upon by all the education authorities. No doubt the right hon. Gentleman will know how to apply further pressure where it is needed. There are hard cases among retired teachers who are on pension, and although it may not be possible to separate such questions from the general pensions question, I would put in a word for a very small and rapidly diminishing class, the pre-1919 teachers, whose allowances, even reckoning the slight increase that has taken place, are still very small.
  On a previous occasion I raised the question of supplementing the pay of teachers on war service. Very few authorities have done nothing in this matter. Some have followed the Government's example of making up civilian salary in full and others have adopted the scale of the Joint Industrial Council, with various modifications. I wish to make two points. First, there is no doubt that Circular 118 raised expectations which
  1438
  have not been fulfilled. In the second place, this was a matter for national and uniform, not local action. There are many cases of actual hardship, and there is much unrest and bitter disappointment in many areas, because of the unequal treatment in adjacent districts. Even more serious, in respect of the precedent it may form, was the flouting of the unanimous ' recommendation of the National Joint Council. Everybody hoped when the National Joint Council was set up that at least its unanimous recommendations would receive the support of the Department almost as a matter of course. This would have been a great gain for education, through the elimination of causes of friction and the avoidance of prolonged or recurring disputes, which make for embitterment. Proposals by the English Board of Education for reconstruction after the war are spoken of and promise much better conditions. I should like the right hon. Gentleman if possible, to lift the veil a little regarding proposals for Scotland. Even a declaration like that of the last President of the Board, including the raising of the school-leaving age to 15 without exemptions, Day Continuation classes, and the thorough overhaul of the secondary school curriculum, would be welcome.
  It may not be out of place if I refer to the very great loss that Scottish education has sustained this year by the death of Mr. Thomas Henderson, General Secretary of the Educational Institute, who was well known in this House as well as in America and some parts of the Continent. He was a man of very great ability, of wide interests and a well-stored mind, a very effective ambassador for education. In the service of his own association he travelled all over the world. He was a wise counsellor and an excellent negotiator. I am sure my right hon. Friend will agree that he formed an admirable link between the teaching profession and the administrators of education. Those of us who knew him intimately share the general sorrow at this blow to education, and mourn besides the loss of a steadfast and sympathetic friend. We could ill spare him in these difficult times.
  Mr. McNeil: I am encouraged to intervene here because I know that this House extends to inexperienced Members tolerance and

  1439
  generosity. I am forced to speak because I am concerned, as almost everyone else like me is concerned, about the plight of the bombed-out population in various parts of the country, and particularly, in this 'Debate, in various parts of Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Scotland gave us some figures, saying that 14,000houses had been completed this year, and spoke of his concern for better housing. My hon. Friend the Member for Dumbartonshire (Mr. McKinlay) warned us against accepting expedients claiming to be a speedy means of housing and said that people who commended concrete usually had something to sell. I have nothing to sell in this Debate; I intend to commend, with all the earnestness I can command, the plight of these homeless people, not only to the Secretary of State but to all Members of this Committee. I do not argue merely from humanitarian reasons or even from broad social principles. I suggest that the difference between defeat and victory may quite easily turn on our treatment of these people. I do not mean to be dramatic or melodramatic about this. I mean it as a cautious, careful statement, because, as we all know, victory or defeat will finally rest on the morale of our people, and where the bombs fall, there is morale most severely tested. A beleaguered town does not withstand an enemy because nine of its ten gates are held; if one falls, all fall.
  It has been part of my job to go wherever the bombs have fallen in Scotland, and I think it only just to add that there also I have always seen the Secretary of State for Scotland, his assistants and his officials. I know, as they know and as we all acknowledge, that the spirit of our people in those places has been magnificent. Their endurance, their fortitude, their boldness have robbed the word "heroism" of its meaning, but I feel that there is a great danger that we may ask these people to carry a bigger burden than we have any right to expect them to bear. Morale, I think, rests probably on three principles. There must be an assurance that the cause is just, there must be a reasonable hope of victory, and there must be a conviction that no one section of the people at war is being asked to carry a greater burden than any other section. These people who are at present homeless, if their condition is worsened, may consider that they are being asked
  1440
  to carry a greater burden; they may consider that they are a forgotten section of the people. If that happens, neither speeches, nor visitations, nor generous relief will take away their fear. In my opinion, only an emergency drive to throw up any kind of emergency housing will meet the needs of these people and will ensure that the morale of the whole nation is maintained at its weakest point.
  Perhaps I may illustrate what I mean by quoting figures from an area the name of which I will supply to the right hon. Gentleman but which, for obvious reason of public safety, I will withhold from this Debate. This area was subjected to a sharp series of sharp attacks. As a result, 1,174 houses were either completely destroyed or so badly damaged that they cannot be repaired; 1,024 houses were badly damaged but will in time be repaired, and about 9,000 houses were damaged in a lesser degree, but only about 1,000 of these enter into our calculations. This means that about 3,000 families, totalling between 9,000 and 10,000 souls, had to be billeted in that area, and despite an excellent billeting officer, despite the co-operation of the receiving people, to which the Secretary of State has paid just tribute, and despite the good will of the billeted people, these 9,000 people were billeted in some cases in the most appalling circumstances.
  One case, which has been dealt with speedily by the right hon. Gentleman's Department, concerned, for example, a husband and wife both of whom had been previously married. They both had adult families, and as a result the husband and wife and adults of mixed sexes, having no blood relationship with each other were forced to share the floor in one room. I believe that I could harrow this Committee, but I do not want to do so. I want to put forward my case with cool objectivity. Despite the diligent work of this excellent billeting officer, who has made a complete census of the area, and setting aside all the medical, social and moral standards which this Committee normally lays down in relation to housing, there are only 3,000 possible further billets in that area. That is another way of saying that if the bomber strikes again with a similar degree of ferocity, there will not be, in that town, even an unoccupied manger. If there is a third attack, the position will be chaotic.

  1441
  I therefore think I have a right to submit to this Committee that there are few questions more urgent or more deserved of priority than this one of meeting these needs—they are not confined to that area—with any kind of housing that can now be devised. Let no one suggest that I am unaware of the technical difficulties of this problem, or that I am unappreciative of the hard work and the research which the Secretary of State's Department has done on this job. But technical difficulties can be overcome if I can persuade Members that this problem is as urgent as I see it, or if the Minister can be brought to see this as a problem really concerned with victory or defeat. When there was a cry for huts for Militiamen, huts sprouted in our fields almost like crops. When it was clear that fighter aeroplanes were needed to save this country from defeat, day by day we saw more fighters in our sky. To-day, day by day we shall see more tanks roll off the assembly line because the country is persuaded that it is the great need. What I am asking is, that we should have a Beaverbrook for the bombed-out, and I am quite certain that the Minister has the drive, diligence and imagination to do this job if he can be persuaded to see it with the urgency with which I see it. I am not concerned with what methods are adopted—Nissen huts, timber, concrete, houses standing unroofed—any kind of emergency houses with communal services relating to food, to water, to sanitation, any kind of emergency instrument to meet what I think is a clamant priority.
  May I just add this? Whatever is going to be done must be done within the next two months, and I know how much I am asking. But it is plain that the skilled tradesmen of the building industry, and the semi-skilled operatives of the Army, who have already done a similar job for themselves, are available now. By October, when darkness falls, and the bombs fall, this personnel will be completely occupied in coping with the results of the new aerial attack which must, certainly will, come to this country.
  Mr. Maxton: I appreciate very much the fact that I have the opportunity of following the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. McNeil) in his first speech in this House. I would have been very ready to give way had you,
  1442
  Sir Dennis, called the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Kelvingrove (Colonel Elliot), because I would have liked to have left to him the honour of congratulating the hon. Member on his entry into this House. All we Glasgow and West of Scotland Members remember the historic struggle in Kelvin-grove, when it was on the turn of a coin as to which of the two would be the representative for the Division. I congratulate the hon. Member for Greenock on his first effort in this House to-day. Some Members have to make their maiden speech under difficult conditions. No one could find a more genial and kindly audience than is to be found when we are discussing, in Committee, the Scottish Estimates. I think we are agreed that he has made the best use of his opportunity.
  Now I have said that, I want to start complaining. I want to complain that the Secretary of State for Scotland rationed himself to the very limited period he did. The speech he made was to the point of being of no use to us. I know that his motives were of the very best. He wants to ration out the oratorical time of the Committee on Scottish Estimates. In my view it is nonsense so far as Debate is concerned, particularly nonsensical for the Secretary of State to withhold from the Committee the essential facts that make enlightened Debate possible. I would infinitely prefer that we should have a system by which we balloted for the right to speak on Scottish Estimates than this system. I hope there will never be any attempt to repeat it. I will endeavour to keep well within the time which I understand has been unofficially agreed to for the duration of speeches. It is more necessary to-day that we should have a satisfactory statement from the Minister, because we have not had, for two years, the annual reports of the various Departments. Then we had statements in writing on which we could work, but these have not been produced for two years.
  My first question to the Under-Secretary is, What is the excuse? There may be an excuse for not putting up houses in bombed areas, though I do not think it is a good excuse. I think houses in bombed areas are, as the hon. Member for Greenock stated, just as necessary as tanks, planes, or anything else. Earlier

  1443
  in the war it may have been true that there was a materials difficulty, that there were urgent demands for building for naval, military and other purposes. But to a large extent the problem of extra building for camp accommodation and so on has been overcome. I understand that the materials difficulty has been overcome to a large extent. I hope that the Scottish Office will reconsider the idea of no house building until the war is over—. 14,000 last year, and we are promised less for next year. Fourteen thousand is a pitiable contribution to the ordinary urgent needs of Scotland, let alone the additional war needs that have arisen.
  Whatever difficulty there may be in producing houses, surely there is no difficulty in producing annual reports of the Departments of Health, Education, and the other Departments of Scotland. Surely the Secretary of State gets a report from these Departments. If so, what is the difficulty in getting that printed for the benefit of Members, and the people of Scotland generally? Those are my two complaints, first, that we have not had a proper statement, as in the past, from the Secretary of State, and, second, no printed statements from any one of the Scottish Departments. It will be a bad thing if we only get the opportunity of discussing Scottish Estimates on one day a year, though our share, mathematically, of the 20 days allowed for discussion of the Estimates—Scotland getting one-twentieth for its 4,000,000 population in an Empire that has so many million population—means that we are doing fairly well. A more close and intimate discussion of Scottish Estimates would seem to involve the setting-up of a Scottish Parliament or some special machinery in Scotland. I leave that complaint. I hope the Under-Secretary will be able to give some intelligent reason why we have not had annual reports. The war cannot be made an excuse indefinitely. Scotland has to live, even if there is a war on, and the people who are responsible for Scottish affairs are entitled to have an ordered report of the work of all the officials engaged. I hope that in 1942 we shall not be without those reports, and that we shall be given some adequate reason why they have been lacking in 1940 and 1941.
  1444
  I have some minor points to raise. I have spoken to the Minister about one of them which seems to me to affect both the health and the education of the children of Scotland. I refer to the provision of milk in schools. Children under 5 years of age get a pint of milk a day supplied at a cheap rate. When they reach the age of 5 that stops—it may go on for a week or a month, to the end of a registration period, but then it stops. If the child goes to school it is then entitled to a third of a pint a day. Why a pint should be the appropriate ration for a child under 5 and a third of a pint the ration for a child over 5, I do not know. Very frequently, however, there is a gap of some months between the time when the child reaches the age of 5 and the time when it enters a school. A child who reaches the age of 5 in, say, the April-May period, will in most areas of Scotland not be accepted by a school until September. During that interval there is neither the domestic pint at a cheap rate nor the school one-third of a pint. In some areas I am told that dairymen, misunderstanding the rationing scheme, are not prepared to substitute another pint when they stop the cheap pint, even though the parents are prepared to pay the normal rates. I hope that the Under-Secretary will see that the child's cheap or free milk is continued until it receives the school ration.
  Then there is a food question. Perhaps this could be more appropriately raised on the Vote for the Scottish Department of Agriculture, but it is not so much a question on the production side as on the nutrition side. Scotland has a tremendous number of fresh-water fish. Salmon and trout have been of interest only to the sporting fraternity, but they are now a matter of interest to those who want to see our population fed in the best way. I would like the Scottish Secretary to see whether he can take steps to increase both the salmon and the trout population of Scotland before next season. I understand that you do not need to import food from America to produce big salmon and big trout. I want him to see that the fresh-water fish of Scotland are put on the highest possible level, and then that they get into the markets so that they reach the homes of the ordinary people. I want to associate myself with the remarks of

  1445
  my hon. Friend the Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. G. A. Morrison) about Mr. Thomas Henderson, who died within the period under discussion. He certainly served Scottish education in all ways, at all times, and in all quarters of the globe. I believe that he represented Scottish education on one occasion as far away as China. I regret his untimely death, and all the more because he was an old friend of mine. I think that his very first entry into the administration and politics of education was when he came to join me as assistant secretary in an organisation called the Scottish Class Teachers' Association. From that time, he was serving teachers and education in Scotland.,
  Colonel Elliot: I wish it had fallen to me to be the first to congratulate the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. McNeil). Since that privilege was not allowed me, I do so now. I am sure that my fellow Scottish Members realise, as the; rest of the House will realise in days to come, how difficult a task was set me in opposing him in that City of which I share the representation along with other formidable figures, such as the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton). I am sure the House will always listen with interest to the contributions of the hon. Member for Greenock, and we on this side all wish him the very best of fortune in his new career. He made a very strong plea for emergency treatment for the bombed-out populations of Scotland. I am sure that all of us would agree—and the Secretary for Scotland more than any man—that the present responsibility for housing in Scotland is a sufficient problem at any time, without the diminution of the scanty stock of houses which we in Scotland enjoy. I would add my plea that Scotland should be treated as an area with special claims in any scheme that can be secured for the purposes of emergency repairs and of building up stocks where bombed houses can be rapidly rebuilt, and that, as far as possible, we should even continue with the building of houses, or, at any rate, of shelter, which can be available in time of emergency.
  It has been stated by the Secretary of State to-day that that policy has been followed with success in the case of hospital accommodation. I am sure the Committee will have heard with pleasure
  1446
  that a great addition to hospital accommodation has been made in Scotland, and that we are now in a position to make some inroads into the waiting lists of the Scottish hospitals. These waiting lists have always been one of the scandals of our country, alike from the humanitarian, the social and the economic points of view. That a great nation should be able to afford repair slips to recondition engines, but should not be able to afford to recondition its human machinery, is one of the many anomalies from which we suffer. It is a problem peculiar to Scotland. I was interested, on taking over the responsibilities of Minister of Health in England, to find that that problem was not present in anything like the same intensity in England as in Scotland, and that, roughly speaking, any person could obtain admission to hospitals in England in a reasonable time. In Scotland such a person might have to wait for years. The problem existed also in the North of England.
  I am glad to know of the emergency hospital accommodation which has been erected in England, particularly in the Northern districts, where there were waiting periods of as long as seven years before a person could count on getting admission to one of the hospitals in the area. I very much hope that local authorities will see to it that advantage is taken of the accommodation which is now at our disposal and that they will bring to the notice of the voluntary hospitals, not merely by circular or letter, but in every possible way, the fact that the chance is now open and that under the various pieces of legislation in the Statute Book they will secure harmonious working with the voluntary system so that all can benefit by these great new reinforcements which are offered to us. In all overcrowding the overcrowding of a sick person or a person in need of hospital treatment is perhaps the most painful and distressing, and when accommodation is available it is urgently necessary to take advantage of it, all the more so because this accommodation may not last for ever. It is available now, but evil days may come again with the longer nights, and these hospital beds may be taken up with people injured in air raids. We shall all rue the day if we do not take advantage of the beds which are waiting to be used.

  1447
  I, too, think it is a pity that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State rationed himself too strictly in the statement which he made to the Committee. I trust the Under-Secretary will take it from us that there is no need to confine himself too rigidly when he comes to reply, and that if awkward questions arise, it will not be necessary for him to point to the clock and say, "I should have been glad to deal with them, but time presses. We are all working to a ration." I have seen this device used many times; in fact, I have used it myself, and it is one of the bolt-holes of Ministers in trouble which we would do well to stop up. I particularly would have liked a more extended review of the ordinary services in Scotland, not peace-time services, because all services are now war-time services, but services on which the structure of the nation is built and is being stabilised at this time of emergency. In some of the figures which my right hon. Friend gave us there were some encouraging features, but some of the figures require very close watching indeed. The diseases he mentioned as rising were all diseases of which we must keep a careful note from the point of view of the present period of distress. Meningitis due to overcrowding, paratyphoid—a disease due to bad sanitation— and tuberculosis, the great danger signal of malnutrition, are warnings that strain and stress are beginning to have a really injurious effect on the constitution and make-up of not merely those people who have been reported as having these diseases but those who are in the preliminary stages.
  Both in Scotland and England the tuberculosis graphs have turned upward after a long period of decline, and that shows there is a problem, whether it be a problem of fresh air, overcrowding or malnutrition. I think it is more particularly nutrition to which our rulers would be well to give close consideration at the present time. I noted that in yesterday's Debate it was suggested that actual feeding was perhaps leading to a slackening of the maximum war effort in certain conditions, and I co-relate that with the fact brought out at Question-time yesterday—that out of the whole of the pits in Scotlands there are only two canteens. The question whether we can give extra rations to men doing heavy physical labour has been examined time and time
  1448
  again and is one of great difficulty, because not all manual workers are engaged in heavy physical labour. It is nonsense to say that because a colonel is wearing a khaki coat he should thereby have a great deal more food than any other Member of this House. It is not necessarily so, and he does not, in fact, get extra rations for that purpose. But feeding on the spot in works and canteens is a method by which supplementary rations can be secured for those who most need them. That miners might be short of the necessary food to enable them to produce their maximum output is a great waste which we should not tolerate in war-time. Yesterday the Minister of Labour said that instead of getting 10,000 extra men, he would like to get 10,000 extra rations. By that means he said he would be able to get the extra work produced as a result of this extra food, instead of having to bring more people into the pits. As regards the shortage of material, I do not think the hon. gentleman the Member for Bridge-ton (Mr. Maxton) was quite accurate in his statement that the shortages have been overcome.
  Mr. Maxton: I do not think I said that, but I know I am like the right hon. and gallant Gentleman—rather exuberant in my expressions. My impression, drawn from various quarters, is that the building material problem is less serious to-day than it was six months ago.
  Colonel Elliot: Well, if there is any information which the Under-Secretary can give us on this matter, we shall be most glad to have it. I think it is a type of statement which in general terms he might be able to allow us to have, and I should be very glad if that were so. The shortage of timber, the great demands still being met for the construction of factories and public works of all kinds, and the necessity for storing material against the dark days which may confront us—all this would make me hesitate to put forward such a statement, although it would make me all the more grateful to receive it. However, I must not trespass on the time of the Committee, and I would only repeat that we would have welcomed from my right hon. Friend a statement which was twice as long. Housing and nutrition rest upon the functioning of the great basic services of Scotland, and I would

  1449
  like to impress upon him and Members of the Committee the necessity of stressing in every way the importance of carrying on the normal administrative services in spite of the great demands being made on all classes of the community, and perhaps most of all on the officials of local authorities, by the new emergency tasks which are constantly being heaped upon them.
  The services of education, housing, sanitation, and so on, are the foundation of our Scottish effort, and all of them must be kept going, as well as the great extra effort which the country and the local authorities' officials, in particular, are being asked to undertake at this time. They have done wonderful work and we are now seeing some of the fruits of it, but unless we are willing to redouble our efforts, and make sure that the new emergency demands do not subtract from but add to the work which the local authorities and the nation did before the war, we shall not succeed in Scotland, whatever may happen South of the Border, because we had a long leeway to make up and conditions in Scotland were by no means satisfactory as they were in the great sister nation. If we allow ourselves to relax in war time, we shall increase the leeway and the lag, and we shall have a doubly difficult task in the days to come.
  Mr. Kenneth Lindsay: I intervene only for two or three minutes, because I feel it is impossible to do justice to the subject which I should wish to discuss, namely Scottish education, in the time allotted, and because we have not had a sufficient basis of facts and figures on which a discussion could take place. Therefore, I join in the protest made by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) and my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kelvingrove (Colonel Elliot) against the very severe rationing of time which the Secretary of State has imposed upon himself. I think we would all wish to have a broad survey of Scottish affairs so that, even if some of us did not catch the eye of the Chairman, we might have a more careful Debate.
  I welcome very much, and would like to pay a tribute to, the speech of the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. McNeil), which was fluent and full of knowledge.
  1450
  It was a very rare speech. I am surprised—perhaps it is because I have overdone it, or others have under-done it— that in Scotland so little has been said so far about conditions in bombed areas. I would not have gone as far as the hon. Member did in the matter of details, because one has to be extremely careful, although I do not think the hon. Member said anything which most people do not know; but I was very glad to hear the hon. Member stress the question of morale in war-time. To a person taking in evacuees, the war does not mean Sollum, Bardia and other far-off places; it means an extra personal strain in the home. Anything which can be done to relieve that strain will sustain morale and help in winning the war, and by relieving the strain I mean, for example, relieving the house hold in regard to the midday meals, which means an extension of communal feeding. There has been far too little development of that in Scotland.
  I have been made almost a complete Scottish Nationalist to-day, and I have more sympathy than for many years with the idea of a greater devolution of Scottish government. It is really impossible to discuss the great affairs of Scotland, education, health and agriculture, in six hours. My main purpose in rising is to ask a specific question. In education, Scotland had a200 years' start over England—I was re-reading Macaulay's description of it the other day—and it is due to that fundamental training in school and kirk, which happened 200 years before it did in England, that all over the world Scottish men and women have taken the enormous part which they have, not only in building up the British Empire, but in improving their own positions. To-day, Scottish education—I say it with some knowledge—is falling behind the best experiments that are going on in England. I deplore that. Scottish education is becoming too academic. In England there is, at the present time, so we are informed, what is called the "New Testament" of education. My right hon. Friend who recently vacated the position of President of the Board of Education and his officials have prepared a complete and very long document on the whole future of English education, and I understand it is being examined by the local education authorities and the teachers,

