Sitting of 16 July 1942

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

    "Holidays-at-Home" Schemes.
    Mr. Ellis Smithasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the satisfaction given by the organisation of enjoyment for the people brought about by the circular issued by his Ministry; is it intended to make this a permanent feature; will he consider later the experience gained in order to increase and improve the facilities; why no action was taken in the large industrial area of Sal-ford; and will he give the industrial areas where no action was taken in the OFFICIAL REPORT?
    The Minister of Labour (Mr. Ernest Bevin): The reports I have so far received indicate that the "Holidays-at-Home" schemes organised by local authorities have been most successful, and I should like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation of these local efforts. Whether they will be a permanent feature of our social organisation is not a matter which I can forecast but steps are being taken to keep a careful record of this year's experience as a guide for the future. As regards Salford, I understand that the annual holiday was commonly taken at Whitsun, and that it was not possible to organise holiday activities locally so early in the year. I regret the information asked for at the end of the Question is not available.

    Volunteer Nurses.
    Mr. Ammonasked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the shortage of nurses, special consideration will be given to releasing women who volunteer for nursing?
    Mr. Bevin: After consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, I have instructed my officers that, in all
    1322
    the cases in which releases require their permission, women who wish to volunteer for nursing should be allowed to do so irrespective of their occupation.

    Married Women Workers (Leave).
    Mr. Bowlesasked the Minister of Labour whether the Press notice issued last March applies to employers not engaged directly or indirectly in war production?
    Mr. Bevin: The Press notice as to leave for women with husbands in the Forces or Mercantile Marine related to all employers, whether or not directly engaged in war production.
    Major Kimballasked the Minister of Labour whether, in cases where a man and his wife are employed in different essential industries which have selected different weeks for their works holidays, he will give authority for the wife to be granted her holiday for the same week as the husband's holiday?
    Mr. Bevin: I have a great deal of sympathy with the point made by my hon. and gallant Friend, but it will be appreciated that the holiday arrangements of each factory must be planned primarily with reference to the organisation of the factory and the needs of production. I hope, however, that employers will do what is practicable to meet requests from employees in such cases as that referred to in the Question.

    Registration, Kegworth.
    Major Kimballasked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the inconvenience and difficulty caused to residents of Kegworth, Leicestershire, who at present must go to the Ministry of Labour's office in Castle Donington to register, he will arrange for a representative from his Ministry to attend one day per week in Kegworth?
    Mr. Bevin: I am having inquiries made and will communicate with my hon. and gallant Friend.

  BAKING AND CONFECTIONERY INDUSTRY (WAGES).
  Captain Peter Macdonaldasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the trade board for the baking and confectionery industry has demanded a

  1323
  further increase in wages for operatives which will be the fourth rise since the commencement of the war; and whether, in view of the decision to reduce the maximum price of bread, he can take any steps to prevent unreasonable action by the trade board in question?
  Mr. Bevin: The trade board has statutory responsibility for fixing minimum wages. The representatives of employers and workers on the board together with the three independent members were unanimous, and my hon. and gallant Friend can rest assured that all relevant facts were taken into account.
  Captain Macdonald: Have the facts which have occurred since been taken into account?
  Mr. Bevin: How can you take into account facts that have occurred since?
  Captain Macdonald: Could they not be taken into account now before any further action is taken?
  Mr. Thorne: Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is no finality in wages and salaries?

  CATERING TRADES (REGULATION).
  Colonel Arthur Evansasked the Minister of Labour the outcome of previous independent investigations into the desirability of establishing trade boards in the catering industry?
  Mr. Bevin: The only inquiry into the question of establishing trade boards in the catering trades was made in 1930, when the late Sir Arthur Colefax was appointed as Commissioner to hold a public inquiry with regard to proposals for applying the Trade Boards Acts to the catering trade. His report was concerned mainly with legal aspects of the proposals and did not deal with the desirability of establishing trade boards, as he took the view that this was a matter solely for the Minister of Labour. He expressed the conclusion, however, that subject to certain views which he expressed as a matter of law with regard to the form of the special order that would be necessary, the objections to the establishment of a trade board which were relied upon
  1324
  at the inquiry did not provide any sufficient reason why the Trade Boards Acts should not be applied to the industry if the Minister considered that course to be expedient.
  Colonel Evans: As my right hon. Friend is anxious to introduce an agreed Measure based on the facts of the case, and as there are so many acknowledged difficulties to be overcome and the Bill is so wide in its scope, will he refer the question to an impartial committee to go into the whole matter in the light of probable post-war conditions and consider the findings before proceeding further?
  Mr. Bevin: I am in negotiation with the trade at the moment, and I shall consider anything that is put up to me, subject to this—and I say it as a considered judgment—that I cannot give way in any circumstances on the principle that there must be a wage foundation of some kind in this industry.

  MILITARY SERVICE.

    Transport and General Workers Union (Staff).
    Major-General Sir Alfred Knoxasked the Minister of Labour how many men of military age are still retained as exempt at the headquarters and district offices of the Transport and General Workers Union; and what proportion these men bear to the total clerical staff?
    Mr. Bevin: As stated in reply to a previous Question asking for similar information about a private firm, I am not prepared to publish information of this kind in respect of individual undertakings or organisations.
    Sir A. Knox: Is it not a fact that at the Finsbury Park offices of this union 50 per cent. of the employees are of military age? Would they not give better service if they joined the Fighting Services, and could not their work be equally well done by women?
    Mr. Bevin: I have taken the line that when man-power boards deal with particular firms and organisations I accept their decisions, whether they apply to private firms or unions, and I do not bring their decisions into public discussion.
    Sir A. Knox: Surely the right hon. Gentleman can inquire into this case and find out whether some men could be released?
    Mr. Bevin: I am making constant inquiries all the time and reviewing all cases.

    Call-Up Deferment.
    Major Lyonsasked the Prime Minister whether he will call upon each of the Fighting Services for the numbers of men and women who have been called up but whose postings have been deferred, and returned to await further instructions; whether by means of increased training facilities, or otherwise, he will arrange that the time of such deferment be limited and that so far as possible no persons called up for service should be without instructions and merely placed on waiting lists?
    The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Attlee): I have the information to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. The scale of training facilities which it is possible to make available depends on many factors and no recruits are kept waiting longer than is absolutely necessary. So far as possible, recruits on deferred service are warned of the probable time that will elapse before they are required. In no case are they left without instructions.
    Major Lyons: Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the idea which is getting around that there is no vacancy in any part of the war effort is fostering a spirit of frustration throughout the country, and will he take steps to make it known that there is, every day and every hour, something that somebody can do in the war effort?
    Mr. Attlee: I am not aware that that idea is getting around; if it is, I am sure my hon. and gallant Friend's Question will have contradicted it. The aim, where there is any deferment, is that people should carry on with their jobs or perhaps with some other job until they are called up.
    Major Lyons: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider taking some steps to put into effect what he has just said, so that the words "waiting list" shall not be known in connection with services wanted for the war effort?
    Mr. Attlee: I do not know whether my hon. and gallant Friend is not referring merely to a matter of nomenclature. It is necessary that certain people should be deferred, but it has been made abundantly plain that while they are waiting they should be carrying on with their ordinary jobs.

  INDIA.

    Import Licences.
    Mr. Molsonasked the Secretary of State for India whether he is in a position to make a statement regarding the issue of import licences in India for goods ordered before the introduction of the new Import Licensing Regulations, which took effect on 1st July?
    The Secretary of State for India (Mr. Amery): In the case of items in respect of which an import licence was required before 1st July for imports from the United Kingdom, any licences already granted will remain valid. In the case of items in respect of which an import assistance recommendation has been issued by the Government of India, an import licence will be granted as a matter of course on application by the importer in India. It is, therefore, safe for such items, to be shipped from this country in anticipation of the issue of the licence. In other cases exporters are advised to delay shipment until they have ascertained that an import licence has been granted in India. The Government of India are advising importers in India to take the initiative in applying for licences in respect of outstanding orders and informing suppliers here promptly when these have been obtained.