  1451
  and that it will come before a wider public in good time.
  I want to put a question to my hon. Friend the Under-secretary of State for Scotland. I am very glad he is in that office, because he is one of the few occupants of it who could be called the Under-Secretary of State for Scottish Education. We have not a special Minister for education in Scotland, but my hon. Friend knows the subject from long experience in education authorities. I want to ask him whether a very careful survey is in process of taking place at the present time, how far it has gone, and what is proposed to be done with it; and whether it will go not only into the question of the machinery of education, such as raising the school age and so on, which is important, but, what is much more important, into the question of whether Scottish education is meeting the needs of industry, agriculture, and the great professions. I am not sure about that.
  I want to put forward a suggestion. I believe that in Scotland the time has come, as in England, for something like a welfare department within the Scottish Education Department. It is impossible to-day for a modern teacher to fill up all the forms, to go on teaching, and to deal with the milk scheme and all the extra school activities which are being thrown upon the teacher. I would like also to see the whole of the probation work included under education. It is the people who teach in the schools who know whether a child, at the age of 13, is going off the rails; it is the teacher who can follow up the matter with the parents. It is wrong to have the present separation. There should be an Educational Court closely linked up with the education authority, the parents, the teachers, and the social workers.
  A subject in which I am particularly interested, partly because I was the first chairman of that body, is the youth committee, both in England and in Scotland. There has been a wonderful growth in the whole of this work throughout Britain. During the last six months I have been going round the country—during last week I was in three or four places in the North of England—and I have seen a growth in the work for those
  1452
  between 14 and 18 years of age, such as has not happened during the last 30 years. I should like the Under-Secretary of State to tell us a little more about how this work is developing. I hope he will take to heart the suggestion I have made about creating a welfare department, particularly considering the work that has to be done in the reception areas—which has nothing to do with the old education —the youth work, and the feeding, for it has been proved at Marr College in Ayrshire, if it has not been proved anywhere else, that one good meal in the middle of the day makes all the difference to school children. The quicker this can be reproduced throughout Scotland, the better will be the physical basis of Scottish children.
  In conclusion, I hope that in future we shall have more time to debate Scottish affairs, without having to hurry and look at the clock all the time. I hope there will be opportunities to debate special items of Scottish affairs, such as agriculture—which might well have one day— and education and health, which might perhaps be linked together; and we might perhaps have a longer statement from the Secretary of State telling us what progress is being made, what ideas are at the back of his mind, and what we may look forward to next year. I hope also that we may have an assurance that in Scotland as in England, there will be a thorough overhaul of education. That will be an essential part of reconstruction after the war, although I believe in going ahead with things now. I agree with Lord Horder when he says "start now" If we can start on these things now, we shall be able to lay the foundations for a better system in the future.
  Dr. Morgan: I hope the Committee will pardon the intrusion of an English Member in this discussion. I intervene as an old graduate of Glasgow University, and as one whom the Scottish people adopted, or allowed to be educated under a scholarship provided for medical education. I am specially interested in the treatment of fractures and in the question of rehabilitation in Scotland, and quite recently I had the privilege of visiting the Glasgow Hospital and Edinburgh Hospital to investigate their fracture treatment arrangements. I hope the Committee will bear with me if I point out certain aspects of the fracture treatment

  1453
  and rehabilitation schemes. In this connection I recently put a Question to the Secretary of State for Scotland, which I consider he answered very badly and evasively. I asked him whether plans were being considered for implementing the recommendations of the Delevingne Inter-Departmental Committee for the rehabilitation of persons injured by accidents. On that Committee was a representative of the Scottish Office. The reply completely evaded the question, and spoke instead of the provision of six new orthopaedic units. This question is of special importance, and is in some way related to the remarks of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kelvingrove (Colonel Elliot) when he spoke about wastage.
  I wonder whether the Department of Scotland realises that owing to the bad organisation of fracture treatment in Scotland the casualties in one area alone mean that over 6,000 working hours have been lost. This is through inefficient treatment. There have been 100,000 accidents in Scotland a year, of which 20,000 have been cases of fracture. The British Medical Association Fracture Committee, in 1935,confirmed the Report of the Delevingne Committee, that so long as there is unorganised fracture treatment, there will be delay, incapacity, deformity, wastage and so on. I know this is a highly technical subject, and that many hon. Members may be asking themselves what is the difference between organised and unorganised treatment. It has been proved by the B.M.A. Committee, which is comprised of professional experts doing professional work, and not of laymen discussing professional work, that if fractures are treated in the ordinary way, and the patient is sent into an ordinary ward, these terrible results follow. The Committee lay down certain definite principles of treatment which have been accepted by the Delevingne Committee. They concern unity of control, segregation of cases of fracture, treatment by one team of surgeons, appropriate arrangements for exercise and things of that kind. If cases are treated in the ordinary way, calamity results.
  Let me take the case of fracture to the wrist. If cases are treated under an organised scheme—and the Scottish Office can find the report and confirm my statement—the length of time between the
  1454
  accident and the time when the man can get back to work, is seven weeks, whereas if the treatment is unorganised the length of time is 29 weeks. If the treatment is organised the number of persons who are permanently incapacitated amounts only to one-half per cent. whereas under the unorganised system, the corresponding figure is 23½ per cent. I could go on giving similar figures showing that, if treatment is organised, less time is taken, and that if it is unorganised you have these dreadful results. Taking the whole of the fracture cases together, it has been found that under organised treatment only 1 per cent. are permanently incapacitated, while with unorganised treatment the figure is 37 per cent. Unless the treatment is properly organised, both within hospitals and between hospitals, there is prolongation of treatment for the injured person, disability, and extended suffering. Permanent incapacity is not due to any fault of the injured person or workman but to inefficient treatment, disjointed treatment, and unorganised handling. Injured persons are bandied from one surgeon to another, from one hospital department to another, from one person more or less highly-skilled, to another person more or less unskilled, to the detriment of his chance of physical recovery and early return to work. Under the Emergency Hospital Services scheme the Government are responsible for making certain definite arrangements for the treatment of cases in hospitals, and yet we still have certain areas where no organised fracture treatment is given, such as in the Glasgow Royal Infirmary. I visited the Glasgow Royal Infirmary and found that, although it had an excellent clinic, the treatment was completely dissociated and unorganised in the in-patients department.
  I wish to ask the Government whether it is not possible by grants to the voluntary hospitals—and I know this is the price for the present hospital system— which are now doing their work to introduce proper organisation both in the in-patient and out-patient departments. Is it not possible by this means to bring these hospitals up to Grade I laid down by the Delevingne Committee? On page 78 of the report the Glasgow Hospital grades are given and on page 75 the classification of the number of grades is shown—Grade I, Grade II, Grade III, Grade IV, Grade V.

  1455
  Grade I, only, provides an adequate organised fracture treatment approved and laid down as a standard by the Committee. In Scotland in 1939 only one hospital, the Glasgow Hospital, was carrying out this principle. Three hospitals are in Grade II, none in Grade III, none in Grade IV and six in Grade V, which is the lowest in regard to this problem of rehabilitation. Many dissociate rehabilitation from treatment and do not adopt it until the surgical treatment is completed. This often means that a man is permanently disabled. There is nothing dealing with the question of the actual retraining of the injured person, making him fit, restoring his working capacity and as far as possible making him a fit citizen. If there is a rehabilitation centre it must have been very recently set up. I have not heard of it yet. This important subject involves civilians who have been injured in bombing, people injured on the roads, industrial workers and even children. If this thing is done properly, by organising the treatment it will leave an impression on the medical services and earn for the Secretary of State a reputation, which I hope he will richly deserve. I apologise, as an English Member, for intervening in a Scottish Debate, but, being so keenly interested in the question, I hope the Committee will feel that I have not wasted its time.
  Sir John Train: I hesitate to intervene, not because I am an Englishman, but because certain things have been said in the course of the Debate. I congratulate the hon. Member for Rochdale (Dr. Morgan) on his very highly technical discourse on the various ills that befall the human frame, but I am more concerned to impress on the Secretary of State the necessity of providing beds in the hospitals for the injured. I had sent me yesterday a cutting from a well-known Glasgow newspaper with the heading, "Hospital waiting lists. A scandal to Scotland" It records a speech delivered by a former Member of this House on Saturday which, my correspondent tells me, has exercised the minds of a great number of people. This gentleman blames not only the voluntary institutions but also the Department of Health. He blames the Department not for the lack of accommodation, but for its modesty in not making known the provision that has
  1456
  been made. There are thousands of people waiting for accommodation who do not know how to get there. Perhaps the Under-Secretary will give some explanation of this situation and let the people know what has been accomplished. The gentleman who made the speech to which I have referred forgets that the number of hospitals has largely increased in recent years, particularly since the war, and that a great many houses and institutions have been taken over. I hope my hon. Friend will make it known that these are available.
  I wonder whether anything is included in these Estimates for assistance for housing. Private enterprise cannot touch it, because of the licences required, and also for economic reasons, but something must be done to provide houses at rents that people can afford to pay. Housing has been a black mark against us for many years, and it is much worse now because of the blitz and the movement of the population owing to evacuation. Some sort of pressure should be put on local authorities and housing authorities to provide housing for the people. It could be done with a little push. I would urge the Under-Secretary on these two points to bring pressure to bear with a view to the provision of houses, to let the people know what provision is available in the way of hospital accommodation, and not to let people who have a "grouse" make speeches which are largely reported in the Press, without some reply being made now that we have these Estimates before us.
  Mr. McLean Watson: I want to join with my colleagues who have referred to the rationing of time because we have rationed ourselves for a number of years. In view of the fact that we have the whole of the Scottish Estimates to discuss to-day, there is even more justification for it than there has been in the past when we enjoyed two days' discussion. So that while we would not object to the Secretary of State taking more time in making his statement, I think that rationing of time is a good thing for Members generally. I would have welcomed a longer statement from the Secretary of State in view of the fact that no reports of the work of the Scottish Departments have been issued this year.

  1457
  We get an opportunity on occasions like this to bring to the notice of the Secretary of State particular grievances as they affect our constituencies. The Secretary of State raised some important questions in his short speech. He referred to the auxiliary hospital service that has been set up as an emergency in the event of war casualties requiring extra hospital accommodation, and I would like the Under-Secretary to say whether he can assure us that the voluntary hospitals in Scotland are to have a more secure time in future than they have had in the past. Until the war began, our voluntary hospitals were in a desperate position. I am not so well acquainted with the position in the West of Scotland, but the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary has been hard put to it for many years. I hope that before we go in for a large extension of hospital services in Scotland, we shall make sure that the hospitals which existed before the war will be properly looked after and financed. It is no credit to us that we have to depend on voluntary contributions for keeping such an institution as the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary going year after year. I hope we can have an assurance that the future of such an institution will be more assured and that it will have fewer financial losses than it had before the outbreak of the war.
  With regard to housing, there are in my constituency houses that were commenced before the war and that have been making slow progress during the war, and many of them are still uncompleted. I would ask the Under-Secretary whether anything can be done to get these houses completed. In every part of my constituency there is a demand for houses owing to exceptional circumstances that should never have arisen. We are reaping many heritages in that area. If former Governments had been wiser and had kept Rosyth Dockyard open instead of reducing it to a care and maintenance basis, if they had developed housing as it should have been developed, in regard to the dockyard and housing accommodation, for those employed there, we should not have been faced with the problem that we have in my area to-day. There is not a house to be got anywhere and it has been necessary to resort to billeting. Every possible step to get accommodation for workers who have come into the constituency has had to be taken,
  1458
  yet we have houses nearing completion, which could be completed in a few months if the labour and material were available. I 'hope that the hon. Member for Bridge-ton (Mr. Maxton) is right in saying that more material is available to-day than six months ago. My experience is that neither the labour nor material is available in sufficient quantities to allow even for the completion of these houses. I hope that something can be done to have houses completed as early as possible so that more people can find accommodation.
  There is another scheme that has been undertaken during the war to provide accommodation for workers in the dockyard. Special arrangements have to be made and houses are being built of concrete by the Scottish Housing Association under the control of the Department of Health. I have never been an admirer of the concrete house. I do not believe that it is good enough for the workers of Scotland. They are entitled to a better standard than the concrete house that is now being erected. They are being built on a site that was prepared by Dunfermline Town Council. Streets were made and the services were put in, and 20 houses were begun before the war. The scheme was then closed down. The Department of Health, on behalf of the Admiralty, took over the site and the concrete houses are being built on it. I suppose that some day the Department of Health will want Dunfermline to take over these inferior houses. I would have preferred the scheme outlined by Dunfermline Town Council to have been completed, instead of the houses that are now being erected under war conditions to accommodate Admiralty workers.
  I want to draw the attention of the Under-Secretary to another matter which I have dealt with in correspondence with him. It is in regard to education in Rosyth. From the beginning of the war, schools were taken over, and I believe that a proportion of the 3,000 children who are receiving no education, to whom the Secretary of State referred, are in that area. Schools were taken over and children turned out, and no provision has been made for their education—at least not for the education of all of them. The education authority has done the best it could to provide some education for the children there, but with the lapse of time

  1459
  parents are getting alarmed at the lack of educational facilities in that place. The Under-Secretary of State informed me in a letter some time ago that arrangements are being made whereby at any rate some education will be available to all the children in that area after the summer holidays. I hope he will look into this matter again, because the scheme which he outlined to me is not at all satisfactory. It means that we shall have the children scattered among halls and Admiralty buildings all over the place, and whoever the headmaster may be his opportunities for imparting serious education to the children will be seriously handicapped. I hope something better than the scheme outlined to me will be arranged, and that all the children in the Rosyth area given at least some education and as many as possible full education.
  I agree that there have been exceptional difficulties, but the fault is not on the shoulders of the Department of Health. It lies on another Department, which should never have reduced Rosyth Dockyard to a care-and-maintenance basis. If that had not been done, we should not have been faced with the problems we have to-day. Since the war began, schools have had to be requisitioned for purposes for which they were never designed and the children have had to suffer. These are matters which are of importance to my constituency, and while I am as ready as any other Member to take into consideration the difficulties that are facing all the Departments of the Government, including the Admiralty, I hope that at the end of the next 12 months we shall have a better report from the Secretary of State than we have had to-day.
  The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Westwood): I am trying to keep to the arrangement—
  Mr. Gallacher: Do we understand that this speech is going to close the Debate?
  The Temporary Chairman (Mr. Charles Williams): I called on the Under-Secretary of State, but there is no question of closing the Debate.
  Mr. Buchanan: I understood that the Debate was going on for six hours and
  1460
  that three hours would be given to this subject.
  The Temporary Chairman: I think we had better resume the discussion and not go into the length of the Debate, which is completely out of Order on the Matter before us.
  Mr. Buchanan: We do not not need offensive lectures. Some Members have been called upon who are not interested in the matter at all.
  Mr. Westwood: I am in agreement with those who have already expressed their views about the limited time allowed for the discussion of the Scottish Estimates. It is quite obvious that far too limited time is available for discussing the many problems of the administration in Scotland, and I entirely agree with what was said by the Secretary of State in opening the Debate, that we hope that in the scheme of reorganisation which is to be considered after the war it may be possible to get more time for the discussion of these administrative problems. I have nothing to complain of regarding the tone of the Debate to-day. Two complaints were raised. One was that the Secretary of State, while dealing with so many points, had limited himself to a quarter of an hour under the voluntary arrangement we have come to about speeches. That is a voluntary arrangement which was come to many years ago.
  Mr. Maxton: Not so many years ago
  Mr. Westwood: If it will help the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton), I will say several years ago. We came to an agreement voluntarily to ration ourselves in the time we occupy individually, in order to allow the maximum number of Scottish Members to take part in Debates on Scottish Estimates. As pointed out by the hon. Member for Dunfermline (Mr. Watson), the arrangement gives Scottish Members an opportunity to voice the views of their constituents and to express their complaint against the administration.
  Mr. Buchanan: It was an arrangement meant for the Scottish Members, was it not?
  Mr. Westwood: It was an agreement among the Scottish Members. Another complaint was that the Report of the Department was not available this year.

  1461
  Annual reports have been suspended during the war in accordance with the general instructions which apply to all such Government reports, but we are preparing a rough summary report and it will shortly be available to Members We hope that it will meet the point raised by the hon. Member for Bridgeton. I am sure he will agree that there are difficulties. So far as the Education Reports are concerned, there is a shortage of staff and staff are engaged on war work.
  Mr. Maxton: The hon. Member says there is a shortage of staff, but they are all on the pay list. There is no shortage of staff according to the Estimates.
  Mr. Westwood: They are still on our pay list, but in many cases they are doing other work, all part of the great war work in which we are engaged. I am merely pointing out that the absence of the reports is in accordance with the Government instruction and that exceptional treatment is not being meted out to Scotland.
  Mr. Lindsay: There is a third criticism, and that is that we cannot take three subjects on one day without failing to do justice to some of the subjects.
  Mr. Westwood: I have already discovered that the lack of time makes it absolutely impossible to deal with all the problems before us. It is impossible in the time at my disposal, for instance, to answer all the points that have been raised, but I give the same guarantee as I have given on other occasions, that lack of time in this House will not be an excuse for the Secretary of State or me not answering hon. Members. To-morrow we shall go over the report of the Debate carefully, and every question that has been put will be replied to by a letter signed by myself or the Secretary of State, and if hon. Members are then not satisfied with the answers they will still have at their disposal the Parliamentary procedure of putting down a Question on the subject. That is the line I take.
  The hon. Member for Dumbartonshire (Mr. McKinlay) raised a number of points, including the allocation of foodstuffs. I cannot refer to this point because that matter is under the control of the Ministry of Food. On the problem of the reception areas, two distinct points have to be kept in mind. Children and other members of the priority classes living in
  1462
  the openly built parts of Glasgow and other sending areas cannot be evacuated at the Government expense. Homeless persons are in a different position. When they arrive from other areas to stay with friends they get the benefit of the billet-ting allowance, though this allowance stops when their houses are repaired. It is true that people on one side of a street may be treated differently from people on the other side, but we must draw the line somewhere. There are very few cases where the town ends abruptly and the country begins. The town usually fades gradually into the country. We have tried to draw the line as reasonably as possible, having regard to the fact that the accommodation in receiving areas is limited. We have now the best expert advice we can get as to vulnerability, in drawing these lines, but if the hon. Member for Dumbartonshire thinks that the line has been badly drawn in particular cases I am prepared to discuss the matter with him to see whether, inside the general principles which I have laid down, adjustments can be made.
  We all welcomed the maiden speech by the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. McNeil). The knowledge which he shows on this problem will no doubt be extended to us in other Debates in this House, and his intervention will be an acquisition. He dealt with the housing problem, and I must say that it would be misleading the Committee if anyone suggested that there is not a greater shortage of building material to-day than before the war. We are not importing timber, and there is consequently a shortage of timber. There is also a shortage of labour. These matters are not so easily dealt with as at the outbreak of war, and present a problem which is exercise in the minds of all who are responsible for administration in Scotland. These problems were greater than those of England long before the war broke out, and I agree with the right hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Colonel Elliot) that if we get far behind in these matters, our problem becomes still greater. We have not enough building labour to do the work that was being done before. As a result of arrangements made with other Departments, we have been able to go on with houses which were started before the war, and we have already completed approxi-

  1463
  mately 16,000 of them. The figures for Glasgow are that in the first quarter of 1941, 212 such houses were completed, and the total number of houses completed in Glasgow, including Pennylee, since the war began is 1,781.
  Mr. McKinlay: Does the hon. Gentleman exclude from his consideration houses which were not available for the ordinary workers?
  Mr. Westwood: I am talking about the number of houses that have been completed.
  Mr. McKinlay: What is the number, excluding Pennylee?
  Mr. Westwood: I will let the hon. Member know. There are other arrangements in certain parts of Scotland by which houses are built, and some of these houses were started since the beginning of the war. The Secretary of State gave earlier the number of houses which were begun prior to the war, and which have been completed as a result of the special facilities. The right hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove referred to the problems connected with shelters and hospital accommodation. Those questions were raised also by the hon. Member for Cathcart (Sir J. Train). I am more than pleased that the matter of the available accommodation resulting from our emergency hospital scheme should be brought to the notice of the people of Scotland. The Secretary of State made special reference to it in his opening statement. We are anxious that the voluntary hospitals and the medical profession shall know that these beds are available and we want them to take advantage of that vacant accommodation and so help to reduce the waiting lists referred to by the hon. Member for Cathcart.
  Mr. Watson: Is the hon. Gentleman sure that these auxiliary hospitals are not being reserved for war casualties?
  Mr. Westwood: I say without hesitation that we have the beds available and that there is no justification for a waiting list. I am glad the matter has been raised, and I make an appeal to the hospital authorities of Scotland, and to the general public. We know that some people have antipathies against sending members of their
  1464
  family to hospital. We know also the difficulties in connection with the medical profession, who sometimes do not want to send their work into another hospital. All that I am saying is that bed accommodation is available in Scotland and that attention has been drawn to the particular point. I should like to stress this appeal to take advantage of the vacant beds, in order to relieve to the maximum the suffering which exists in Scotland at the present time.
  There were many points to which I wanted specially to refer, but I can only say again that every one of the questions raised on the Health Estimate will be properly replied to by correspondence. Many questions were also raised in connection with education. The hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. G. A. Morrison) asked what progress there had been towards using the schools for their normal purposes in Scotland, and whether it was true that they were being used by the military, by the A.R.P. and other organisations. We are doing our very best to get the maximum use of the school accommodation which was provided for educational purposes. There are some places where it is absolutely impossible to get the full use of the schools because they are the best type of building for A.R.P. purposes and because sometimes we have had to use them for rest centres, for which purpose they offer better accommodation than many church or other halls. But we are trying to get the maximum use of the schools for the purpose for which they were built.
  The question was also raised about the appointment of non-graduates to our schools. If the hon. Member does not mind, I will be only too pleased to see that he gets a full and a detailed statement on that subject, so as not to take up too much time during this Debate. I can assure him that the question of the appointment of non-graduate teachers is being carefully watched. There is an urgent demand for men with certain specialised qualifications for the Services, and that has reduced the number of graduates available for teaching in our schools. A number of teachers possessing these qualifications have been withdrawn from the schools, and as a result the Department have, in a few cases, approved the appointment to

  1465
  junior secondary departments of teachers not possessing the specialised qualifications which would normally be required. So far as the female side of our teaching staff is concerned, there is no compulsion that they should be graduates. We were continually working towards that higher educational qualification, but we have never been in the happy position of saying that so far as female teachers were concerned we must have 100 per cent. graduates. In all these cases, as I have already indicated, where we have had to use male graduates for other purposes, the Department's approval is provisional. There will be no slackening or lowering of the standard, and any appointments made are subject to two conditions: first, that the teacher is favourably reported on by His Majesty's inspectors, and second, that the appointment will be reviewed at the end of the war.
  It is impossible in the time at my disposal to deal with all the points raised, but a very important point was raised by the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Lindsay) who said that we really ought to set up a welfare department in connection with our educational system. I can assure him that in any project for the reconstruction of education most careful consideration will be given to any points that are brought to our attention, so that in the building up of the new system of education which must be part of our scheme of reconstruction after the war nothing will be left out, and we shall at least do our best to keep Scotland ahead so far as education is concerned.
  Mr. Lindsay: Cannot the hon. Gentleman answer the specific question I put to him? Is an examination going on in the Scottish Department, towards the reconstruction of Scottish education, comparable to that which has been going on for some months at the Board of Education?
  Mr. Westwood: All I can say is that the whole problem of reconstruction is being considered in Scotland as it is in England, but with this difference, that until decisions are finally arrived at we are being very cautious. We want to be in the happy position of telling the country what the conclusions of the Government are in regard to dealing with these problems, and so far no final decision has been arrived at. I can assure the hon. Member, and other hon Members who are in-
  1466
  terested in this problem, that all the points which are put up to us will receive consideration, so that when we come to organise the system of education after the war we shall at least be doing our bit in keeping Scottish education at the forefront. I thank all those who took part in the Debate for all the points that have been brought to our attention.
  Mr. Maxton: The hon. Gentleman has-promised to answer all those of us who have taken up specific points in the Debate, and I wonder if he could consider giving us, for the benefit of all concerned, a typewritten resumé from his Department of the sort of reply he would have given if time had not prevented him.
  Mr. Westwood: I am prepared to give consideration to that point.
  Mr. Gallacher: There has been very considerable talk to-day about the necessity of caring for the people who have been bombed out, and I would like to join with those who have spoken on that subject in urging the greatest possible care and attention to the health, especially of the women and children, of those who have been so affected. I have seen the accommodation that has been provided in the early stages before proper billeting could be arranged, and while much valuable service has been given by the various voluntary organisations, the conditions left very much to be desired. On previous occasions I have drawn attention to the fact that the Secretary of State himself was so impressed by the situation of many of these bombed-out people that he gave carte blanche to the responsible committee in one of the blitzed areas to go ahead with taking over houses or spending money freely in order to ensure their welfare. We are all agreed in support of that. But I want to say now, while we are discussing health, that it is not enough to talk in a learned way about houses and the different kinds of houses. What ought to be impressed on every hon. Member, and especially on the Department, is the fact that thousands and thousands of women and children who are living in the rotten, fetid slums are suffering worse from disease than those who have been bombed out. They are even more in need of urgent attention and are not getting it, right now, in the slums of Glasgow, in the slums of Dundee, in the slums throughout the country.

  1467
  We have all seen the terrible havoc of bombing and are immediately aroused, and our hearts palpitate with pity for those who have suffered. But we become so casual so far as the suffering of the slums is concerned. Is it not the case that the terrible ravages of tuberculosis are increasing? By all means, care for the bombed-out—we cannot do too much for the bombed-out—but why is everything possible not being devoted to the people who have been blotted out with that terrible disease under slum conditions? Why does the Secretary of State not go to some of these authorities and say, "Take hold of these houses in the country, these castles. Take the people out of the slums; give them room, give them a chance of health"? When one goes around and meets all kinds of people, one hears them tell stories of a son, or a husband, or a young daughter, who is lying in one of these places, just waiting the end. I heard during the week-end some really pathetic stories, heart-breaking stories, about visitations to some of these people suffering from tuberculosis, of people who had not the faintest hope, of young people in these slum conditions. It is a terrible thing to dread the coming of the bomb, but to have to lie, week after week, month after month, knowing that life is ebbing away and that nothing will be done—this is real tragedy, a tragedy that is going on in every slum in Scotland.
  This Debate is a shame and a scandal. It is treating Scotland without the slightest serious consideration—the health of Scotland, the welfare and education of the children. This should receive the maximum attention. You go around and about and find everywhere that the children's education is being neglected. You hear stories from mothers and fathers concerned about their children not getting education. And now, the question of the health of Scotland and the education of the children of Scotland are given three hours, and we are limited to 15 minutes speech each. That is, of course, a sensible limit so far as Members are concerned, but I never understood that it was intended that the Minister making a statement in introducing the Estimates would be limited to 15 minutes' that the Minister representing Scotland would have 15 minutes in order to review matters of health and education.
  Mr. McKie: It is well known that the arrangement about length of speeches is a voluntary one, which has gone on for several years, to give Members an opportunity to participate in the Debate.
  Mr. Gallacher: I know that. It is quite a sensible arrangement so far as back benchers are concerned, but I never understood that it applied to the Minister when introducing the Scottish Estimates. To introduce them in 15 minutes is a travesty, with the Minister saying that if he has time he will deal with this or that. There is not time to deal with the affairs of Scotland. Then, the Under-Secretary —they are a very tough combination— follows up the Secretary of State by saying that if he had time he would answer this question and that question, but that in view of the lack of time he would not answer anything but that someone in the Department would send the Member concerned a letter. That is not the way to deal with Scotland. We ought to have an abundance of time in which to discuss these problems with people who understand them. At least four times in a Session we should have full meetings of the Scottish Members in St. Andrew's House in Edinburgh to discuss the problems which affect the people of Scotland, and bring to these Sessions representatives of the local authorities affected by any particular problem which we might have under discussion. If we are to deal effectively with the problems of Scotland, why cannot we have these Sessions in St. Andrew's House in Edinburgh, or have them in Glasgow, and be in a position to invite representative men—men of skill, as the Secretary of State for Scotland calls the men who are going to deal with housing—on the particular subject we are discussing to be there to assist us?
  The Deputy-Chairman (Colonel Clifton Brown): The hon. Member is going quite outside the range of Supply at the present moment. What he is saying would involve fresh legislation, and it cannot be in Order.
  Mr. Gallacher: The only point I wish to make is that we are wasting money while we carry on in this way, and that in order to get better results for the people of Scotland, to ensure attention to their health, and care for the children, it is essential,

  1469
  and I demand it as a right for the Scottish people, that the Scottish Standing Committee meet, not here, but in a series of regular Sessions held either in Edinburgh or Glasgow, where we can get closer contact with the people, closer touch with their problems, and where we can also get the necessary assistance and advice from the people who are peculiarly and particularly interested in the matters under discussion.
  Mr. Buchanan: I wish to express my thanks to you, Colonel Clifton Brown, for your great kindness in calling me now that no one can reply. I know that an arrangement has been made to end this Debate, but I feel sore that not a word has been said about what is possibly the gravest matter in Scotland, the question of juvenile crime. I only rise to say that and to enter my emphatic protest. I feel terribly sore that there was no allowance made for the raising of what is possibly the outstanding subject in Scotland.
  Question put, and agreed to.

  UNCLASSIFIED SERVICES.
  DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR SCOTLAND (WAR SERVICES).
  Resolved,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £90, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1942, for measures in Scotland to deal with casualties and disease, for expenses connected with evacuation, for repair of war damage and for other services arising out of the war." [Note: £ 10 has been voted on account.]
  CLASS IV.
  PUBLIC EDUCATION, SCOTLAND.
  Resolved,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £5,102,061, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1942, for public education in Scotland, for the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, including sundry grants in aid, and for grants to approved associations and other expenses in connection with youth welfare" [Note: £5,400,000 has been voted on account.]
  CLASS VI.
  DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SCOTLAND.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £ 350,331, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come
  1470
  in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1942, for the salaries and expenses of the Department of Agriculture for Scotland, including grants for land improvement, agricultural education, research and marketing, expenses in respect of regulation of agricultural wages, a grant in respect of agricultural credits; certain grants in aid, and remanet subsidy payment" [Note: £175,000 has been voted on account.]
  The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. T. Johnston): Anyone who has ever considered social economy for the past century must have been struck by one notable and outstanding fact. That is the miserable status and conditions, and the low wage rewards, given to the workers in the primary industries, such as coal, agriculture and fishing. Upon the labours of the workers in these industries depends so much of our national comfort, yet, while the rewards given to other classes in the community enabled them to achieve at least a moderate standard of comfort, somehow the workers in the primary industries have lived always on the border-line of insufficiency and penury. During the war, however, we have learned a lesson—at least, I hope we have learned it—the lesson of the criminal neglect and waste that has occurred in connection with our agriculture. Never again must it be allowed to sink back into the condition in which it could be fairly and honestly described as a sweated industry.
  On the whole, with the exception of hill sheep farming, I believe that agriculture is now getting into a healthier economic condition. Farmers, farm workers, our agricultural executive committees, our Department of Agriculture, all have jointly made a magnificent response to the national campaign for more food production. In Scotland, we began this war with the lowest number of acres under the plough since agricultural returns were first published three-quarters of a century ago. We were cultivating 400,000 acres fewer than in 1866. We have gone up this year to some 450,000 acres more than in 1939. More than that, we have vastly increased mechanisation on the farm. Since June, 1939, the number of tractors in use in private hands in Scotland has nearly doubled. In addition, the Department of Agriculture have now about 800 tractors for hire, all staffed and equipped, and by harvest time we shall have a proportionate number of binders and a large number of threshing

  1471
  machines for hire. That, I believe, marks a substantial improvement in the mechanisation of our farms. Many farmers, small farmers particularly, could never have afforded to sink their capital in tractors and other modern implements, which they could use for only a few days in the year; but, through the agricultural executive committees, the Department of Agriculture is making these modern appliances available at very low rates indeed.
  Agricultural wages are higher than they have ever been before in our history. Men from the Pioneer Corps help in cutting bracken and in draining waterlogged land. The killing of hinds and stags in our deer forests has been doubled, and directions have been given to agricultural committees to ensure that any grazing land in these sporting wastes is made immediately available for sheep and cattle grazing. I would add that there is no deer forest which we shall not requisition if necessary and if we can get sheep stocks or cattle grazing stocks to place upon it. Beginnings have been made of new industries—canning industries, for example—in our rural areas. I do not want to advertise any particular firm, but I have sampled first-class canned venison stew from Inverness, which was most appetising and nutritious. I hope that in the days to come such industries will develop, so that venison, which previously was consumed only by the rich, will be made available for all. We have, as I said, been mechanising our farms. Also we have imported, or have arranged for the importation of, a very considerable additional amount of implements. I think we have increased our import of tillage implements seven or eight times, and our own production of tillage implements in this country has been more than doubled.
  But mechanisation by itself is not enough. Increased acreage under the plough is not enough; it is the spirit of the man behind the machine that matters. We are dependent, certainly, upon a good harvest, but subject to that and to an adequate supply of labour, about which I will say something in a few moments, I hope this year's crop will be the finest in our history and that the co-operative results of employers and employed, with the agricultural committees and others, will be amply rewarded, so that we shall be able to say that here at any rate is
  1472
  one bright spot in these dark and dull days. I have said that we must ensure labour for our harvest. Well, apart from the students who have been mobilised, the women of the Land Army, the recruitment of Irish labour, which is being arranged, and Italian prisoners—about 1,000 of whom, I hope, will be made available in the South of Scotland—we have an interesting experiment in two counties, Ayrshire and Fife, whereby, through the local village registers organised by the county agricultural committees, there will be volunteer labour to help with the harvest. I am glad to say that the number of part-time volunteers is increasing very rapidly indeed, and in addition to that, and supplementary to it if need be, the War Office has agreed that, subject to military requirements, soldiers may be made available to help local farmers with harvest work where no other labour can be obtained. Any farmer who wishes to make use of soldiers for this purpose should apply at once to his local agricultural executive committee. Indeed, for all forms of labour assistance immediate application to these committees should be made.
  What have been the results of this extraordinary effort of cultivation? I think everyone interested will be able to enjoy a share of the reward. We shall get over 1,000,000 tons of extra foodstuffs from the soil of Scotland this year as compared with before the war. Out of 450,000 acres of extra cultivation we shall, given a good harvest, have over 1,000,000 tons of extra food. In potatoes alone, on the basis of two stones of potatoes per week per household, we shall have an increase of 17 weeks' supply —that is equal to nearly one-third of a year's extra supply. As regards oats, we have an added acreage of 300,000, which has given us, the estimate, the equivalent of 1½lbs. of oatmeal per person per week after making allowance for losses by conversion and so on. Taking the population of Scotland at a maximum of 5,000,000—I know it is not that—we shall increase our production of oatmeal by the equivalent of 1½ 1bs. per week per person over pre-war production. These are remarkable figures.
  The Chairman of the Milk Marketing Board in Scotland estimates, I believe, that we shall be able to maintain our liquid milk supply in Scotland. There is,

  1473
  however, one black spot, and that is hill sheep farming. We are really facing the serious economic plight of a very deserving and a very hard-working class of the community. We are fully aware of the serious plight in many areas, although not in all, of the hill sheep farming industry. There has been a succession of difficult years and of low prices, both for lambs and ewes, and to that succession of difficult years we mast add last winter's severe storms at the lambing season, with their resultant great loss of lambs. I hesitate to give some of the figures which have come to me about the loss of lambs in certain areas, but it is higher than 50 per cent. in some areas, although in others, of course, it is less. It is true that in the early markets there has been an observable increase in lamb prices. That in itself, in my view, is indicative of the short supply and, indeed, of the difficult financial position of sheep farmers.
  The facts are indisputable, but the remedy is not so easy to discover. The average subsidy has this objection—at least, this objection has been offered— that if it is sufficient of a subsidy to meet the necessities of a man who has lost two-thirds of his lambs, it may be a gross over-subsidy and unnecessary to the man who has lost only one-third of his lambs. Last year the Government sought to meet the position, which was difficult enough then, by giving a subsidy of 2s. 6d. to hill sheep farmers for every breeding ewe. This year I am satisfied that the 2s. 6d. subsidy will not meet the situation. There has been an increase of 15 per cent. on wool prices, but no decision can be taken by the Government as to the amount of the subsidy or the method by which it can be given until the autumn lamb sales are concluded and price movements are known. But I give the warning that these autumn sale prices must be treated with reserve. They are in themselves not conclusive evidence upon which the amount of the subsidy can be given. I repeat the pledge given by the Government that it is our intention not only to provide conditions under which the survival of the hill sheep farming industry can be secured, but that the sheep farming community in the uplands and highlands of Scotland shall not only be allowed to survive but must be financed so that they will be able to play their part without this financial harassment. I had
  1474
  hoped, in the course of the Debate, to say something about mutton prices, though it is really a question for the Ministry of Food, but I have been informed to-day that a decision has not yet been arrived at. I can only assure hon. Members of this, that while we are fairly satisfied that agriculture is a going concern in Scotland as far as nine-tenths of it is concerned, we are aware of the difficulties of the sheep-farming industry, and as far as the Scottish office is concerned, we shall take every possible step we can to see that it shall be allowed to survive.
  Captain McEwen: We have listened to an interesting and, in the space of time allowed to him, comprehensive review of the agricultural situation in Scotland from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. We are often told that agriculture is a wide subject, and sometimes, even, that it is not one subject, but many. Possibly that explains the somewhat odd and one-sided picture which many people get from the Debates that take place from time to time in the House on this subject, for too prevalent, in any case, is the "stern-and-wild" and "mountain-and-flood" view of Scotland taken by those whose knowledge is mainly derived from the reading of Walter Scott. Hence, when our Debates revolve, as they often do, on questions such as hill-sheep farming, or deer forests, or the eradication of bracken, the holders of that view are confirmed in their erroneous impressions. But it ought to be possible, on an occasion like this, to take a wider view and to get a more complete picture of the whole, and to include not merely the bracken-covered slopes of Argyllshire, but also the fruitful plain of the Merse, not merely the high corries of Ross, but also the teeming fields of Ayrshire, the Lothians and the Kingdom of Fife
  What is the complete picture to-day? It is one which is full of hope for the future. We have upwards of half-a-million more acres of grassland under the plough, and many grass fields, which had been grass for 60 years or more and which escaped the searching agricultural programme of the last war, have now at last been ploughed up. The hay crop, which a month or so ago was causing certain head shakings and forebodings, has now turned out to be an excellent one, and is, I think, mostly stacked. As for the other

  1475
  crops, both cereal and roots, they are full of promise. In fact—and here, unfortunately, we come to the first snag—it looks as if we are in for a bumper harvest; but the question which the farmer is asking is, how it is to be taken in? My right hon. Friend mentioned certain steps which the Government are taking to provide labour for the harvest. He mentioned the University students and arrangements for importing Irish labour, and I was glad to hear him mention also Italian prisoners-of-war labour, too. But why should there be only 1,000 prisoners of war imported for this purpose? What proportion of the total number imported into this country are we to get in Scotland? It seems to me that 1,000 is a very small number. Why, in any case, should they be confined to the Lowlands alone? I should be grateful if my hon. and gallant Friend who is to reply to the Debate would tell me something about this.
  There are only three short questions I wish to ask. The first concerns cattle. I do not refer merely to the shortage of feeding-stuffs for cattle, which has been a burning question for some time past, but to the shortage of stock, especially now that the import of store cattle from Ireland is prohibited. How does this matter stand? And further—and relevant to that—what steps, if any, are being taken to curtail the slaughter of bull calves, which is undoubtedly going on at the present time? Secondly, at what stage have we now arrived in the survey of the agricultural possibilities and potentialities of land in Scotland? That was taken in hand some time ago, and I understand it is approaching completion now. Thirdly, is it possible for my hon. and gallant Friend to tell us anything about the present credit position of Scottish farmers generally as compared with the position in previous years? It would be interesting to know whether that position is more favourable or less favourable than it was.
  To conclude, although in general I am opposed to the statement on the part of His Majesty's Government of their war aims, for many reasons into which I need not go at this moment, I confess that I would be prepared to waive my objections in the case of agriculture. Farmers, perhaps more than any other section of the community, are anxious to know, to
  1476
  put it broadly, whether the interest which the Government are now taking in agriculture is likely to be maintained after the war is over. All that one can say to them when they ask that question is that one hopes it may be so. This may not be the occasion or the time for a reasoned statement on this matter, but I ask my hon. and gallant Friend to bear it in mind, and I hope that the Scottish Office, with the Ministry of Agriculture, will press upon the Government the importance of issuing some reassuring statement on this matter at the earliest possible moment.
  Mr. Mathers: I want to thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the excellent commencement he gave to the Debate. His statement was one that had so many satisfactory features that it is not likely to prove the same source of irritation on account of its brevity as his statement on health matters. I think we are entitled to thank my right hon. Friend for providing, by these brief statements, an opportunity to as many Members as possible to take part in the Debate and state the points in which they are interested. I want to raise a general question which might take for its title "The State as Landlord." I think it is very important for us in Scotland to remember how greatly the land in Scotland is controlled by, and is under the aegis of, the Scottish Office and the Secretary of State.
  We have at least 750,000 acres in Scotland owned by the Government, and most of that acreage is situate in the crofting counties. I want to ask how the State is discharging its duty and responsibility as landlord in respect of the land. From information which has reached me recently—and I have a number of correspondents who write to me from time to time about Highland agricultural matters in particular—the complaint is being made that by no means is enough being done in the crofting counties and on the small holdings which have been established by the Department of Agriculture for Scotland. I am told that in respect of drainage and bracken cutting a tremendous amount is needed to be done at the present time. Recently, I have been told about holdings. I will simply read the names of the estates which have been referred to: Kingsburgh, Bracadale, Scarrybreck, Kilbride, Raasay and