    State Railways (Wages).
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Secretary of State for India the financial surplus on the Indian State railways during the last official year; whether, in view of the low pay of the staff and the small allowances granted to meet increased cost of living, any of that surplus is to be used for the purpose of granting an increase in pay; and whether any recent consultation on this matter has taken place with the railwaymen's trade union?
    Mr. Amery: The railway surplus for 1941–42 was expected to be Rs. 26.2 crores (£19,650,000). This figure was

    1327
    arrived at after charging a sum of nearly Rs. 1.5 crores (£1,100,000) for payment of cost-of-living bonuses to the lower-paid staff, which was fixed after discussion, and in agreement, with the representatives of organised labour. The surplus earned by the railways, except so far as required to be placed to reserve, goes to the relief of the Indian taxpayer, who has previously had to bear the burden of the unprofitable years of depression.
    Mr. Sorensen: Is it not a fact that the organised workers on the Indian State railways are dissatisfied, and in the circumstances does not the right hon. Gentleman think it proper that of the £19,000,000 some portion should be allocated for a reasonable increase in wages?
    Mr. Amery: As I explained, the increases were granted after discussion with and in agreement with representatives of railway labour.
    Mr. Sorensen: Are not the wages still miserably low in many cases, and do they not require some augmentation?
    Mr. Amery: Wages in India are low.

  WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION.
  Mr. Ellis Smithasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware of the urgent need for increased payments under workmen's compensation and many other changes required; and what action is it proposed to take?
  The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Herbert Morrison): I have recently had under consideration certain representations made by the Trades Union Congress General Council in regard to benefits and certain other matters which would require amending legislation. Having regard, however, to the fact that a Government Committee is undertaking a comprehensive survey of the social insurance and allied services, including workmen's compensation, and that the conclusions reached by this Committee may have an important bearing on the lines on which workmen's compensation should be developed in the future, I have come to the conclusion that legislation proposing substantial amendments of the existing scheme could not usefully be con-
  1328
  sidered pending the report of that Committee, which is expected to be received in the next few months. I would remind my hon. Friend that the payments under the Act in disablement cases were substantially increased two years ago by the Workmen's Compensation (Supplementary Allowances) Act, 1940.
  Mr. Smith: In view of that reply, could the Secretary of State give some idea what is meant by "the next few months," as it may mean many months? In view of the urgency of this question, will he consider taking some action between now and when the report is received?
  Mr. Morrison: I can assure my hon. Friend that I am seriously and definitely informed that when we say a few months it will be so and will not run to many months, as he not unnaturally fears. I can assure him that I will keep the matter under observation in the meantime and keep in touch with the General Council of the Trades Union Congress, whose deputation was headed by my hon. Friend the Member for North Southwark (Mr. Isaacs), and I think that he will assure my hon. Friend that they at any rate will keep in touch with me.
  Mr. W. Joseph Stewart: Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the county of Durham £22,000 is paid out each year from the local rates to help such cases as these?
  Mr. Ellis Smith: Can the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that as soon as he receives the report action will be taken within a short time?
  Mr. Morrison: I would not like to pledge myself, for it depends on the nature of the report, but when it is available I will enter into consultation with the representatives of the General Council of the Congress if they so desire, as I have no doubt they will.

  CIVIL DEFENCE.