  1477
  Glenelg. These estates have been indicated to me as places where bracken cutting is urgently needed and where water-logged land is a real menace to the food production which we wish to see carried out at the present time.
  I know that the tenant can appeal to the Land Court to reduce his rent, but I do not think at a time like this that is the way to tackle the matter. The only way is to get down to the problem and to make the best use of the land by raising more crops and feeding more stock upon it. We know the work of the Land Court and the authority attaching to it, and I am sure we are looking forward to a continuance and extension of its great usefulness under the new Chairman, who was recently the hon. and learned Member for Greenock (Mr. R. Gibson), and whose successor has made a fine maiden speech in the Committee today. I should like to hear what the Under-Secretary has got to say on this point and to know that sufficient progress is being made with the land settlement in Scotland.
  I should now like to refer to the question of raising more stock. In many places more stock could be raised on the land. I am thinking particularly of the Islands and the transport facilities. We know that the MacBrayne Steamship Company is subsidised to provide a service for the Highlands and Islands, but at the same time they do not seem to equip themselves for offering an adequate service for the transportation of cattle to the mainland. On that account I am afraid the raising of cattle is dwindling in the Islands. Perhaps the Under-Secretary could give us statistics showing the stocks in different parts of the Highlands, and he might answer a specific question, by giving us the comparative statistics over the last few years for cattle stocks in say, the Island of Jura.
  I have made reference on many occasions to the deer forests, and I was glad to hear the declaration made by the Secretary of State about his determination to take over any deer forests which were necessary. He indicated that he would not hesitate to requisition deer forests which could be put to better use. That was spoken in his old Luskentyre manner. In regard to the killing of deer, it has been indicated to me in answer to questions in this House that
  1478
  a farmer is entitled to take his own measures against deer. I do not know what would happen to a smallholder if the landlord found that was being done. I am afraid in many cases that the small farmer would not have the necessary guns and ammunition to enable him to deal with the deer menace to his crop. I should like to ask whether there is any possibility of the Department of Agriculture assisting in the supply of weapons to those who are prepared thus to spend their time at night in an endeavour to protect their crops.
  We all feel the limitation of time, and I will therefore pass on to ask another question. What is the position in respect of the reappointment of the chief technical officer in the Department of Agriculture? As the Secretary of State knows, that appointment was set aside, as I understood it, a number of years ago because of the urgent need for economy. I believe that many of the difficulties which face my right hon. Friend and Scottish agriculture could be solved with the help of a properly equipped, fully authorised and fully competent chief technical officer. I was glad to hear the statistics of the Secretary of State in regard to food production and particularly in regard to oats. I was glad to hear him say there would be a considerable increase in the production of oats. I know what an important article of diet oatmeal has become, not only in Scotland, but South of the Border as well. In London this year I have had the experience, which has never happened to me before, of being able to obtain and I have availed myself of the opportunity of having my plate of porridge in the morning. In the Lothians—and the name "Midlothian" stands for the best oatmeal known throughout the world—the millers have been searching in vain during recent weeks for further oats to convert into oat- meal to meet the demands made upon them. They have failed and orders from South of the Border have had to be refused and the money sent back.
  I wish to raise another question in regard to food production which relates more particularly to my own constituency. I want the Secretary of State to make representations to the Ministry of Food. I am thinking of tomatoes, which are grown in large quantities, especially in the lower parts of Scotland. My constituency is a case in point. Growers complain that

  1479
  they have to stand up to much more difficult conditions than prevail in England. Their glasshouses are rated. That is not so on the English side of the Border, and, when it comes to fixing prices, the difference in the cost of producing tomatoes is not sufficiently taken into account by the Ministry of Food. I think it is the bounden duty of the Secretary of State to stand up for the Scottish growers of tomatoes and to make sure that they get a fairer deal than they have had up to now. The price to the grower is 9d. per lb. The wholesaler takes 3d., and the price to the consumer is 1s. 5d. It seems an absolutely unbalanced way of dealing with the prices. The producer should get far more and the wholesaler and retailer considerably less than they are getting. I am asking the Secretary of State, in his position as guardian of Scottish agriculture, to tackle the Food Ministry on the point. I would have asked with regard to drainage and farm workers' wages, but I merely mention these matters in order to give the Under-Secretary an opportunity of making any comment upon them that he may be pleased to make in his concluding speech.
  Colonel Sir Charles MacAndrew: I should like to say a word or two about the problem of potatoes. We all realise how essential it is to have as large an acreage as possible. There is a couple of points which must be decided at once and published now with a view to next season's crop, because the seeds for next season are actually being selected to-day. Not only must the area be maintained and increased, but the farmer must be given an ample return on his crop. The costs are rising, and labour is very difficult. More labour is required for potatoes than for practically any other crop. One way of helping the potato industry is to encourage the stock-breeding farmers to put down more land under potatoes, which they could do if they were given coupons to buy feeding-stuffs for their beasts. If that did not have the result which I think it would have and the potatoes were not produced, the coupons would not be given out and we should be left where we are, but it is worth thinking of because these stock farmers have the farmyard manure which is absolutely essential, and they would be encouraged to grow more potatoes if this method
  1480
  were adopted, giving them coupons in return for the acreage that they planted.
  The other thing that I want to speak about is the question of this falling scale, which is the maximum price the growers get. I should like to have dealt with the question of the merchants and the retail prices, but I do not think it would be in Order. The only reasonable way of working this scale is not by dates fixed long ahead but by dates fixed when the digging can begin. It is useless to make dates ahead and say that the price at a certain time in May or June will be so much when no one can tell what the conditions will be. In my constituency there are 3,000 or 4,000 acres of potatoes, and many of the early varieties. Do not let anyone get away with the idea that these early potatoes are a luxury. They are nothing of the kind. Certainly within recent days there have been higher prices stated in the newspapers for early potatoes, but they are potatoes which are being bought for seed purposes, and they do not give any indication of the general price ruling for early potatoes. In addition, in Ayrshire the land and the climate are absolutely suited for early potatoes but not for the later varieties. Once the potatoes are dug a very valuable gap is filled, because a second crop can be grown on the ground.
  The early potato industry is one that should be helped, and it could easily be helped if some sense were brought to bear on the fixing of the scale of prices. This year we were three weeks over the normal time, and before any early potatoes were dug we had reached the fourth price week. The result was that the growers did not get their costs of production. In addition the scale began on 17th May, and between that date and 21st June prices applied to an article which simply did not exist. Had the scale begun when digging was able to begin, prices would have corresponded to costs to some extent, and it would have been only reasonable and fair, because the costs when they started to dig were the same as for the corresponding week of last year, when costs of production were 30 to 40 per cent. lower. The point is quite simple, and it must be well understood by all connected with the industry.
  When the Minister replies, will he tell us why it was not considered necessary to have a veterinary representative on the

  1481
  Agricultural Improvement Council? I am sure it must have been an oversight, but I should like to ask for an assurance that a veterinary representative will be put on. Then we are very much worried about basic slag. I hope it is not true, but we have been led to believe that it is only the lower grades which are going to be sent to us and that all the higher grade basic slag is to be retained in England. I hope everyone connected with Scotland will join in protesting against this. It is up to all who occupy places of authority to fight for this. We will not stand for being palmed off with second-rate stuff.
  Mr. Garro Jones: Did the hon. and gallant Gentleman get that information from the horse's mouth, from the farmers in his constituency?
  Sir C. MacAndrew: I live in my constituency, and I am very much in touch with the farmers and get a lot of information. I am asking whether this information is right or wrong.
  Lord William Scott: The statement we have to-day from the Secretary of State will be received with mixed feelings by the agricultural community on the Scottish Border. Both the right hon. Gentleman and the Committee are fully aware of the really distressing and serious economic conditions of the Scottish hill farmer, but I doubt whether there is quite the same agreement in the Committee as to whether the words of the Secretary of State are likely to remedy the position very considerably. It is true that the opening sales of lambs have given promise of far better prices than those which the Scottish farmers have been used to receive during the last few years, but we must remember that so far only the low ground lambs have been brought into the sale ring, and it will not be for several weeks yet that the high ground or the hill lambs will actually come on the market. During the last few years there has been a far greater demand for low ground lambs than for those from the high ground pastures, chiefly because the low ground lambs require far less finishing for the market and the feeders, especially those in England, have been short of the necessary keep for maintaining and fattening backward lambs.
  It is not improbable that the increased acreage under the plough in England
  1482
  during the last three years will have a considerable effect on the demand of English feeders, and that there will be an increasing demand. I think it can be said that the decline of acreage under turnips in England during the years after the last war was one of the chief reasons for the tremendous distress of breeders on Scottish hill land. It is only a matter of time before the increased feeding capacity in England must incidentally produce a greater demand for our Scottish store lambs. This year the supply of hill lambs will be very short, and however great a rise there may be in prices, it will hardly make good or compensate for the small numbers that are coming forward and the big losses that the farmers have had to meet in the last two hard winters. Scottish hill farmers are as anxious as any other class of farmers to produce their full quota of production in the national war effort. If they succeed in securing a more satisfactory price for their lambs this year, it will assist them in the preparation of bigger and better crops of lambs in the years to come—years in which we can anticipate that the requirements of the feeders will be on an increased scale.
  Unfortunately, we have to consider two very unpleasant facts. The first is that during the last 10 or 15 years, possibly even longer, the feeding value, the pasturage value, of the hill sheep farms of Scotland has considerably deteriorated. I do not think there is any doubt about that. There are many reasons for it, and I have little doubt that the Secretary of State knows them as well as I do. One result of this deterioration in feeding value of the pasturage is that there has been an undoubted decline in the constitution of the sheep stocks in Scotland. I do not think there is any doubt that the sheep stocks, especially the Cheviot stocks, have not as good a constitution as they had 20 or 30 years ago. There is no denying the fact that one of the greatest difficulties with which the hill farmers have to contend is the fact that there has been an immense amount of sickness and disease, both in the Cheviot and in the black-faced stocks. The whole condition and constitution of these stocks must be improved before we can hope to secure both better and bigger crops of hill lambs to satisfy what we trust will be the increased demand of the low ground feeders

  1483
  in the years to come. We have good reason to hope that in the immediate future we shall not have to face such bad winters as we have had recently.
  Apart from that, there is only one thing that the hill farmers can do to improve their crops of lambs for the future. That is to improve their pasturage. Various methods can be adopted, and the Department of Agriculture are doing their best to assist. The most obvious method is increased use of lime and slag and assistance in draining and bracken cutting. I have little doubt that all hill farmers would be ready to make far greater use of this assistance from the Department of Agriculture if only they had the necessary finance to enable them to do it. Years of low uneconomic prices have put the hill farming industry into such very low condition that the average hill farmer lacks the necessary finance to enable him to maintain his pasturage and to improve it in the way which he knows is desirable, but if, as I hope, we are to secure better prices for our lambs this year and an increased subsidy for the ewes, I trust the hill farmer will have at his disposal a little more cash to enable him to do a great many things which he would have been only too pleased to do in recent years if the money had been available. I have little doubt of that, once he gets the money to enable him to do it and has a reasonable certainty that the money he spends both on the maintenance of his pastures and their improvement will give him a reasonable return in the shape of profits.
  I know that to-day we are dealing largely with rather a short-term view of the hill farming industry and are chiefly concerned with the lamb crops of the next year or two. Even so I hope that the Secretary of State will bear in mind that we cannot possibly hope for a real improvement in hill sheep farming or in pastures until we have once again restored to the hill sheep farms the numbers of cattle they used to carry in past years. I am well aware that faulty drainage and various other instances of what might be termed neglect have been to a certain extent responsible for the deterioration of the pasturages, and probably a considerable deal of it is due to overstocking, but I think there is no doubt that the chief cause has been the withdrawal of cattle
  1484
  from the lower grazings of the hills and I am convinced that we shall never see permanent prosperity restored to hill sheep farms until we once again have cattle back on them.
  I trust there is no truth in the belief that only low grade slag is to be available for Scottish farmers. There is a belief in some quarters that if only you have sufficient slag, it does not matter very much whether it is high grade or low grade, and that double the quantity of low grade slag will make up for its poorer quality. That may or may not be true, but the fact remains that transport is the chief expense in putting slag on the high ground farms, and if we are able to get high grade slag we shall get the value of the slag into the ground without the enormous extra cost of transporting greater quantities of low grade slag. The Secretary of State told us to-day that he hoped in the immediate future to be able to announce the new mutton prices, which may have an important bearing on the prices to be secured in the next week or two at the lamb sales in Scotland. Farmers on the Border have pressed me to find out when these mutton prices are to be made public, because on them depends largely what the feeders will pay the breeders in the lamb sales. It is a general belief that last year the date when the new mutton prices were given out was so late that any benefit that was secured—
  The Deputy-Chairman: Mutton prices are a matter for the Ministry of Food and not for the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Minister of Agriculture
  Lord William Scott: I will leave that point, but I hope the Secretary of State will press the Ministry of Food for an early announcement, because it will be of very great interest to our Scottish hill farmers. The Secretary of State told us frankly that the question of an increased subsidy for hill farmers is a very difficult one, and that if it was a fixed sum it was certain to be too much for one or too little for another. If there is that risk, I trust the Secretary of State will run the risk of making it too much rather than too little. There is no question that during the last ten or 15 years the consuming community in Great Britain have been getting their food extremely cheap from the agricultural interests, and if there is any risk of any hill farmer receiving a slightly too

  1485
  high subsidy for the year 1941, the Secretary of State can rest assured that even if he does receive too much it will in no way compensate him for the losses he has borne for the benefit of the consuming public in the past. I hope that the Secretary of State will really stand up for something which will not only benefit the hill farmer in 1941 but will create the possibility of his being able to do a great deal more for the output of mutton in the years to come. I hope we shall know our mutton prices fairly soon and that the Secretary of State will insist upon a really decent subsidy.
  Captain W. T. Shaw: War brings its changes, and I think the present occupant of the office of Secretary of State for Scotland is the third during the past two years. I do not know that these frequent changes tend to improve the administrative efficiency of the Department, but from what I have seen of the present occupant of the office, I hope he will continue there for a fairly long period. Looking back over the history of Scottish agriculture, I get the impression that it makes very little difference to agriculture in Scotland who is the Secretary of State. I am very sorry that the Minister of Agriculture has just gone out of the Chamber. It is the first time in my experience that the Minister of Agriculture has attended a Debate on the Scottish Estimates, and I should like to tell him if he were still in his place that what we suffer from is that our agricultural policy in Scotland is dominated by the agricultural policy of England; that it is the English necessities which are first considered and that the agricultural policy of Scotland is a sort of postscript to that of England. I hope that the Secretary of State for Scotland will put up a strong fight for an independent Scottish agricultural policy, and that the united efforts of the right hon. Gentleman and those who are assisting him will succeed in reaching that end.
  We should no longer have our policy tied to the apron strings of English agricultural policy. Our conditions differ materially from those of England. Reference was made to oats; we know that in the past the price of oats has not been fixed in Scotland upon a basis to give a fair return, in comparison with the price of wheat, which may be of importance to England but is of only secondary importance to the Scottish producer. We want to get rid of
  1486
  what the Secretary of State called the criminal folly of allowing agriculture in Scotland to fall into a bad state, and we must get Scottish agriculture upon a basis which will be satisfactory to the Scottish producer. I hope that the Secretary of State will set up a national agricultural committee in Scotland, composed of first-class farmers—not the most talkative farmers but those who get the best return for their farming. With such a committee to assist him, he will be in a much stronger position. I hope that he will consider that suggestion.
  I was very pleased to hear what the Secretary of State said about production. I have no doubt that agriculturists in Scotland will do their utmost to maintain and improve that output, but we must not take too short a view of this matter. We must not exhaust our land in endeavouring to get immediate production. We must proceed on the basis of preserving the fertility of our soil. We should see that there is a good supply of store cattle in Scotland in order to make farmyard manure. There are not enough store cattle to go round, and the slaughtering of calves which was permitted should not have been allowed to go on as long as it did. I admit that it might not have been an economic proposition to continue to feed certain classes of calves, but that should not weigh too heavily at the present time, and the question of allowing the slaughtering of calves for veal should be reconsidered immediately in present conditions, not only from the point of view of production but also from that of keeping the fertility of the land at the highest possible state. We need all the agricultural manure we can get, partly because it is difficult to obtain artificial manures at the present time. It is necessary not to take too short a view of these matters, and we have to look even beyond the end of the war. What would be the position of this country if the Lease and Lend Act policy of America were to stop immediately after the war? It would be very difficult for us to provide all our food, and our difficulties in that respect might increase when victory had been won.
  I listened to what was said on the question of labour. That is an important point. Last year we were very fortunate in our weather in Scotland: it is seldom that two such seasons succeed each other,

  1487
  and I hope that we have sufficient labour to gather in the great crops that seem to be coming into maturity. I would like the Secretary of State to tell us whether his soldier labour, which will be available for the harvest, will be paid, and whether the soldiers will be allowed to retain any extra remuneration given to them by the farmers. It is essential that agriculturists should not be disgruntled. In my constituency there have been several cases of first-class agricultural land being taken by the Air Ministry or the Admiralty. I do not complain, because I recognise, and so do my constituents, that the first necessity is that the war effort should not be impeded and that everything possible should be done to assist it. We might, however, have an assurance that the Scottish Department of Agriculture is keeping a sharp look-out upon other Departments to see that they do not unnecessarily take high quality agricultural land when other land is available.
  In my constituency there are two highly cultivated farms in the vicinity of Carnoustie, producing sugar-beet and other crops in large quantities. It is proposed to take them over for the Admiralty. I do not know whether it will be essential to do so, but I hope, before that policy is proceeded with, that careful inspection will be made to see whether other land is not available. I hope that care will be taken to see that no unnecessary injury is done to the crops that are now growing. Within the last fortnight there has been a survey which has, I believe, done a great deal of harm to growing crops upon local farms and I want to be sure that in this case, and other similar cases, no wanton injury will be done to the agricultural industry.
  Mr. Sloan: It is unfortunate that when there are so many people waiting to give advice there should be such a short time to devote to this Debate, and I wonder what the farming community will think about our having to discuss this subject in the course of a short Sitting. There is, however, one thing the farming community in common with others have learnt by this time, and that is that they are very important people during a war. They spring right into- the limelight and become very important people indeed. One of the reasons for the
  1488
  parlous state of agriculture in Scotland is what happened in other times, when the miners and other industrial workers, working long hours for very low wages, found their production exported sometimes at even less than the cost of production, low as it was, the exchange so acquired bringing in food produced by ill-paid farm workers. I want to say to the Secretary of State for Scotland that it will be indeed a pity if he is legislating only for war-time and is not attempting now to accomplish something to remove the evils from which Scottish agriculture has been suffering during the course of the years.
  I remember that we had an intensive Debate on agriculture during the last war. The Secretary of State has given us some figures and has said we are producing one-third more potatoes than we did in the last war. As a matter of fact, I do not think we are doing nearly so much as we did in the last war; at least, speaking from this bench quite recently, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), who is a specialist and who speaks with considerable authority on agriculture, stated that we were not doing nearly as much as was done in the last war. At any rate I do not think it can be argued that we are doing any better. There are some directions in which we are inevitably doing considerably worse. Because of the wild attacks upon our merchant shipping, we are unable to import the necessary feeding-stuffs, and cattle have had to be reduced, so that although it is unpreventable, in that aspect of agriculture we are doing very much worse than we did in the last war. I think it is very questionable even to-day whether we have as much land under the plough as we had in 1916, after two years of war. Without attempting to disparage anything which the Government or the agricultural community have done —I think they have done wonders—we hope that a great deal more will be done, because it will all be necessary in the coming winter. I know the immediate requirement of the present moment is food and still more food, but I think we also ought to make provision for the future, so that agriculture will never again have to go through the phase it has gone through during the last few years.
  What guarantee are we offering the farming community that we shall not