    French and Danish Nationals.
    Mr. Ivor Thomasasked the Home Secretary whether, in recognition of the services to the allied cause of the French and Danish communities in this country, he will extend to them the exemptions from the restrictions upon aliens recently given to allied nationals?
    Mr. H. Morrison: While I am glad to pay tribute to the services which are being rendered to the Allied cause by the French and Danish communities, I regret that I should not feel justified in extending automatically by general order to the nationals of States which are not at war with the Axis powers the privileges recently granted to nationals of Allied States. I have, however, considered whether any steps can be taken to meet the special case of the French and Danish civilian and unofficial communities, and I have decided to give to individual French and Danish nationals, who satisfy me that they are trustworthy and loyal supporters of the Allied cause, exemptions of a general character from the restrictions upon the movements of aliens. Individual French and Danish nationals who desire to obtain general exemption from these restrictions should communicate with the police of the district in which they reside.
    Mr. Thomas: While thanking my right hon. Friend for his reply, which will give great satisfaction, may I ask whether every application will receive the most sympathetic consideration?
    Mr. Morrison: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. Sorensen: Is there any appeal against a decision of the local police?
    Mr. Morrison: No, Sir, though sometimes representations are made to us and we ask for the observations of the police; but this matter must be administered locally, and the decision must be the decision of the chief constable.
    Mr. Buchanan: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether it is possible to extend this change to cover cases where Danes or French marry here, so that the women they marry will not lose their British nationality, and also allow his decision to operate in the case of adopting the child of an alien?
    Mr. Morrison: That does raise a rather different issue from that in the Question on the Paper. I will consider it, but my impression is that it would require legislation.
    Sir Granville Gibson: Will this regulation apply to Norwegian nationals as well?
    Mr. Morrison: They are already covered rather more advantageously because the Norwegian Government are at war with the Axis.

    Alien Internee (Inquiries).
    Mr. R. G. Morrisonasked the Home Secretary the cause of the delay in dealing with the case of an alien, about whom he has been informed, brought back from Canada two months ago and now in the Isle of Man; what inquiries are still uncompleted; and when a decision will be made?
    Mr. H. Morrison: The alien to whom I assume that my hon. Friend refers was brought back from Canada for consideration of the question of his eligibility for release. The fact that he has been offered employment is not in itself sufficient reason for authorising the release of a man who does not fall within any of the categories of civilian internees eligible for release from internment, as laid down in the White Paper (Cmd. 6233) of October, 1940, which still remains the basis of the Government's policy. The position of this particular case was explained to my hon. Friend by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in a letter of 24th June, and I am still awaiting the replies to the inquiries which had then already been initiated. I hope to be in a position to reach a decision at a very early date, when I will not fail to inform my hon. Friend.
    Mr. R. C. Morrison: In view of the fact that I was informed in the right hon. Gentleman's Department that these inquiries would not take more than a month and that considerably over two months have elapsed, can he expedite this matter?
    Mr. H. Morrison: I will do all I can, but I cannot accept the view that there was delay in the Home Office. Inquiries had to be made by the Ministry of Labour, and I do not think there was any undue delay there, because the alien arrived back on 12th May but unfortunately did not register with the Ministry of Labour, and, indeed, it was left to the Home Office to approach the Ministry of Labour on his behalf.

    Subversive Literature.
    Captain Crowderasked the Home Secretary what action he proposes to take

    1331
    regarding the distribution of subversive literature among Yorkshire miners by young men between the ages of 25 and 30 who are being paid £10 a week to distribute this literature?
    Mr. H. Morrison: Such information as is available to me does not suggest that men are being paid £10 a week to distribute the literature to which my hon. Friend refers, or that this literature has any appreciable influence in the mining industry or elsewhere, but I am making some further inquiries in the matter.
    Mr. Sorensen: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire in particular of the gentleman who made this statement and ask him to produce the specific evidence upon which he based his statement?
    Mr. Morrison: Yes, Sir. I have given instructions that suitable inquiries should be made, and I shall be very glad of any help that Mr. Hall can give me.
    Mr. Gallacher: While the Minister is making inquiries about the possible bad effect of these activities, will he also consider what would be the good effect which could be produced by the "Daily Worker"?
    Mr. Morrison: I would ask my hon. Friend not to be too keen upon suppressions. This organisation is only pursuing much the same political policy as he and his own political friends pursued before the Soviet Union was attacked.

    Detainees.
    Mr. William Brownasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware of the difficulties, to prison staffs and prisoners alike, arising from the incarceration of convicted prisoners and 18B detainees in the same penal establishments, the two types of prisoner being governed by separate and different disciplinary regulations; and whether he will take steps to end this situation?
    Mr. Lewisasked the Home Secretary whether he can assure the House that prompt disciplinary measures will be taken against any man or woman detained under Regulation 18B who refuses to obey reasonable instructions from the prison authorities, or who endeavours in any way to obstruct the prison employees in the execution of their duties?
    Mr. H. Morrison: Persons detained in prison under Regulation 18B who are guilty of breaches of discipline are liable to punishment as provided by the Prison Rules and may be reported and dealt with as circumstances require in the same way as prisoners. As such persons are detained for custodial purposes, and not by way of punishment, they are allowed certain privileges which are not accorded to ordinary prisoners: and this difference in methods of treatment is liable to cause difficulties to the prison staffs—to whose good work in overcoming these difficulties a tribute of appreciation is due. Most of the persons detained under Regulation 18B have been sent to the Isle of Man. There are, however, a few persons who for various reasons, including the temporary accommodation of persons coming from Isle of Man to attend before the Advisory Committee, are detained in prison. I recognise that there would be advantages from the administrative point of view if all such persons could be accommodated elsewhere than in prison, but I regret that for the present at any rate the difficulties of providing and staffing separate establishments with suitable accommodation are such that this course is impracticable.
    Mr. Brown: Is not the Home Secretary aware that there is one prison which is entirely unoccupied at the moment and which could be used to segregate the 18B prisoners from the ordinary prisoners; and does he not realise that while the prison staff appreciate the tribute he has paid to them, they would much more appreciate being delivered from a situation which, from the disciplinary and other points of view, is almost impossible?
    Mr. Morrison: I appreciate the point which the hon. Member has raised, but the number involved is only 55——
    Mr. Brown: Just the accommodation of that prison.
    Mr. Morrison: That is remarkable——plus 26 persons temporarily there waiting to attend before the Advisory Committee, etc., and I do not think I ought to be pressed to open a special prison establishment, with all the necessary overhead charges that are involved for this purpose. While I appreciate that there are difficulties for the prison staff, I think they have surmounted them very well, and it is not a bad thing for the prison staff that they

    1333
    should have some variety in the class of cases which they handle, for this develops their ingenuity and adaptability.
    Mr. Brown: Will my right hon. Friend be willing to receive representations from the prison staff themselves as to what is involved in this double set of regulations in the same prison?
    Mr. Morrison: I should require to consider that point.

    Censorship Office, Liverpool.
    Mr. Sorensenasked the Home Secretary whether he has now investigated the statement and allegations made by an Indian doctor respecting his treatment by officials of the censor's office at Liverpool; and whether he has taken any action in the matter?
    Mr. H. Morrison: I received yesterday from my hon. Friend a copy of the statement to which he refers. I am having inquiries made and will communicate further with him in due course.