  1489
  throw them overboard immediately the war is over? I am a miner, and I had some experience after the last war when the Government immediately decontrolled the coal industry. They carried it on through the war period, but immediately the war was over they decontrolled the coal industry and threw the mining and industrial communities of this country into a state of semi-starvation. We would like to know the attitude and the programme of the Government in regard to agriculture in Scotland when the war is over—not merely for present needs, but immediately the war is over. I would also like to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what provision will be made for security of tenure. I know that the landlords' interest is very well represented in this House. I do not think many speeches will be made to-day from the opposite side on behalf of the tenant farmers. I should like to ask the Secretary of State what steps, if any, have been taken to provide security of tenure for the farmer after the war is over. We know the ramp that took place in farms after the last war.
  The Deputy-Chairman: I am afraid the hon. Member is now going into questions concerning legislation after the war is over. That, of course, is out of Order to-day.
  Mr. Sloan: I accept your Ruling, Colonel Clifton Brown, though I am very sorry, because I have something very important to say on this matter regarding something that is taking place to-day, and not something that will take place after the war. As leases expire or are broken to-day, tenant farmers are being faced with demands for violent increases in rent. I do not know whether that comes into the question, but so far as the farming community is concerned it is a very serious business, and surely the Government should be able to take some steps to prevent any ramp in regard to the question of raising rents during the period of the war. I have had it brought to my notice on many ocasions that attempts have been made to impose increases of rent on tenant farmers even where the lease cannot be broken. It is necessary to instil confidence into the farmers and prevent the landlords from working their dirty dodges. I cannot find any excuse for allowing the landlords to take advan-
  1490
  tage of the war to feather their own nests by increasing rents.
  I would also like to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his intention regarding smallholders in Scotland. I know that the Secretary of State for Scotland has a warm heart for this type of people, and had long before he came to the House of Commons. It is a tragic situation in which they find themselves. It goes without saying that they have been badly treated, and it appears to me that that is so because ample and sympathetic consideration has not been accorded to them. Many of them are dependent, to a considerable extent, on their pigs and poultry, and the restriction on feeding-stuffs is rapidly rendering them bankrupt. These are the type of people who were encouraged to go into farming. Many of them are ex-Servicemen, relics of the last war, people who expended their all in establishing themselves in these small holdings. Now, through this sudden decision on the part of the Minister of Food and the Minister of Agriculture, to cut off feeding-stuffs from them, they are placed in a parlous condition. As regards the relation of this decision to shipping space, if anyone can explain tome the reason why it is better to bring in a cargo of rotten eggs to the exclusion of a cargo of good feeding-stuff to produce good eggs, I would like to know it. By this decision, eggs are thrown completely off the breakfast table, and we have these smallholders of ours, anxious to produce eggs, who have lost their livelihood through this decision on feeding-stuffs and who are now in a state of bankruptcy.
  Before I finish I wish to say a word regarding the wages of agricultural workers. We have had speeches made on behalf of the sheep farmer. We know that subsidies are handed in every direction to the farmer; it is a tremendous figure. But I do not hear from the other side of the House—and they should be interested in the agricultural worker as much as the farmer—any demand being made for a better status for the agricultural worker. Unless you have happy, satisfied, agricultural workers on your land, I do not care how much machinery you may have, or how much capital you have invested in your land, how much sunshine and rain you get, you are still in the same difficulty. We hear a great deal about munition workers. Is the farm

  1491
  labourer a munition worker or not?. Is the man who produces the material to feed the guns a munition worker, and a man who produces food to feed the man who feeds the guns not a munition worker? The scandalous wages that are being paid to agricultural workers in Scotland to-day are a shame and a disgrace-to the industry. If the Minister of Labour says that £4 2s.6d. is a fair minimum wage for a docker, ought not the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Minister of Agriculture also be prepared to say that £4 2s. 6d. is a fair wage for an agricultural worker? I say to the Secretary of State for Scotland, and he can pass it on to the Minister of Agriculture, that in relation to wages they are badly out of step with the Service Ministers. Employees under the Ministry of Aircraft Production, the Admiralty, the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Mines all have far higher wages than the skilled workers on the farms; arid I hope something will be done, apart from providing' subsidies for farmers, to deal with this question.
  Sir R. W. Smith: A suggestion was made earlier in the Debate that the Scottish Standing Committee should sit in Edinburgh to discuss Scottish questions. It seems a most unsatisfactory way to discuss Scottish agriculture on an Estimate, because we are precluded from dealing with anything which requires legislation, while one hon. Member has been advised that he could not raise the question of the price of an agricultural commodity because it was a matter for the Ministry of Food. It is of enormous importance that we should be able to go over the whole field of Scottish agriculture. Unfortunately, the speech of the Secretary of State had to be short. He told us what had happened, but he gave us little idea of what was to be the policy of the Department in the next twelve months. That is the one thing that the farmers want to know. The Minister may not have settled the prices for agricultural commodities, but surely, as the Minister responsible for Agriculture in Scotland, he is able to approach the Minister of Food about prices. There is a great danger that the Minister of Food may look at this matter more from the point of view of England than from that of Scotland. Surely it is correct to ask the Secretary of State for
  1492
  Scotland to press certain points in regard to prices in Scotland?
  When the prices of cattle were settled it was decided that there should be a fall in price between July and November this year. I understand that that reduction amounts to over 10s. We were told that this was an ordinary seasonal reduction. I have figures here showing the seasonal reductions for the years 1934 to 1938. The greatest seasonal reduction in that period was one of 6s. That occurred between the third week of July, 1937, and the third week of November, 1937. In all the other cases the reductions were quite small, amounting in many cases to only a matter of pence. A reduction of 10s. means that the farmer will get £5 less for each 10 cwt. beast put into the market, and it will be hard for him to carry on in that case. Reference was made to farm workers' conditions. The Secretary of State opened his speech with some remarks on that subject, with which I agree; and I agree with what the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Sloan) said about it, too. But it is impossible for the farm worker to receive higher wages unless the farmer has higher profits.
  Another point is that the farmer likes to be taken into the confidence of the Ministry. There is nothing worse for agriculture than a feeling of uncertainty. I would like to draw attention to what took place with regard to the culling of herds. Farmers were told in June that they must cull their herds very drastically.
  Mr. Johnston: By whom were they told that?
  Sir R. W. Smith: This appeared in many Scottish papers. It seems to me that the Department ought to read the Scottish papers in order to be aware of what is being said, and when the papers are wrongly informed they ought to draw attention to the fact. I have here the "Scottish Farmer" for 5th July—but perhaps I had better not take up the time of the Committee in reading it. I will take the matter up with the Secretary of State. I will only say now that it is most necessary for farmers to know where they stand. With regard to wages, the cost of labour to farmers has gone up considerably. Men are being called up, and there are only a few obtainable; and naturally the farmer has to pay higher wages. It is a very serious thing for

  1493
  him. As he has so few men and as farm labour is so difficult to get, he has to pay much more. It is all a question of funds. If the farmer gets good enough prices to pay higher wages, nobody is more willing to pay them.
  Then there is the question of the ploughing-up of the land. Many Government Departments are large landowners. Extraordinary difficulties have arisen where, after a compulsory order to plough up certain land has been made by the local committee, the land is then sold to a Government Department. The Department cannot be ordered to plough up the land. That seems very unfair. I appeal to the Secretary of State to impress upon Government Departments that they must not put the local committees in such an awkward position, and that they must not let the country down. This point is of vital importance. I would ask the Secretary of State to see that we get the land ploughed up where it is required, and that the orders of the local county agricultural committees, which were set up by him, are obeyed.
  Major Thornton-Kemsley: At the end of last week there was a meeting of the joint: labour committee of the agricultural executive committee of the counties of Aberdeen and Kincardine to discuss harvest labour. The committee had before the requisitions for extra harvest labour from 1,364 farmers in those two counties. These requisitions were those that had come in up to 24th July. They are still coming in. Those farmers in two counties asked for 2,100 more labourers than they have at present for getting in the grain harvest. That is making no mention at all of the potato harvest. It is a rather serious position, but I am glad to say that, under the terms of a War Office letter which was issued by the Adjutant-General's Department during the last few days, the position is very much better than at one time seemed likely. There are still, however, a great many farms in Scotland around which there are no military units. So military labour will not be the only solution, and my first hope is that the Secretary of State will find some means of gathering in the harvest which Parliament and the country have begged farmers to raise.
  We are debating to-day the affairs of a country which has an area of 30,000
  1494
  square miles, by far the greater part of which is producing timber or food which is urgently required to help our war effort. We have more than 600 square miles of inland lochs and rivers which contribute to the nation's larder, and we have a long sea coast from which for generations seafaring men have dared the dangers of the deep in order to get for us our fish. Here is a vast productivity. Are we stimulating and encouraging this productivity as we ought? I am bound to confess that I have felt for a long time that we are being held back by what is, fortunately, an easily-remedied weakness in our political organisation. Scottish rural economy is so important to our national war effort that it ought to have the undivided Ministerial attention of one man, charged with the duty of answering to the Secretary of State and to the House of Commons for every aspect of our rural production. Instead of the Joint Undersecretaries of State that we have at the moment, I want to see two Parliamentary Secretaries of equal importance, but with different but well-understood functions. One might be Parliamentary Secretary for Scottish Education and Health and the other Parliamentary Secretary for Scottish Rural Production.
  I am well aware that this may be the intention of the present division of responsibility but whatever the intention may be the position in effect is not what is desired. Rightly or wrongly, the Department of Agriculture for Scotland, which contains, as every one in this Committee will admit, some very able men, has been gaining the reputation of being autocratic. I am afraid that this is a prevalent tendency in these bureaucratic days. Parliament has ever been the people's safeguard against powerful factions. The monarchy, the monastery and the military—each has found its check in this Assembly of the people's representatives. The remedy has usually been to increase Parliamentary control. I am sure that must be done here. The Department lacks the inspiration and control of a Parliamentary head, and the country is beginning to sense an absence of vision and direction in our rural policy. Let me give three examples of the kind of thing I mean. I have taken them almost at random. They seem to me to be matters upon which concentrated study ought to be directed and in some cases vigorous action taken.

  1495
  First, there is the question of hill sheep. The Secretary of State has recognised that hill-sheep farming is the one exception to the healthier trend of Scottish agriculture. It is a fact that we are failing to use the hills of Scotland to anything like their full capacity as sources of food supply. My right hon. Friend has spoken with great sympathy and understanding about this aspect of our affairs, and other hon. Members have referred to it. I spoke at some length on the question of hill sheep in the Food Production Debate on 3rd April, and every word that I said then applies to-day. I hope my right hon. Friend will do me the honour of referring back to what I said at that time.
  The second thing I want to speak about is garden produce. I know from my own observation how well Scotland's gardens have responded to the appeal for increased production made by the Scottish Gardens and Allotments Committee of the Department of Agriculture. They have done so well that in many cases there are indications that there will be a considerable surplus of perishable green vegetables. The planning has been good, but it has not been good enough, and it seems to me that we must build something better for next year. What I would like to see is the formation of a Scottish Garden Produce Association working under Government aegis, through a Director-General, with a small advisory council, with an Assistant Director in each county or each group of counties, who would co-ordinate the work of existing Garden Produce Committees and encourage the formation of new ones. An association of this nature would establish its own preserving, packing, and grading centres, arrange for the collection and distribution of produce, and for its direct disposal or for its sale on a percentage basis through existing trade organisations.
  My third point is the question of youth service camps. I am sure that we need someone to take his coat off and get down to a detailed examination of the possibility of youth service camps for Scotland, camps at which town and country lads would spend six months—
  The Chairman: I am afraid that is not in order on the Vote now before the Committee.
  Major Thornton-Kemsley: I apologise for introducing the matter, which is very near my heart and which I had hoped was in Order in this Debate. Let me say, in conclusion, that there is on general grounds an overwhelmingly strong case for the creation of a separate Ministry of Scottish Rural Production. The Select Committee on National Expenditure, in Part I of their Sixth Report, correctly appraise the importance of realising that the present opportunity is not merely to produce short-range results of immediate value to the country's war effort, but to effect a lasting improvement in the position of British agriculture. This can be achieved only with forethought and planning ahead. For this planning, as well as for the continued expansion of rural production, Scotland's importance demands the whole-time Parliamentary direction of the whole of her rural economy.
  Major McCallum: The Secretary of State gave us a very rosy picture of the state of agriculture in Scotland as a whole, but I am afraid the state of agriculture in that part of the country which I have the honour to represent does not show that same rosy picture. One of the greatest difficulties with which we have to contend is shortage of labour. I was very pleased, and I am sure my constituents will be very pleased, to hear that there is a possibility of using university students and, maybe, Italian prisoners of war for work on the land. I would suggest to my right hon. Friend that the prisoners of war might very well be used to carry out the work of national importance in the Highlands about which we all know, but cannot speak. Why not let the prisoners of war get on with that work, and leave the men who have been born and bred on the soil of the Highlands to do the farming? At present many of the men who have been born and bred on the soil, who, by virtue of their loyalty before the war, joined the Territorial Forces, have now been called up as well as the men who have registered.
  We are told that the agricultural committees are forming gangs or squads to go about the country and do work here and there, but in that part of the Highlands which I represent farms are far too widely scattered for gangs to be able to cover even as few as 10 or 12 farms. On most

  1497
  of the farms the farmer and his wife work all day with the assistance of one man. That extra man has in many cases now been taken away, and the farmer has to have some substitute, such as a member of the Women's Land Army. Volunteers from the Women's Land Army have been very successful in the big farms in the Lowlands, where you can easily replace three men by three women. But in Argyllshire a woman cannot carry out the work of that one man. It is physically impossible for her to lift great weights and do those other necessary jobs. I beg the Secretary of State to make some special arrangements for districts like Argyllshire. It has been done by the Minister of Food, who, for the purpose of the egg rationing scheme, has classified the district as a special area. Would it not be possible to treat the area as a special area from the labour point of view? It is shortage of labour from which the hill sheep farmers and dairy farmers are suffering. If it could be arranged, my farming constituents would be doubly grateful to my right hon. Friend. Last spring, when we were short of tractors, I sent a telegram to the Under-Secretary, and within a few days those tractors were forthcoming. We are grateful for assistance of that sort, but it is labour that is the all-important question in the constituency that I represent.
  The Joint Under Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Wedderburn): It is not surprising that a good deal of attention should have been paid to the position of the hill-sheep farmer. It is the branch of Scottish agriculture which is least remunerative and the only one of which it can be said that its present condition is unsatisfactory. The problem is a long-term one. My Noble Friend the Member for Roxburgh (Lord William Scott) said that for some years conditions and the state of the pastures in hill-sheep country had been deteriorating. I believe, in fact, one might say it has been deteriorating for the last 100 years, during which the land has been continuously drained of its fertility and very little put back into it. It has been over-stocked with sheep and denuded of cattle. Its reconstruction, or the establishment of a better kind of agriculture in those districts, is a matter which will take a long time. Measures designed to that end will involve questions of policy and possibly of legislation which cannot well be discussed in Committee of Supply. I can only speak now of
  1498
  measures which are being taken to mitigate the unhappy condition of the hill-sheep farmer. You cannot give a price for mutton and wool which will be sufficient for the products of the hill-sheep farm without making those prices excessive for other kinds of sheep. Therefore, it was decided last year to pay a subsidy of half-a-crown on every breeding ewe. My right hon. Friend has explained that we are not yet in a position to say what the nature of this subsidy will be this year, but the trend of prices as shown by lamb sales must be fully taken into account. High prices may be created by the scarcity caused by the general death rate in the storms of last winter.
  We have also this summer introduced a long-term measure designed to increase the numbers of hill cattle, not only for the sake of having more cattle and producing more meat, but also putting back a little more fertility into Highland grazing and helping to keep down the bracken. The subsidy is to be paid at the rate of £2 on every breeding cow that grazes on the hills for eight months of the year. It is confined to Galloway and Highland cattle and their first crosses with a Shorthorn bull. It will take time to re-populate those districts with cattle. We have so far received 268 applications for this subsidy, and they cover between 4,000 and 5,000 cattle.
  With regard to the clearance of bracken, a measure has this year been introduced for paying one-half the cost to everybody who is willing to undertake the cutting of bracken either by hand or by means of the bracken-cutting machines of which the Department has ordered 150. So far, owing to supply difficulties, I do not think that more than 50 or so have been delivered. We have applications this year for the payment of grants for the cutting of 43,000 acres of bracken, and I hope that the figure next year will be considerably improved.
  The hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Mathers) asked me a number of questions about our settlements in the Highlands and deer forests. We have not made any new settlements since the war began. Eighty-seven old ones have been enlarged, but no new ones are being made during the war. With regard to the chief technical officer who was engaged in land settlement services, instead of filling the vacancy when it occurred 10 years ago a

  1499
  new organisation was set up. Three additional land officers were appointed, each of them with a salary not far short of that which was paid to the chief officer. Each of these officers is the chief technical officer for purposes of land settlement in his own area. With regard to deer forests, I cannot give the figure for June for which the hon. Member asks, but, taking the deer forests as a whole, they are carrying 95,000 sheep and 3,000 cattle, which is about double what they were carrying before the war.
  I should like to turn from the Highlands, which provide us with most of our troubles, to the Lowlands, which provide us with most of our food. The hon. Member for Linlithgow asked us to make representations to another Department about the price of tomatoes, which will certainly be done. In fact, the other Department has expressed its willingness to consider the matter, but the growers of tomatoes must submit a statement about their costs, and they have been a little dilatory in doing that. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Bute and North Ayrshire (Sir C. MacAndrew) was very much up in arms because he thought he might not get any basic slag.
  Sir C. MacAndrew: No, the higher grade basic slag.
  Mr. Wedderburn: The higher grade basic slag is all produced in the neighbourhood of Bilston. This is not a question between Scotland and England, it is a question between those parts of the United Kingdom which have the good fortune to be in proximity to Bilston and those other parts of the United Kingdom, including Scotland, which are unlucky enough to be at a far distance from that centre of industry. This is a question of transport. We are as anxious as we can be to get the 20,000 tons of high grade slag we got last year, but it is a matter which must be discussed with the Ministry of Transport. We must discuss the difficulties our transport system has to bear and try to arrive at the best conclusion in the general public interest. In regard to my hon. and gallant Friend's question about veterinary surgeons, I would refer him to the Parliamentary answer which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Ayr Burghs (Sir T. Moore) last week.
  1500
  My hon. Friend the Member for Central Aberdeen (Sir R. W. Smith) said a number of things about beef cattle. I think there has been perhaps some confusion about Press statements on this matter in recent months. What the Secretary of State has often said was that next winter there would probably be no rations at all for the beef cattle, and I think there will be no rations for beef cattle this winter. Therefore farmers must keep only as many cattle as they can grow food for on their farms. That is the sort of statement which has to be repeated, because it is one to which some farmers are apt to pay not as much attention as they ought, and if anybody kept on a lot of beef cattle in the hope that he would get as much cake as last year, he would be badly landed.
  Sir R. W. Smith: I was unable to quote my reference. May I say that it was from the "Scottish Farmer" of 5th July that I took the statement, and there was no question of this only being surplus?
  Mr. Wedderburn: I am telling my hon. Friend what our policy is and always has been, but subject to that we want arable farmers to keep as many beef cattle as they possibly can. I think possibly they will be able to keep more than they have, on account of the largely increased fodder crops which they are growing, but this year we are faced with an acute shortage of Irish stores because of foot-and-mouth disease. Of the 260,000 store cattle normally required for feeding in Scotland in any one year 120,000, or nearly half, have been imported from Ireland. Since this foot-and-mouth disease has been raging in Ireland and imports have been banned since January, it is not surprising that our beef cattle population this year shows a decline. I wish I knew what was going to happen in Ireland about this foot-and-mouth disease, how much longer it is going to last. If it is stamped out soon we may expect a very rapid increase in the number of our beef cattle. If not, it will take time to make up the deficiency by the increased breeding of home-raised stores.
  I was glad to hear that some of my hon. Friends were interested in preventing the slaughter of calves. I have consulted the Farmers' Union about this, and we have also consulted the Ministry of Food, and it may perhaps Be possible to arrange

  1501
  some combination between the store markets and fat stock markets by which calves brought to be slaughtered may be found a home with farmers who are able to feed them as store cattle. It is considered that calves are not being slaughtered to an undue extent, but if there has been any increase it has been because the number of dairy cows is increasing so much.
  In regard to feeding-stuffs, something was said about them last week by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, during the Food Production Debate. We do not propose to give any ration to arable farmers for their beef cattle, although, as the Minister indicated, it is possible that we might issue a ration in certain cases in exchange for the sale of oats. We expect to be able to give a generous ration for dairy cows. The details have not yet been finally worked out, but I think it will be more favourable than was the case last year. Most of our dairy farmers are this year growing an immensely increased quantity of food for their own cows, and the number of cows has increased since the war began by 13,000. It is not unreasonably optimistic to hope for a rise in our milk production next year.
  Before I conclude, I would like to reply to the question about Italian prisoners. The fact is that most parts of Scotland are either prohibited areas or districts where it is not considered desirable, for military reasons, to have Italian prisoners of war, and on these and other grounds we may not be able to make extensive use of this source of labour. I am sorry if I have not been able to give longer replies, but it may be said generally that the production of food in Scotland is very much greater this year than anybody expected a year ago. If harvest prospects are realised, the increase will be very considerably greater, and this production of food in time of war should enable us to pursue a way of life resulting in greater prosperity and greater stability in peace-time.
  Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again," put, and agreed to.—
  [Major Dugdale.]
  Resolutions to be reported upon the next Sitting Day.
  Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon the next Sitting Day.