  ROBBERIES WITH VIOLENCE, LONDON STREETS.
  Sir Waldron Smithersasked the Home Secretary how many cases in the Metropolitan Police area there have been per week this year of footpads in London causing grievous bodily harm to citizens; how many persons have been taken to hospital as a consequence; and what steps he is taking to combat this growing menace?
  Mr. H. Morrison: In the first six months of this year the total number of cases of robbery or of assaults with intent to rob in all parts of the extensive Metropolitan Police District was 85, as compared with 75 in the corresponding period of last year, and these figures include minor assaults which do not involve grievous bodily harm. Figures of the number of persons taken to hospital are not at the moment available, but they shall be communicated to my hon. Friend as soon as possible. The Commissioner of Police, with whom I have been in consultation, is satisfied that there is no ground for the apprehension that there is a growing menace. There is no evidence of organised activities involving robbery with violence and no ground for thinking that the streets of the Metropolis are less safe than they were before the war.
  Sir W. Smithers: In view of the fact that there are cases known to me personally—in one case the victim was in hospital three weeks—will the right hon. Gentleman take powers to ensure that very severe punishment is inflicted on these highway robbers? [HON. MEMBERS: "And shoot them."] Yes, and shoot them.
  Major Petherick: Could not they perform useful service in fighting the Germans?
  Mr. Morrison: That question is hardly one for my Department. On the point raised by the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Sir W. Smithers), while I am speaking from memory my impression is that the possible punishments are fairly severe. It is, of course, a matter for the courts. I cannot continually bring in new penalties and new punishments; otherwise I should be doing the work of the courts of law.
  Sir Percy Harris: Is it not a fact that in spite of the black-out and in spite of the fact that we are at war, London compares very favourably with peace-time conditions in its respect for law and order?
  Mr. Morrison: As a matter of fact, my own opinion is that the figures which I have given are a remarkable tribute to the character of the people of London. It is only an increase from 75 to 85, which may be temporary. In view of all the circumstances to which the right hon. Baronet the Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Sir P. Harris) has drawn attention, I do not think there is anything about which to get panicky.
  Mr. Sorensen: May it not be that Chislehurst is a bad spot?
  Sir William Wayland: Would it not be better if the Home Secretary were to suggest to magistrates that they gave a flogging sentence? I think it would be far better.

  CZECHO-SLOVAKTAN DOCTOR (COLLIERY APPOINTMENT).
  Sir Henry Morris-Jonesasked the Minister of Health whether sanction has yet been given by his Department to an application made six weeks ago on behalf of a distinguished Czecho-Slovakian doctor of unimpeachable references, who is a

  1335
  recognised authority on rheumatism, to take up an appointment offered him by a group of collieries in the Midlands, to co-operate with their own medical officers in a clinic for the prevention and treatment of rheumatism and allied disease amongst miners?
  The Minister of Health (Mr. Ernest Brown): Yes, Sir. The colliery clinic to which I understand my hon. Friend is referring has been approved as an institution at which a foreign-qualified doctor may be employed under the Medical Register (Temporary Registration) Order. My approval was given as soon as certain questions of principle regarding the employment of foreign doctors in this new field of industrial medicine had been settled, in consultation with the Government Departments concerned and the Central Medical War Committee.
  Sir H. Morris-Jones: When did the right hon. Gentleman give his approval?
  Mr. Brown: I do not know the exact date, but probably my answer will satisfy my hon. Friend.

  OLD AGE PENSIONS.
  Sir Irving Alberyasked the Minister of Health what steps are taken to draw the attention of voluntary contributors in the Old Age Insurance Scheme, to the fact that in certain circumstances, even when contributions have been maintained, they will not become entitled to the full 10s. per week pension; and whether he is aware that persons have entered into voluntary insurance unaware that there is any such condition?
  Mr. E. Brown: Arrangements have been in force from the start of the Contributory Pensions Scheme whereby every person who has been precluded from qualifying for the ordinary rate of old age pension by reason of the fact that he has previously been in an employment excepted from old age pensions insurance has been supplied at the time he has become eligible for voluntary insurance with a leaflet explaining the modifications in the rate of old age pension to which he will be subject. I have no reason to suppose that there has been any failure in the operation of these arrangements.
  Sir I. Albery: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that it will probably come increasingly to his knowledge that there have been failures, as these pensions become due?
  Mr. Brown: I should be very glad to be informed by my hon. Friend, but he will understand that it has now been working for a long time.
  Mr. Sorensenasked the Minister of Health what protests he has received against the proposed method of granting a clothes allowance to old age pensioners; whether this proposal is now operating; and whether he has any report from old age pension officials respecting the incidence of the proposal?
  Mr. Brown: As regards the first part of the Question, I cannot add anything to the reply given on 8th July to a similar Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Bedwellty (Sir C. Edwards). The answer to the second part is "Yes," and as regards the last part, the Assistance Board inform me that the information they are receiving about the progress of the work indicates that, in general, those of the pensioners visited who are in need of clothing, etc., welcome the inquiry, when its purpose is explained to them.
  Mr. Sorensen: Has every step been taken to explain fully to the public how this scheme operates?
  Mr. Brown: Yes, Sir, and I am grateful that this Question has been asked, as I was for the Question a fortnight ago.