SOVIET UNION AND POLAND (AGREEMENT).
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."— [Major Dugdale.]
The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Eden): I must apologise to the House for trespassing on its time, but when an international event of importance occurs, I think it right that the first public announcement of that event should, if possible, be made in Parliament itself. I am very glad to be able to inform the House that an Agreement between the Soviet Union and Poland was signed at the Foreign Office this afternoon. Under that Agreement the Soviet Government recognise that the Soviet-German Treaties of 1939 as to territorial changes in Poland have lost their validity, while the Polish Government declare that Poland is not bound by any agreement with a third party directed against the Soviet Union. Diplomatic relations will be restored at once and Ambassadors exchanged. The two Governments agree to render each other support of all kinds in the war against Hitlerite Germany. The Soviet Government agree to the formation of a Polish Army on Soviet territory. This Polish Army will be subordinated, in an operational sense, to the supreme command of the Soviet Union. Attached to the Agreement is a Protocol by which the Soviet Government grant an amnesty to all Polish citizens now detained on Soviet territory, either as prisoners of war or on other grounds, as from the resumption of diplomatic relations. Here, perhaps, I may say that arrangements for immediate resumption are being made.
After the signature of the Agreement, I handed General Sikorski a Note in the following terms:
"On the occasion of the signature of the Polish-Soviet Agreement of to-day's date, I desire to take the opportunity of informing you that in conformity with the provisions of the Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland of 25th August, 1939, His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have entered into no undertaking towards the U.S.S.R. which affects the relations between that country and Poland. I also desire to assure you that His Majesty's Government do not recognise any territorial changes which have been effected in Poland since August, 1939."
General Sikorski handed me a reply in the following terms:

1503
"The Polish Government take note of your Excellency's letter dated 30th July, 1941, and desire to express sincere satisfaction at the statement that His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom do not recognise any territorial changes which have been effected in Poland since August, 1939. This corresponds with the view of the Polish Government, who, as they have previously informed His Majesty's Government, have never recognised any territorial changes effected in Poland since the outbreak of the present war."
I want to say a word in connection with the Note which I handed to General Sikorski. It is stated in paragraph 1 of the Soviet-Polish Agreement that the Soviet Government recognise the Soviet-German Treaties of 1939 concerning territorial changes in Poland, as having lost their validity. The attitude of His Majesty's Government in these matters was stated in general terms by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on 5th September, 1940, when he said that His Majesty's Government did not propose to recognise any territorial changes which took place during the war, unless they took place with the free consent and good will of the parties concerned. This holds good with the territorial changes which have been effected in Poland since August, 1939, and I informed the Polish Government accordingly in my official Note. As to the future frontiers of Poland, as of other European countries, I would draw attention to what my right hon. Friend said in the speech to which I have referred. I am sure the House will agree with me that both parties are to be warmly congratulated on the signature of this Agreement. This is an historic event. It will lay a firm foundation for future collaboration between the two countries in the war against the common enemy. It will, therefore, be a valuable contribution to the Allied cause, and will be warmly welcomed in all friendly countries, and not least, I feel sure, by public opinion throughout the British Empire.
Mr. Noel-Baker: May I respectfully congratulate the Foreign Secretary on the personal service he has rendered in helping to negotiate this very notable Agreement? Does he think it appropriate and desirable to express to the Governments of our two Allies the appreciation of the Members of this House of the statesmanship and generosity they have both shown?
Captain McEwen: Am I right in assuming that, as a result of this Agreement, no guarantee of frontiers in Eastern Europe will be undertaken by His Majesty's Government?
Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir. The exchange of Notes which I have just read to the House does not involve any guarantee of frontiers by His Majesty's Government.
Sir Percy Harris: Are we right in saying that both parties to this Agreement are satisfied with its terms, and that it is mutual in respect to the Governments of both nations?
Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir, and I think, in view of past history, we ought, in fairness, to repeat our congratulations to those who have shewn such wise statesmanship in coming to this Agreement.
Mr. Mander: On the question of the guarantee of frontiers, surely the existing guarantee to Poland holds good?
Mr. Eden: There is, as I have said, no guarantee of frontiers.
Mr. Ellis Smith (Stoke): In view of the huge potential Polish Army in the Soviet Union, will the Foreign Secretary consider doing all he possibly can to equip that Army as soon as possible?
Mr. Eden: That will be a matter for the Soviet Government, but we had in our minds throughout the negotiations the enormous value to the Allied cause in raising and equipping rapidly, a Polish Army in Russia.
Mr. Hore-Belisha: May I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the part he has taken in mediating this Agreement, which is of such good augury for the new order in Europe? Will he also make known to our principal enemy, Hitler, that this is the result of his wanton attack upon Russia?
Mr. Ness Edwards: Was the Note which was handed to General Sikorski at the termination of the signing of the Treaty known beforehand? Was it part of the amicable arrangements of all the parties?
Mr. Eden: Oh, yes, all that was arranged beforehand.
Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

  ARMED FORCES (PENSIONS AND GRANTS).
  ARMED FORCES (PENSIONS AND GRANTS).
  TORCHES AND BATTERIES (PRICES).
  TORCHES AND BATTERIES (PRICES).
  KING CHARLES I STATUE (PROTECTION COST).
  KING CHARLES I STATUE (PROTECTION COST).
  COAL DISTRIBUTION.
  COAL DISTRIBUTION.
FOOD SUPPLIES.
  AGRICULTURAL WORKERS (RATIONS).
  AGRICULTURAL WORKERS (RATIONS).
  FRUIT PRESERVATION.
  FRUIT PRESERVATION.
  CANNED FRUIT AND VEGETABLES.
  CANNED FRUIT AND VEGETABLES.
  POTATOES.
  POTATOES.
  TOMATOES.
  TOMATOES.
  THEFT OF EGGS (CONVICTION, LONDON).
  THEFT OF EGGS (CONVICTION, LONDON).
  ORDERS (INTERPRETATION).
  ORDERS (INTERPRETATION).
  UNLAWFUL GAMING (CONVICTION, LONDON).
  UNLAWFUL GAMING (CONVICTION, LONDON).
  CIGARETTES (THEFT CHARGE, LONDON).
  CIGARETTES (THEFT CHARGE, LONDON).
BRITISH ARMY.
  BOOT PRESERVATIVE (TEST).
  BOOT PRESERVATIVE (TEST).
  OFFICERS (RELEASES).
  OFFICERS (RELEASES).
  ROYAL NAVY (HARVEST WORK, UNPAID LEAVE).
  ROYAL NAVY (HARVEST WORK, UNPAID LEAVE).
  CLOTHES RATIONING.
  CLOTHES RATIONING.
MERCANTILE MARINE.
  CASUALTIES (PAYMENTS TO NEXT-OF-KIN).
  CASUALTIES (PAYMENTS TO NEXT-OF-KIN).
  SHIPS' LIFEBOATS (SIGNALLING APPARATUS).
  SHIPS' LIFEBOATS (SIGNALLING APPARATUS).
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION.
  PRICE STABILISATION (WHITE PAPER).
  PRICE STABILISATION (WHITE PAPER).
  BROADCASTS TO SWITZERLAND.
  BROADCASTS TO SWITZERLAND.
  RUSSIAN OPERATIONS (PICTURES).
  RUSSIAN OPERATIONS (PICTURES).
  INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS (MEMBERSHIP).
  INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS (MEMBERSHIP).
  POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION.
  POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION.
  CIVIL AVIATION (DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY).
  CIVIL AVIATION (DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY).
ROYAL AIR FORCE.
  TRAINED PILOTS (RETURN TO CIVIL LIFE).
  TRAINED PILOTS (RETURN TO CIVIL LIFE).
  WIVES (PASSAGES TO CANADA).
  WIVES (PASSAGES TO CANADA).
  MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (TELEPHONE DIRECTORIES).
  MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (TELEPHONE DIRECTORIES).
Preamble
The House met, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
CARDIFF CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
EAST WORCESTERSHIRE WATER BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments: the said Amendments considered and agreed to.

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE, CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS AND WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD SNELL: My Lords, this small but useful and even important Bill needs very little explanation. Its purpose, as set out in the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum attached to the Bill, is quite clear. It is designed to secure certain changes in the health insurance, contributory pensions, and workmen's compensation legislation. The House must first of all regard this Bill as an interim measure. It is brought before your Lordships pending more comprehensive legislation at a later period. The Bill has been carefully considered, and had an uncontested passage in another place with the pronounced good will of all sections there. The Bill has three main objects: first, the increase by 3s. weekly of the latest of sick and disablement benefits under the National Health Insurance Acts; secondly, it extends the benefits of health and pensions insurance to non-manual workers remunerated at a yearly rate of £420, the present limit being £250; thirdly, it brings within the scope of the Workmen's Compensation Acts non-manual workers earning between £350, which is the present limit, and £420. The changes which it is suggested should be made by this Bill will not be operative until January next, and so far as they relate to health insurance
972
they are to be made possible by an increase in the rate of weekly contributions in respect of men and women alike by twopence per week, one penny of which will be contributed by the employer.
Perhaps a few words of general explanation may also be helpful. The Bill is, as I have suggested, a kind of stop-gap measure, but it does extend our system of social insurance. We were perhaps somewhat late in this field of public endeavour, but at the present time our social insurance system compares favourably with that of any other country. It is admittedly incomplete, and the present Bill represents a cautious advance. It is not, however, entirely negligible in its effects and benefits. The caution which is visible in it is in accordance with our legislative tradition. Our method is empirical in the matter of legislation. Before committing ourselves to comprehensive and final plans, it is our habit to try out in a limited field certain proposals and then to amend, cancel or extend them as experience may show to be necessary. We are thus able to avoid the results of major miscalculations and to build upon proved foundations. The present Bill, therefore, first of all amends what have been proved to be undoubted anomalies in the working of this kind of legislation, and, secondly, it extends the scope of social insurance.
It is a small Bill, and yet it affects the welfare of millions of our fellow-citizens. By increasing benefit rates it will affect between sixteen and seventeen million people, and half a million people will benefit by the raising of the level of remuneration for the compulsory health and pensions insurance of non-manual workers up to £420. Then it brings social security against the risks of sickness and industrial accidents and against old age to hundreds of thousands of workmen, besides provision for their widows. Finally, it indicates that Parliament is not unmindful, in the midst of perils and preoccupations, of the welfare of the workers of this country, who deserve so much of our attention at the present time. On grounds, therefore, of expediency and of national welfare, I commend this useful, if restricted, measure to the favourable attention of your Lordships, and I beg to move that it be now read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Snell.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

WAR DAMAGE TO LAND (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD ALNESS: My Lords, the purpose of this measure, which applies to Scotland only, can be expressed within the compass of one sentence. It is to provide a cheap and expedient method of determining the rent, if any, which is payable in respect of certain dwelling-houses which have been the victims of war damage. Moreover, the method by which this end is achieved can also be expressed in one sentence. It is that, failing agreement between the landlord and the tenant with regard to the rent, if any, which falls to be paid in respect of bombed premises, the matter shall be referred for final determination to "a man of skill," who shall be selected from a panel to be set up, in virtue of the provisions of the Bill, by the Secretary of State for Scotland.
The Bill can be divided into two parts. The first relates to the question of principle, which I conceive to be relevant to a Second Reading debate, while the remaining provisions are in their main outline ancillary and procedural, and are more appropriate to the Committee stage. I would say, however, that the Committee in another place devoted most meticulous care to an examination of the provisions, of the Bill, and it comes here with the assent of another place, without, I think I am right in saying, a single Division having been taken upon it. The principle of the measure I have already stated. It is this, that for litigation in the matters with which the Bill deals shall be substituted arbitration. Perhaps it may be right and proper, however, that I should say just a word about the directions which the Bill contains in applying the principle to the circumstances which may, and probably will, arise.
In the first plce, the Bill provides that, where the premises are unfit by reason of war damage and are not occupied, no rent shall be payable in respect of these premises by the tenant. On the other hand, where an unfit dwelling-house is
974
occupied in whole or in part, or where the accommodation of the dwelling-house has been substantially reduced by war damage, the rent payable falls to be ascertained, failing agreement between the landlord and the tenant, by "a man of skill" appointed from the panel to which I have referred and to which I shall refer again in a moment. Again, the Bill is limited—and some of your Lordships may feel inclined to ask why—to dwelling-houses held on a tenancy of not more than a year, and it is also limited to premises the rental of which is not in excess of £90. The reason for selecting a yearly tenancy is that in Scotland many, if not most, of the working-class houses fall within that category, and the reason for selecting the limit of £90 is that that is the figure which is to be found in the Rent Restriction Acts in their application to Scotland. We think that, so far as houses with larger rentals and longer tenancies are concerned, there is no hardship in leaving them to be dealt with in the ordinary way by the Courts. In cases of that kind, where the property is large and valuable and where the tenancy is lengthy, it is obvious on the face of it, I think, that problems more complex in their character and different in their kind from those which arise in the case of the limited class of houses to which this Bill applies would be likely to be encountered, and therefore it is proposed to limit the operation of this Bill to houses of a rent not in excess of £90 and the tenancy of which does not exceed a year.
I should perhaps say a word with regard to the panel which is to be set up by the Secretary of State for Scotland. That panel will contain architects, surveyors and other persons deemed by him to be suitable for ascertaining the appropriate rent, if any, to be paid for damaged premises. They will visit the premises and in many cases settle the matter on the spot. At the same time, I would impress upon your Lordships that the hope and intention underlying this Bill is that in many cases, if not in most, an amicable arrangement will be arrived at by landlord and tenant without recourse even to the good offices of an arbitrator. The Bill further provides that the "man of skill" may issue a certificate certifying the fitness of a house for occupation, and, so long as it subsists, that certificate is conclusive evidence of fitness.

975
But the Bill also provides that, on the expiry of three months, the certificate issued by the arbitrator may be reviewed or revoked if circumstances require that course to be followed. I should add, perhaps, that the Bill also provides that a house is not deemed to be occupied while it is unfit by reason of war damage merely because furniture is left in it by the tenant, or because the tenant visits it for the purpose of protecting or removing his furniture, and although he retains keys of the house. That provision, I understand, appears textually in the corresponding measure which my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor is to move.
Lastly, I may say to your Lordships—and some of your Lordships may think the provision is not unfitting in a Scottish measure—the cost of remunerating the "man of skill" who is to fulfil the functions of arbitrator is to be paid, not by the landlord or the tenant of the damaged premises, but by the Imperial Exchequer. I think I have now covered the points which are relevant to the Second Reading debate on this measure. I hope your Lordships will agree with me that the purpose of the Bill is commendable, and that the means adopted for effecting that purpose are acceptable. In the hope and belief that that is so, I now beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Alness.)
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, every one of us who is familiar with the history of government will recall, I have no doubt, many instances where our Scottish colleagues have gladly watched English representatives laboriously steering a measure through Parliament, and then have gone one better in a proposal of their own. In this particular case the point which I have to refer to is the proposal in the Bill which relieves those concerned from the expenses of an arbitration, which are borne in this case by the Treasury. I hope the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack, when he comes to introduce the amended Bill for this country in the autumn, will bear this precedent in mind. Also I am impressed by the charming expression, which perhaps may be common in Scottish law, "a man
976
of skill." I have looked at the interpretation clause, but I do not find assistance there. As I say, it is a charming expression, which may mean anything, and it will be open to the Secretary of State to choose a man of any blend of skill. That term might also be made use of in English legislation. Anyhow, I would respectfully congratulate the noble and learned Lord upon the Bill, and I hope we shall take lessons, not for the first time, from our Scottish colleagues, in knowing how to make the Exchequer pay.
On question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

LANDLORD AND TENANT (WAR DAMAGE) (AMENDMENT) BILL
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON): My Lords, I move that this Bill be read a third time. I would call your Lordships' attention to the fact that I invite the House to make a few small verbal Amendments before the Bill is passed. Those Amendments are available in print and are on the Table.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Lord Chancellar).
On Question, Bill read 3a.
Clause 1:
Provisions as to short tenancies.
(5) If the local authority in whose area any such dwelling-house is situated issue a certificate that the dwelling-house has been repaired to the extent mentioned in the last foregoing subsection, the production of the certificate shall, at any time while the certificate remains in force, be sufficient evidence that the house is fit for the purposes of this section at that time, unless the contrary is proved:
THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (5), to leave out "at any time while the certificate remains in force" and insert "as respects any period during which the certificate is in force." The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, the first Amendment is at page 2, line 19, and there "re consequential Amendments at lines 21, 35, 37 and 38. It is to be observed that as the Bill now stands it might well be that in Clause 1, subsection (5), the production of a certificate of fitness would be evidence of the

977
state of affairs at the time the certificate is produced. That, however, does not really cover the intention of the legislation. In many cases the question before the Court will be, not the fitness or otherwise of the premises at the time, but of their fitness during a past period in respect of which the tenant had refused to pay rent. The distinction is little more than verbal. It is for the purpose of securing that the intention is quite plainly expressed, and avoiding the possibility of confusion or misunderstanding, that I beg to move.
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 19, leave out ("at any time while the certificate remains in force") and insert ("as respects any period during which the certificale is in force.")—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I think we may take the further Amendments to this clause together.
Amendments moved—
Page 2, line 21, leave out ("is") and insert ("was")
Page 2, line 21, leave out ("at that time") and insert ("during that period")
Page 2, line 35, leave out ("and until a new certificate is issued") and insert ("the certificate shall cease to have effect except as respects any period before the said date; and, as respects any period after the said date and before the date of the issue of a new certificate")
Page 2, line 37, leave out ("is") and insert ("was")
Page 2, line 38, after ("damage") insert ("during that period").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendments agreed to.
Clause 10:
Application of principal Act to ground leases.
(3) The following provisions shall apply with respect to notices served before, or proceedings pending at, the passing of this Act:
but nothing in this section shall affect any order of the Court made before the passing of this Act under Section thirteen of the principal Act, and the Court shall not exercise its powers under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of Section nine of the principal Act—

(i) in a case where a notice of disclaimer in respect of a lease which appears to the Court to be a ground lease has been served before the passing of this Act, so as to make the surrender of the lease, or of any sublease derived out of the term created by the lease, take effect on a date earlier than the date when the notice was served; or

THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in paragraph (i) of subsection (3), to leave out "appears to the Court to be" and insert "the Court is satisfied is". The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, the only other verbal alteration I seek to make is in Clause 10. My noble and learned friend Lord Maugham, on the Second Reading, truly observed that the phrase now in the Bill, on page 14, line 11— "in a case where a notice of disclaimer in respect of a lease which appears to the Court to be a ground lease"—was an unusual and undesirable expression to be used in such a matter. On reflection I agree with him. I am proposing therefore to leave out "appears to the Court to be" and to insert "the Court is satisfied is".
Amendment moved—
Page 14, line 11, leave out ("appears to the Court to be") and insert ("the Court is satisfied is").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

AGRICULTURE.
LORD BROCKET LORD BROCKET moved to resolve, That an agreed long-term policy for agriculture is essential in the interests of the nation. The noble Lord said: My Lords, some of your Lordships may recollect that in the very important agricultural debate introduced by the noble Earl, Lord De La Warr, on May 21, the noble Earl said that that debate was not the exact time to discuss long-term policy. Since that debate we have had in your Lordships' House a debate on planning in which the noble Lord, Lord Reith, made two very important speeches, on July 17. In his speech he said, regarding the central planning authority:
"The Minister of Agriculture has been closely in consultation throughout, and quite clearly the central planning authority has to subserve—that term has been used this afternoon—national policy in agriculture which he, I believe, is in the process, the urgent process, of formulating."
Later Lord Reith further said:
"Before a central planning authority in its final form can be established a vast amount of work has to be done on agriculture, industrial development, and transport."
Your Lordships will therefore notice that the Minister of Agriculture is in process of forming a long-term policy.
In view of the fact that he is at present in process of formulating it, we must not be disappointed if the noble Duke does not produce the detailed policy this afternoon. We do not expect that in any way at the moment. We hope it will be produced in due course, and that it will be a long-term policy which will be satisfactory to all the interests in agriculture and to the nation in general. I—and some friends of mine agreed with me, and, in fact, persuaded me to put down this Motion—considered that it might be a great help for your Lordships to debate long-term policy. It might even be a help to the Minister of Agriculture and to the noble Duke to hear some of the views which your Lordships who are more experienced than I am will put forward.
I get about a good deal in agricultural circles, and if there is one thing which is in any way holding back the absolute one hundred per cent. effort of farmers it is the lingering doubt in their minds that after this war is over the same thing will happen to them as befell them after the last war. Your Lordships will remember that during the last war increased production in agriculture was pushed ahead as much as possible. Farmers, owing to the very nature of their business, have to budget ahead, and they did budget ahead. After that war there were large sales of land at which many of them bought their land at high prices, and that land has been a millstone round their necks ever since. As a matter of interest I may mention that, four years ago, I purchased a farm which my father had sold after the last wax. The tenant said to me how delighted he was that I had the farm again and he had not to pay the tithes and other charges, which he did not think would be quite so heavy. It is true to say that farmers all over the country have this lingering doubt that the same thing will happen again. They do not trust those whom they call the politicians as much as some of us politicians think they should trust us. Therefore this debate this afternoon, if it elicits from the noble Duke that the Government have a long-term policy in preparation, and intend not to let agriculture down after the war, if it does nothing else, will have done a great deal of good.
In the years between the two wars agriculture, although a certain number of
980
measures were brought in to help it, was not really subject to a sufficiently long-term policy I think I can say this, however, that the recent Ministers of Agriculture, Sir Reginald Dorman-Smith and Mr. Hudson, have really done a vast amount of good. It is only right to pay just tribute where tribute is due. If one goes about the country one can see—I am glad the Prime Minister said this yesterday—better crops than we have had for years. I only hope that no misfortune will befall them before they are gathered in. I trust that farmers will keep a weather eye open for any enemy action on these crops.
In my Motion I have stated that "an agreed long-term policy of agriculture is essential in the interests of the nation." I discussed the form of the Motion with one or two noble Lords before putting it down. We came to the conclusion that the word "agreed" was an absolutely necessary word. In our political system we cannot have any long-term policy unless the various political Parties are agreed on it, and unless a subject like agriculture is as far as possible removed from the cockpit of Party politics. It is quite hopeless, I am sure your Lordships will agree, to have five years of one policy, then a General Election, and then four or five years of another policy. That is bad for any form of industry, and particularly bad for agriculture. Therefore, as in this war all classes and all political Parties are welded together to win the war, I hope political Parties will agree between themselves on a policy for agriculture which will give agriculture its rightful place in times of peace. In addition, other interests than those of the British Isles are involved. The British Dominions beyond the seas and the Colonies are involved; and also we are having very solid and great help in our war effort from the United States. No doubt the United States will also be involved, and their interests will have to be considered. But, before the Empire and other countries have to be consulted, the long-term policy must be agreed between members of the various political Parties.
I do not wish this afternoon in any way to appear controversial or dogmatic because, as I said before, many of your Lordships have your own very excellent views on agriculture. I feel that mine

981
are, perhaps, very humble views, but they are views which I have formed as the result both of study and experience. The key word, in my opinion, for agriculture and for the long-term policy should be "security." This word "security" divides itself into the following points: (1), security for the land itself by the maintenance of fertility; (2), security of good wages and improved amenities for the farm worker; (3), security and guaranteed reasonably profitable prices for the farmer; (4), security of tenure for the efficient landowner; and (5), security for the provision of adequate finance.
I am not going to take very long in discussing each of these subjects, because there are several of your Lordships who wish to speak, but I think it will be generally agreed that the maintenance of fertility is absolutely essential. Neither the farmer, nor the farm worker, nor the landowner nor in fact anyone who has any interest in the land can exist if fertility is all drawn out of the land and nothing is put back. We are getting to the stage of this war when it begins to look as if planning for three years of war would have to be extended. In many parts of the country the second or the third white straw crop is now growing, and it is very important that part of the land which is at present under straw crops should be seeded down, so that we should get back the fertility which was stored up when the land was under grass.
I am very glad indeed as an ordinary Back-Bencher to welcome the assurance that the lime subsidy is continued to 1944. I also am glad, in view of the difficulties which so many of us experienced in getting slag, that the money which has been devoted to the basic slag subsidy, should be spread over other fertilizers, but it is also important that no more cattle than is absolutely necessary should be killed. I am glad to say that it now appears as if the fears of farmers that large quantities of these cattle which make manure for the land would have to be killed are, to a certain extent, being reduced or dissipated. I know there are other noble Lords who may perhaps talk about the necessity for the preservation of fertility, but I feel it is absolutely right to put that point as No. 1 of any long-term agricultural programme.
The second point under the head of security is good wages and improved amenities for the farm worker. I would not like in any way to trespass on to the subject of agricultural wages, which is now so much before the country, but I yesterday heard Mr. Bevin in the other place say that wages always followed prices up and that wages always followed prices down. In agriculture prices now are following wages, and if farm-workers wages are put up—and, if I may say so, I think they deserve all they get—prices will have to conform with those extra wages or the farmer will not be able to make a living. In the past, all wage standards in the country have been built up from the low, much too low wage standards of agricultural workers, and I hope it will be possible in the long-term policy that agricultural workers shall be given a wage which, when calculated with the different allowances and amenities, such as very low-rented houses and perhaps free milk and so on, will be no lower than any other wage standards in the towns. It is very necessary that men should be kept on the land, and I feel that this inequality in agricultural wages has been one of the reasons why so many farm-workers have left their work and gone to the towns.
I have the words "improved amenities" also in this point No. 2. Now in 1926 the Housing (Rural Workers) Act was passed—a very good Act for improving rural cottages, but an Act which has not been used as much as it should have been used. Acts of that kind should be really used, and owners of houses should be encouraged to use them. In addition there are other Acts which enable landowners and local councils to build cottages for agricultural workers. I hope that building under those Acts will be stimulated. It is also essential that as far as possible water supply and drainage should be improved in the villages, and, if possible, electricity should be brought to villages. There is no doubt that all these three things would help very much in making the life of the agricultural worker living in a village, or near a farm, more attractive. I have also, later on, a little to say about landowners. I do hope, after this war, that it will be possible for many landowners and big farmers to live at their places in the country. It looks to me as if, after

983
this war, the standards of living of many people will be very different from what they were before the war, and I hope that it will be possible, and in fact I think that it will probably be necessary, for many people to devote themselves to a country life and to produce the food they are going to eat. If that is so, I hope that in the villages we shall not always see that the larger house is empty, because when you have leadership in the villages I feel sure there is much more life and much more attraction for the workers on the land to live in those villages.
My third point is security and guaranteed reasonably profitable prices for the farmer. No elaboration is really needed for this point, but I think it is a fact that the farmer cannot exist, nor can he pay his larm workers, if the prices he is allowed to enjoy are not reasonably profitable. Speaking as a Back-Bench Conservative I would be quite willing to agree, for my own part, with some of the schemes which the noble Lord who sits on the Front Bench opposite (Lord Addison) brought forward when I first got into the House of Commons, and which at that time were not always so acceptable to the members of my Party as they may be now. I do not think members of any Party would wish to stick to Party remedies. I feel that the question is far too serious for that, and the necessity for the long-term policy is far too great.
It is quite possible that there may be a necessity for a certain extent of control, for a continuation of control. You may have what I have heard called "the wheat scheme" applied to the meat scheme, and you may have lots of other schemes. I do not intend to take up your Lordships' time by going into those schemes this afternoon, but I feel sure that Lord Addison will agree with me that it is absolutely necessary that some scheme should be brought in which, while enabling foreign foodstuffs to come into this country at a reasonable price, does not permit them to come in at such a price and with such freedom that the English farmer is entirely ruined. If I might add one word on that point it is this. I have very often talked to farmers and they have said "Well, we would like to have taxes or tariffs on foreign foodstuffs, but what happens when the Empire foodstuffs
984
come in and ruin us just as much as the foreign foodstuffs?" That is a point which, before this war, the Conservative Party perhaps did not quite regard with sufficient seriousness. I feel certain that if the farmer is ruined he does not much mind whether he is ruined by his Canadian cousin or by somebody outside the Empire.
I come to my fourth point, security of tenure for the efficient landowner. This is a point on which I do not mean to be controversial. It may seem in your Lordships' House, where there are so many landowners and so many practical farmers, that I am making a plea for landowners, and to a certain extent I am, because I think in the structure of farming they are very necessary. But I have put in the word "efficient" and I have put it in for this reason, that at the present time nobody in the country would wish to allow inefficiency. The war agricultural executive committees arc turning out inefficient farmers. I am just going to take over three farms the tenants of which are being turned out. I have been trying to get rid of them for years, but under the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1923, I have been unable to do so. Now the committees are coming to my aid, and I certainly hope that some such committees, their lineal descendants, will continue after the war. I have put in the word "efficient" because I think that the good and efficient landowner does play his part in the life of the countryside, and it is necessary if he is going to remain in the economic system of the countryside that he should be enabled to be efficient.
I do not think I can do better than quote a few sentences from a book called The Hope of a New World which was written by the Archbishop of York about a year ago. In that book, on page 53, he says:
" It must, however, be recognised, that the rural landlord discharges many social functions, and ownership of agricultural land, subject to consideration of the public welfare, should not be subject to the same restrictions as ownership of industrial stocks and shares; moreover, as family tradition is in this field a valuable social asset, I should personally urge the total exemption of all agricultural land from Death Duties."
Further on, at page 57, he discusses bureaucracy, and he says:
"But the bane of our democracy is the red-tape in the clerical departments of national

985
and municipal offices. To let this loose upon rural England would lead to calamity.
"The present system combines all the disadvantages. We leave the private landlord in possession and make it impossible for him properly to discharge the social responsibilities of his station."
What I would suggest in that connection is that there would be some sort of Commission formed—I do not suggest the exact composition of it—which would give a certificate to a landowner or to an owner-occupier that his estate is in what one might call reasonably good order, and that on the issue of such a certificate Death Duties should not be charged on the estate until it is sold.
We are always willing, in this country, to try to get the best we can out of a system, and whereas it may be put forward with righteousness that there is room far some such Commission as the Forestry Commission to deal with derelict land—that of course is a suggestion which might come from the other side of your Lordships' House—I think that before a system of land ownership which has lasted eight or nine centuries comes to an end, it is right that we should try and make it possible for a good landowner, as the Archbishop of York says, to fulfil his social functions. I would also say that his functions are not only social. He plays a great part. At present one cannot get labour, but when it is possible to get labour the landowner can do a very great deal in the repair and improvement of buildings and in forestry. I would add two or three words on that point. I would like it to be possible for improvements of farm buildings to be brought into maintenance claims. That perhaps is rather a technical point, but nearly all your Lordships know all about maintenance claims. I think if improvements could be included in maintenance claims, that would be a very good way of bringing farm buildings up to date.
The last point I would like to make about the landowner is in relation to forestry. It is almost impossible for landowners to do what they should in the way of afforestation unless they know that they will have security of tenure. Very few landowners are planting oak trees at present. They often plant conifers, larch and so on, because they feel that the crop will mature in a reasonably short time, whereas if they plant oak trees their successors may not be owners of the land
986
when the oak trees come to maturity. I do not wish to trespass on the preserves of the Royal English Forestry Society or the Royal Scottish Forestry Society—I know that they and the Forestry Commission are working very hard trying to work out a forestry policy—but I would like to say that if it is necessary in the ordinary business of landowning and of agriculture for a landowner to have security, it is all the more necessary for the planter of trees to Have security.
My fifth point is that there should be security by the provision of adequate finance. If an owner or an owner-occupier has security, I cannot help feeling that either the banks or whatever corporation may be set up would be more willing to lend him money at a low rate of interest to enable him to make improvements on the land he owns or on the land he farms. I do not intend to say much about finance except that agriculture has suffered for many years; from lack of it, and I feel that in anything like a long-term policy some system of credit is absolutely necessary. If one goes to other countries one finds that money is lent to a landowner to be repaid over thirty years, and I have seen a great many improvements made in farm buildings and farm houses, and generally on the estates of landowners, out of money which the landowners are gradually repaying over thirty years. I think something of that kind might be very useful in this country. It may be that the noble Duke when he replies will only be able to reply in what I might perhaps call a preliminary fashion to-day, but I hope that when the Minister of Agriculture in due course announces his long-term policy it will be the foundation of a healthy, prosperous and good agriculture for many years when peace returns to this country. I beg to move.
Moved to resolve, That an agreed long-term policy for agriculture is essential in the interests of the nation.—(Lord Brocket.)
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I think that there could be no division of opinion anywhere, in view of our tragic war experience, on the argument that there should be an agricultural policy in this country which will lead to a better use of the land. I think that every one of us whose business it has been during the

987
present war to go about the country and take part, sometimes, in the efforts that are being made to increase production, has been reminded sadly enough of the state of affairs that prevailed in the last war, when somewhat similar efforts were made. Much energy was devoted to those efforts, and we were all of one accord that we must never allow the mistakes which then happened to recur. I can recall very readily many promises that were made to that effect. I recall, too, very vividly what happened afterwards. We are still suffering in this country—I will say a word or two on this subject in a minute—from the tragic disappointment which ensued.
The other day, at the invitation of the Minister of Agriculture, I, with many more, went to see some very enterprising work which is being carried out in the County of Huntingdon, where land which had been allowed to revert to briars and bushes has been brought back into cultivation. We saw hundreds of acres of very good crops growing on land which within the last two years was a wilderness, but as we went along the bumpy road—if you could call it a road—which provided access to these fields, the thing which struck many of us was that whichever way you looked you could not see a house. There were no houses; they had disappeared. There was a village not far off, where we assembled, but I was told, on inquiry, that the population had dwindled to a few tens almost; much less than a hundred. That was a place which, clearly, was once a prosperous village. Another village, which would normally have supplied the labour to be employed on the land now being reclaimed, had disappeared altogether, and there was nothing there but a few tumbledown cottages.
In the county where I live, I know one part where there is something like a thousand acres of good land, like this in Huntingdon, which two years ago, was a place where thistles and brambles grew and little else, but which is now yielding good crops. These are cases which could be multiplied a hundredfold as we know; they are not fancy illustrations. This land is good land which is being used now as it ought to be used; that is, scientifically for the production of the food which it is suitable for growing. But apart from
988
this we all know that from one end of the country to the other farm buildings, farm roads and other things which go to make the conduct of farming possible are in a deplorable state of dilapidation. At the same time, just as in the case of these villages in Huntingdon, so from one end of the country to the other the skilled men have gone, and the bright boys of the families for years past have sought to find jobs somewhere else.
I have myself taken the view for a long time, and have said in season and out of season, that our land is worth something better than that; that taking it altogether we have some of the finest land in the world, and although we may grumble at the weather with unfailing regularity, we have for the purpose of food production a very excellent climate, taking the country as a whole. There is no doubt also that we have still remaining craftsmen in husbandry and different branches of agriculture, and in stock-rearing, who are unsurpassed in the world. That is why it is that for generations past they have come to British farmers from distant places to stock their herds. Well, I do not think there is any question as to what the reason is, at rock bottom, for the declension. It is that the nation has not thought it worth while, during the last fifty years, to have a policy which ensures the efficient use of our land. That is why it is that this deplorable state of affairs has gradually arisen. I think that the discredit for this rests equally on all Parties. If we are to prevent a repetition after this war of the disgraceful decline that followed after the last war, and that had been setting in for many years before that time, then we must have such agreement upon this matter of prime importance as will lead to a sustained, developing and prosperous industry in our countryside. Unless we can obtain agreement on this matter the inevitable will recur.
I should like, if I may, to pay a modest tribute to the efforts of the Ministry of Agriculture and to the lines upon which they are proceeding. I think they are laying the foundation for what, if we have the good sense to preserve it, will provide security and improvement in agriculture. The biggest obstacle which everyone experiences is the obstacle which is presented by the minds of the farmers and all others concerned with the land. They

989
always ask the question—everyone of us who has had anything to do with this matter has been asked it, I am sure, scores of times—"What is going to happen afterwards?". Whenever we ask a farmer to spend money—and these things cost money—to plough up land and undertake a series of cultivations which must inevitably extend over a number of years, he is entitled to know within reason what is going to happen. The memory of 1921 has done more to poison the efforts of this time than anything else. I hope that we shall with one accord decide that this discreditable experience shall not be repeated.
There are, I think, certain admitted essentials. I shall diligently steer clear of saying anything which might in any way present the slightest difficulty to the noble Duke and to his colleagues. I shall certainly not introduce any controversial element at all. I think, however, that it is recognised by everybody that we must have a system which will arrest this shocking neglect of good land, and that cannot be done unless, at the same time, there is a system which provides adequate equipment. I remember that when I was Minister of Agriculture there was provided for me a return of what was necessary to bring farm equipment up to a reasonable standard. By that I mean the provision of such things as adequate farm roads. We were in Huntingdonshire the other day, and any one who has been there and has seen the fields over which we tramped will appreciate the need for adequate farm roads; how they are going to cart the corn from those distant reclaimed fields, I dread to contemplate. Adequate farm roads are essential to the proper conduct of the industry, and that is even more true of buildings. The figure given to me in 1931 was that the expenditure called for would be in the neighbourhood of £250,000,000. It is a big figure, although it is nothing compared with what is being spent in these days. To the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, or compared with the Budget with which the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack presented us the other day, £250,000,000 is a mere bagatelle. I say with complete confidence, however, that if we can devise a system which will provide for the adequate re-equipment, on scientific, up-to-date lines, of our farms, it would be one of the best investments that the nation
990
could possibly make, whether it cost £250,000,000 or twice that figure.
But we must have a system which will give confidence to those engaged in the industry. I myself was responsible for introducing the Agricultural Marketing Act, which, as we have been reminded, incurred some criticism; but, whatever we may say about that measure or about the things which have followed from it, it is evident that there must be a system which will enable the producer to feel that he can rely on obtaining a fair price for his product, and not be subject to the absurd variation under which he gets, say 35s. for a lamb one September and 25s. a year later for an equally good animal. Nobody can conduct an industry on that basis. As a matter of fact, agriculture is the only industry in the country which has been habitually conducted on the basis of a gamble. It is necessary for us to frame a policy which will emancipate it from that hazard and, unless we do, there is no hope that enterprising, knowledgeable people will put their minds and hearts into the industry.
Another essential is to have a system which will provide a proper life and proper opportunity for the agricultural labourer. He is probably the most highly skilled workman in the country, and it is entirely wrong that we have ever allowed a habit of speech to grow up which has treated him as if he were the lowest class in the labouring world. He is not. I am a countryman myself, and I must admit possessing the prejudices which arise therefrom; but I regard the skilled agricultural labourer as belonging to the first class of skilled labour, and I say that he ought to have a decent chance in life. We must therefore secure, not only to him but to his boys and girls, the amenities and schools and cottages and so on that are worthy of his work and which will, moreover, help to keep him on the land. In times past, as we all know, these men have looked for jobs for their boys on the railways, or anywhere except where they are themselves. It is not that they do not love the land and the country; they do, but they feel that it does not give them chance enough. That has been the case for a long time, and no industry can prosper if year after year the bright young men drift away from it.

991
We must make it attractive for brains and enterprise to remain in the industry. That is why I think we shall have to contemplate a different form, in many respects, for many of our agricultural processes, and perhaps in some cases a different form of farming, so as to give a hierarchy of different types in the industry. At all events, it is clear that we ought to have an industry where, just as in other great industries, a young man with brains can make headway apart from the fact of having capital. In every other industry young fellows with brains can get on simply because they have brains, but in farming unless you have a certain amount of capital you cannot farm. That has been a big handicap for a long time.
There is another point which should be mentioned. Apart from the fact that we cannot look forward to making our countryside what it ought to be unless we can have an agreed policy on this matter, we ought to take care that we do not postpone the effort unduly. I foresee that after the war there will be such a scramble to get back somehow to some ordered and peaceful system that we shall be rushed too much, and we shall be likely to overlook the possibilities of agreement which present themselves to us now. It is very necessary, therefore, that every effort should be made to make progress with this endeavour. I say this with confidence, because I know that the Minister of Agriculture is using considerable efforts to make progress now, and I should like to take this opportunity of wishing him well. It seems to me that these are the two quite simple essentials that we must have before us: we ought to have a policy which will make a right and full use of our land, and a policy which will give life and hope and opportunity to those who work on the land. If we get those two things we shall have the essentials. Speaking entirely for myself, I do not think that it would be impossible, or that it would be even very difficult, to arrive at a sufficient agreement. But I do think that it will be necessary as a part of any agreement for the future that it should be embodied in a form which will not be subject to the vicissitudes of accidental political changes, because this is a long-term business anyhow, and we must have that in mind when we deal with it. I will end with this simple sentence. I
992
think the Minister of Agriculture to-day—and I envy him—has a glorious opportunity. I hope he will seize it.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, it seems to be in no way surprising that it should have been desired to have a debate on general agricultural policy before we disperse to resume again in the autumn, and I think it is natural, as was explained by both the noble Lords, Lord Brocket and Lord Addison, to look forward to something in the nature of a long-term policy—far more than it is possible to consider long-term policy in connection with a great many international affairs. I was glad to note that Lord Brocket did not expect the noble Duke who represents the Ministry of Agriculture in your Lordships' House to be able to-day to give anything like a detailed or categorical answer to questions of long-term policy. It is quite clear that it is too soon to attempt to do that. At the same time, I altogether agree with Lord Addison that whenever the war ends a great number of questions affecting agriculture will at once become active and demand consideration.
I think it is possible that the phrase "a long-term Government policy" may create some alarm in a section of the agricultural community, which may fear an indefinite continuance of restrictions and prohibitions, and I imagine that some of them would say: "We trust that the Government policy will interfere with us as little as possible and leave us to work out our business with as much regard as possible to individual capacity and enterprise." The old-fashioned type of farmer, whom many of us can remember, has always been an ingrained individualist, but no doubt the younger generation of farmers who have been brought up in agricultural colleges, take a wider view; still, I think it is fair to say that the British farmer remains much of an individualist. That is a quality which has been recognised by the noble Lord on the Front Opposition Bench.
Although it has been the declared policy of the Opposition Party to eliminate the landlord as far as possible, there is never a question of abolishing the tenant or of curtailing the business of farming as an enterprise. When I speak of eliminating the landlord, of course I am aware that

993
confiscation has never been at all the policy of the Opposition Party. It is intended that if the land is nationalised compensation should be paid for the landlord's interests, although it is not, on such a scale as the landlord would think adequate. Therefore it must be understood that in any policy the agricultural tenant will remain, and it is also obvious that the farm worker, of whom the mover of the Motion spoke sympathetically, has to be specially considered in any form of long-term policy. It is agreed by everybody that agricultural wages in the past were miserably low, although there were some compensations which made the figure not quite so miserable as it appeared. It is quite clear that the unions of land workers are fully aware of the power they possess of combining for a reasonable wage.
That is, of course, one of the elements in considering what is really the essential point of this whole debate—namely, can British farming be made to pay the producer? because it is quite evident that the profit to the producer cannot be increased by raising the prices of the necessities of life which are the main products of our British farms. It seems to me useless to adduce instances of exceptional farmers who have been able to work their land at a profit while their neighbours have not done so. All of us who have been connected with the land know instances of remarkable men who, by some acts of almost genius, such as their special skill in jobbing cattle or inducing their neighbours to pay regular sums for the assistance of haulage and so on, have been able to go on from being smallholders to getting the tenancy of quite a considerable farm. But what has to be considered is how an average hard-working man is able to get on.
That brings us in turn to the old controversy, now just one hundred years old, between Free Trade and Protection as applied to agriculture. It is just one hundred years since Sir Robert Peel formed his Government and began by reducing a great number of duties on all sorts of imports, culminating five years later in the abolition of the Corn Laws. After a period when the dispute appeared to be dormant it again revived and, as we all know, without going into history, this country has become a definitely Protectionist country. Protection for farmers,
994
of course, cuts both ways. A man may receive £5 a ton more for his potatoes or 10s. a quarter more for his wheat, and may find that the higher prices he has to pay for agricultural implements or foreign mineral imports make something like a balance between his loss and his gain, and therefore the duties on the purely agriculture import are not very much use to him.
It is also true that nobody in this country is going to submit to the ruin of our great national agriculture. I do not hold that this need become at all an insoluble question. I think now that the most enthusiastic Protectionist realizes, particularly since the last war, that the interpretation which in some countries, especially in the newly-formed countries, has been given to the rather overworked phrase "self-determination" by translating it into pure economic selfishness, has not proved to be to the advantage of anybody, even of those countries themselves. On the other hand, the most convinced Free Trader equally realises that to return at once to a system of free imports of all kinds, including agricultural produce, would dislocate a great number of industries and would undoubtedly prove the ruin of a great many individual farmers. Therefore the whole of that question will have to be very carefully considered with a view to devising whatever arrangements can be made for keeping agriculture alive. From the point of view of my noble friends on these Benches, subsidies when they have to be paid are greatly preferable to tariffs and quotas for the reasons which I gave a few moments ago.
I certainly by no means fear that in a long-term policy an arrangement cannot be made which would prove to be reasonably satisfactory even to the theorists on both sides of the question. It is reasonable to say that agriculture must, in a degree, be subject to the rules which govern the means of national defence, which by common consent have never been subject to free importation. The analogy cannot be pressed too far, but to a point it may reasonably be held that some form of "protection", if that is the word, of agriculture, as such, can be regarded as being on a different footing from a great many forms of keeping alive industries which could not otherwise permanently be carried on.

995
It is not necessary to attempt to indicate the various methods by which either the Central Government or local bodies can give assistance to agriculture in the coming years. For one thing, I trust it will be agreed that every help ought to be given to what is really the most distinctive and, in some respects, most valuable feature in our whole system of agriculture. I mean the preservation and assistance of those special breeds of different kinds of stock for which this island is so celebrated. The export of the different breeds of horses, cattle, sheep, and pigs which are so famous, and which it is quite unnecessary to enumerate in this House, is a source, and a continuing source, of wealth to this country. It has to be borne in mind that when animals of special breeds are exported it is not merely a single transaction, like the export of a ton of coal, but it is a transaction which has to be continually repeated, because the types of the different breeds, as I think some of your Lordships who travel in foreign countries recognise, tend to alter and always to deteriorate in other parts of the world.
One of the most striking instances of that is close to home. It is one of the lamentable features of the occupation of the Channel Islands that most of us do not know what is happening to the two famous breeds of cattle there. Those of your Lordships who have had the pleasure of possessing herds of either of these beautiful breeds will remember how, every two or three years, it is always necessary to go back to the island bull or there will be a perceptible change in the character of the herd. The same thing is true of all the different breeds of cattle and horses, both in North and South America, South Africa and some of the other Dominions. Therefore, any sort of assistance to the societies that deal with those animals by ensuring means of transport, and low freights and other advantages that can be given, will, I am sure, be found to be advantageous. There are, of course, other means of encouraging these special breeds through central and local societies. I would merely say in conclusion that I am sure it is a mistake to take a gloomy view of the future of British agriculture, and I repeat once more that so far as possible Government assistance should
996
be of an advisory rather than of a dictatorial form, leaving as much scope as possible for individual skill and even for healthy rivalry and competition.
VISCOUNT ASTOR: My Lords, most of us have either taken part or listened to the debates in the past either in this House or in another place when the use of the land was discussed, and, casting our minds back, we have recollections of great divergencies of opinion. Those of us who had to fight Elections, particularly in cities, will remember the conflict of opinion which manifested itself at election time over the whole question of food production, farming and agriculture I find, speaking now, after a member of each of the three Parties has spoken, that instead of a sharp conflict and cleavage of opinion there is a great measure of agreement, and an even greater desire to achieve a still greater measure of agreement. I am myself substantially in agreement with most of the views which have been put before your Lordships. That being the case, I will try not to cover exactly the same points as previous speakers.
I think we would all agree that in these days, when one has to look forward to post-war planning, agriculture must also receive attention. We have read in the Press recently that the three political Parties either have set up, or are setting up, committees on reconstruction, and that being the case it is quite right that: your Lordships should now be taking part: in a discussion as to planning for the future of this major and most important: industry. Although the personnel of your Lordships' House will not change after the next Election, I shall be very much surprised if there is not a very substantial alteration of the personnel in another place. Nobody can forecast what kind of country we are going to have if the war continues, or even if it were to end at once. That being the case I think we are indebted to the noble Lord or having given us this opportunity of discussing this big question. He and others very rightly pointed out that one cannot merely discuss this as a national issue. We have to take into consideration our relationship with the Dominions, and our relationship with the United States, with whom, I say quite frankly, I hope as the war goes on we shall find ourselves cooperating to an ever greater extent. That fact undoubtedly must be taken into consideration

997
when we are discussing the future of British farming.
Future planning of agriculture provides special difficulties. Agriculture is going through a period of change, of revolution. We talk of the new technique of agriculture. By that we mean use of the discoveries associated with the physicist, the engineer, the chemist, the biologist. And that change has not finished yet. One of the difficulties in planning for agriculture is to know exactly what discoveries are going to be made in the near future. One might take for instance the very recent discoveries connected with grass drying, the increased use of ensilage, the management of grassland associated with the name of Professor Stapledon. These recent discoveries affect profoundly the whole course of British agriculture. It would be undesirable to do anything to stabilize agriculture as it is today. Every discovery tends to upset the programme or the management of individual farms. We have to be very careful, when looking ahead and planning as we ought to do, to remember that we cannot chloroform the inventor and we ought not to try to by-pass inventions. Any planning of agriculture must allow for the periodic modification of the structure of agriculture.
People apply different tests as to whether agriculture is in a flourishing condition. Agriculture is tested sometimes according to the number' of acres under cereals or the number of people employed on the land. Those two tests must inevitably be vitally influenced by the development of mechanisation and by inventions and discoveries. It seems to me that the real test as to whether agriculure is in a good condition or not is the quantity of food produced per acre. The noble Lord, Lord Addison, brought out the fact that many farms in many parts of the country are not producing what they ought to be producing, and might be producing with proper application of modern science and modern methods. Another test undoubtedly is the standard of living of people associated with agriculture, and by that I mean both farmers and labourers.
As I see it, agriculture faces two big dangers. There is first the fact that periodically producers of food in this country are faced with serious world slumps in prices, slumps in prices which
998
they cannot foresee, over which they have no control whatever, and which can spell ruin, even for the most efficient farmer. When the noble Lord, Lord Brocket, talked of security I would differentiate in the use of the term "security." I think the community ought to be asked to guarantee efficient farmers against ruin by guaranteeing bottom prices. I do not think it would be fair to ask the community as a whole to guarantee profit, because if you guarantee a profit to agriculture why not to the coal mining or any other industry? One has to bear that essential difference in mind. The next danger which faces agriculture is a danger which many of us have experienced in the past, and that is an electoral slump affecting the Party that comes forward with an agricultural programme. I remember that at my first Parliamentary election I was faced with the so-called dear food bogey. Today the position is different, even though the effects of recent legislation and administration and lines of policy were not entirely foreseen when introduced. We find that we can help farmers, not by making home-produced food dear, but cheapening it by subsidizing the consumption of health foods, and thereby getting the interest and support of the town voter, of the parents and of all who are interested in the rising generation.
It seems to me, speaking as a social reformer, that the next problem facing us is that of malnutrition. We have dealt with housing, with education and so on. We have laid the foundation. There is still a problem of malnutrition in this country. By that I do not mean starvation or malnutrition which manifests itself in rickets or other diseases; but there is a very large amount of malnutrition which can be described as sub-normal health, a form of malnutrition which may lead, at different times, to some disease because the individual's power of resistance has been diminished through not having enough of the right food. Every impartial inquirer who has looked into the question will say that even in this country and in the United States of America, two of the countries with perhaps the highest standard of living, there is a real problem of malnutrition.
If we can link up the solution of that problem with our agricultural policy we shall find that the interest of the town

999
voter, the consumer, will be to vote for our agricultural policy instead of our being faced, as in the past, with votes against dear food. I do not need to go into the various steps taken in recent years to subsidize the consumption of health foods. We know that the cheap milk scheme has led to an enormous increase in the consumption of milk, and has brought prosperity to countless farms. The noble Lord, Lord Woolton, has been responsible for a measure whereby pregnant women and nursing mothers with small incomes are guaranteed a quantity of milk for themselves and for their children under five years of age. There have been various other steps, taken little by little, which are going to spell prosperity for British agriculture. The mother whose child has been benefited by cheap or free milk is going to vote for our agricultural policy, and we are going to get a measure of security for agricultural policy if it is associated with a policy of combating malnutrition.
Obviously, that is not the whole policy. I merely bring it forward as being the corner stone of an agricultural policy. Health foods, milk, vegetables, eggs, fruit, are produced in all parts of this country, and as one noble Lord who spoke earlier indicated, our climate is very good for the production of health foods. Health foods are foods where freshness counts, and in this matter we have an advantage over competitors. So far as we get this policy of better nutrition adopted by the State, whether nationally or through local authorities, and so far as we get health food subsidies, and thereby cheapen these health foods, we shall get electoral security for farmers. I, for one, would not be afraid to advocate on any platform giving many young children free food—for I believe that the money so spent would be well spent—in the same way as we have free education. I could quote countless instances where young children who have received proper food are not only better physically but better mentally also, better able to get full advantage from the very large expenditure of money on their education.
I am not going to examine every commodity. I have said that we were going through an era of change due to new
1000
discoveries. I hope that the noble Lord and those who are associated with him, when they are planning for the future, will plan for a large expenditure of money on research, more particularly in respect of the eradication and diminution of animal diseases. I remember a speech which was made before the war by the then Minister of Agriculture. I think he said that in the opinion of the Department of which he was head, the cost to the country of preventible animal disease was something in the neighbourhood of £14,000,000 a year, but, whatever the exact figure may have been, everybody who has had anything to do with agriculture knows that with cows, with beef production, with sheep, and with poultry there is a large amount of preventible disease which could be and ought to be eradicated. I think it very important that this should be taken into consideration.
Undoubtedly there will be an increased demand for increased production of what I call health foods. I think that as regards beef we ought to concentrate more on the improvement of quality rather than on developing the quantity of the beef that is produced here. Our best beef cattle are the best in the world, but I think most people would agree that when you get away from the best the average quality of much of our live stock is not nearly so good as it ought to be. That is partly due to the fact that we have been slow—much slower than they have been in Ireland for instance—in eliminating scrub bulls. The result is that we have a number of animals either being prepared for market or being put on the market which we should be far better without. This is important because increased milk production means an increase in the quantity of cow-beef. It is very important, therefore, that we should do all we can to improve the general quality.
Previous speakers have referred to the desirability of bringing the agricultural labourer into the picture. I believe that there is a great deal that can be done. You have only to go into rural districts to see the need for improvement in water supplies, for bringing electricity into the villages and for providing better food and a greater amount of food for school children in schools in rural districts; that is to say, the need there is for improvement in our social services. If we do all these we shall do a great deal to

1001
check the exodus from rural districts into the cities. But however much we do for agriculture, I think we have got to face the fact that we shall never go back to the agricultural population of the last century. Those who talk about large increases in the rural population—I think I have even seen it put at a million more people on the land—have never attempted, I am convinced, to study this question judicially and with an impartial mind. What we have got to do is to see that the standard of living of those who are asked to work on farms is raised. If we do this we shall do a great deal to stop the exodus from the land into the cities.
Reference has been made to the part which the landowner has to play. In this country we have grown up under the system of landlord and tenant, but as every noble Lord knows the landlord's position and functions have "been changing. Death Duties, high taxation, sales of estates, are some of the things which have brought about complete change, and so have the Acts connected with agricultural holdings, the Acts intended to give tenant farmers increased security or compensation for improvement. I think I am not exaggerating when I say that very frequently these Acts have tended to shield inefficiency and retard improvement, and we have got to take that into consideration. Whatever it may be, the result is that many estates have run down, buildings are in need of repair, and roads are in need of repair or of being remade. To-day a large number of farms require a big expenditure of capital; expenditure on such a scale as most landowners cannot contemplate.
There is need for a scheme for long-term investment of capital. One of the noble Lords who spoke earlier in the debate referred to the possibility of having a Land Improvement Commission. I think that in the Forestry Commission and in the Agricultural Mortgage Corporation we have precedents which might help us. I do not suggest that it is necessary to have one Land Improvement Commission for the country as a whole. I think it might be done by regions. The Commission might be assisted in acquiring land in those districts referred to by Lord Addison where land is obviously being under-farmed. I think that where a man succeeds to an agricultural estate he should be given the option, if he so
1002
desires, of paying the Death Duties in kind rather than in cash. I do not think that it should be a matter of compulsion, but I think that he should be given the choice. In these ways we should be able to have experiments to see how we could make it possible for capital to be invested by the nation in quantities which I do not believe the private landowner is in a position to do; capital invested in making roads, in improving water supplies and matters of that sort—experiments which we might gardually adopt and expand.
Before sitting down I would only add that I think that this debate has shown the need for including agriculture in our planning for the future. Agriculture is undoubtedly one of the greatest industries we have. The difficulty in dealing with it arises because it is both a science and an art. It provides us with food, and it provides many people with a mode of life which it is very desirable to assist and perpetuate. Moreover, it is intimately bound up with the well-being and welfare of consumers. In addition to that the way in which we develop and plan our agriculture must affect and influence the amenities and beauties of the countryside. I am convinced that national necessity requires careful planning, and in no other phase of our national life can we get a beter return if we plan wisely.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE DUKE OF NORFOLK): My Lords, we have this afternoon, I think your Lordships will agree, had a most interesting discussion on this great industry. It is clearly important that among the various industries which are being discussed in connection with post-war policy agriculture should be included; but when the noble Lord who moved this Motion approached me, I told him that any Government reply on such a debate as this must depend on the timing of the debate, and that I was not quite certain that this was the right moment for the matter to be widely discussed. I hope, therefore, that I shall not disappoint him with the answer which I give this afternoon, for there is indeed nothing that I can say which can add to the statement made by my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture last November. He then said:
" The Government, representative as it is of all major political Parties, recognises the importance

1003
of maintaining after the war a healthy and well-balanced agriculture as an essential and permanent feature of national policy."
I repeat that nothing that I can say can add to or detract from that statement.
The Government are fully alive to the necessity of working out a comprehensive long-term agricultural policy. They are also certain that all Parties must be agreed upon this matter. The necessity of avoiding a repetition of the disasters which overtook agriculture in the years that have passed means that we must very carefully consider not only the political Parties but also the various interests which are connected with agriculture. If we are to achieve the results desired by all those interested, we must consider not only our people at home, but overseas countries and the Dominions. We are still in the very early stages, however, and I cannot to-day give any details to your Lordships; but I will say that we have given to very many points, in broad outline, a great deal of consideration. I can also say that His Majesty's Government are firmly resolved that they will do their very utmost to see that the impoverished state and neglected condition into which agriculture fell between the last Great War and this shall never happen again.
There is, in a debate such as this, a possible danger that the farming community as a whole may get it into their heads that the three Parties are not agreed. I do not think that anything that has been said here this afternoon could give that impression. If it does, I can assure your Lordships that there is nothing further from the truth. Meanwhile, it is our immediate job to win this war, and nothing should distract the farmers from the business which lies to their hand. It is important at this moment to produce an ever-increasing amount of food and to maintain the reviving confidence among farmers. The Government have given a guarantee of fixed prices for at least one year after the war, the object being to ensure stability for a length of time sufficient for the introduction of this long-term policy. All the points raised by noble Lords in this debate will be of value in the discussions which are, and will be, taking
1004
place, and naturally I shall pass them on to my right honourable friend. I am confident that co-operation and good will throughout will achieve the desired results and that people may live in comfort on the land, producing a reasonable living and producing food in abundance from the land which is their inheritance.
LORD BROCKET: My Lords, I feel that although, as I suggested in my few remarks, I did not expect the noble Duke to go into any detail on the policy that is being thrashed out at the present time, his speech will serve to give confidence to the agricultural community. I also feel that the debate which we have had this afternoon will serve a useful purpose in helping His Majesty's Government to formulate the policy which is so essential. I assume that the Motion which I have moved is accepted by the Government, and therefore I presume that a vote will be taken upon it.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
SUNDAY ENTERTAINMENTS ACT, 1932.
BOROUGH OF ST. IVES (HUNTINGDONSHIRE) ORDER.
RURAL DISTRICT OF WINDSOR (PARISH OF SUNNINGHILL) ORDER.
THE EARL OF LUCAN: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend the Duke of Devonshire, I beg to move that these Orders be approved.
Moved, That the Orders made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department under the Sunday Entertainments Act, 1932, and laid before the House yesterday, be approved—(The Earl of Lucan.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.

SOUTH WALES ELECTRIC POWER ORDER, 1941.
Report from the Special Orders Committee, That no petition has been presented praying to be heard against the Special Order, and that there is nothing in this Order to which they think it necessary to call the attention of the House:
Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

MARRIAGES PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
Reported, without amendment', and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House.
  BYKER NURSERY SCHOOL.
  BYKER NURSERY SCHOOL.