  SUPPLEMENTARY PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES (GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS).
  Mr. Tinkerasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can make a statement on the investigation into the position of old age and widows' pensions; and what action is to be taken?
  Mr. Robertsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he will be presenting to the House the report he promised concerning old age pensioners as they are affected by war-time conditions?
  The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Kingsley Wood): I would ask my hon. Friends to await the statement I will make at the end of Questions.
  Later—
  Sir K. Wood: The House will recall that on 17th June I undertook on behalf of the Government, but without anticipating or duplicating the work of Sir William Beveridge in framing any long-term scheme, to carry out an immediate examination into the present position of old age pensioners and widows so far as it is now accentuated by war-time conditions. That inquiry has been duly made and the Government have reached the conclusion that the present position can be met by an increase in the scale rates governing supplementary pensions, by improvements in winter allowances and by steps to make good any lack of clothing, bedding and other household necessaries from which supplementary pensioners may be suffering in view of the increase which has taken place in the cost of such articles.
  The Assistance Board are submitting draft Regulations increasing the scale rates for supplementary pensions, and these draft Regulations, when made by the Ministers concerned, will be laid before Parliament as soon as possible with a view to their approval by affirmative Resolution. The increases in the scale rates proposed will be 2s. 6d. for each person of 16 and upwards whose needs are taken into account, and 1s. for each child under that age. Thus, the increase in the case of a married couple without dependants will be 5s. Similar Regulations will also be submitted with reference to unemployment assistance. Arrangements can be made to bring these increases into effect within three weeks of the date on which the Regulations receive the approval of Parliament.
  Winter allowances are given to meet the excess of winter over summer consumption of fuel and light. The amounts normally given have hitherto been 1s. 6d. for a person living alone, and 2s. for a man and wife, and the period for which they have been given has been from the beginning of November until the end of March. The Government are informed that the Assistance Board had already reached the conclusion that the normal amount of the allowance should be increased to 2s. 6d., whether for a person living alone or for a man and wife, and that they now propose to extend the period of the allowance until the end of April.
  1338
  The action which the Assistance Board are taking with regard to clothing, bedding and other household supplies was described in the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health to my hon. Friend the Member for Abertillery (Mr. Daggar) on 2nd July. Grants will be made in cash, except in the case of blankets, for which special arrangements are necessary owing to difficulties of supply. The total cost to the Exchequer of all these measures will be some £10,750,000 per annum, in addition to the cost of the special grants which may be anything up to £1,000,000 in the present year.
  Mr. Pethick-Lawrence: Does the Chancellor of the Exchequer propose that the House should give its attention to this affirmative Motion before the Summer Recess?
  Sir K. Wood: That is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the House. But I can say, on his behalf, that such is the intention of the Government.
  Mr. Tinker: I gather that we shall have a chance of discussing these proposals before they come into effect, but I want to express my intense disappointment with them. There will be a fight about them.
  Sir K. Wood: I do not think they will be so regarded by the old people concerned. The cost is very considerable, as my hon. Friend knows.
  Mr. Robertson: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the important concession that he has just announced will go a long way indeed towards meeting the old people's requirements? Would not those hon. Members who are still dissatisfied render better service by getting Darby-and-Joan clubs started in their constituencies to relieve the loneliness of these old people, now that their material needs have been so well met?
  Mr. Graham White: May we assume that this decision has the unanimous support of the Cabinet?
  Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir.
  Mr. Daggar: Is it proposed to make no increased provision for the widows, whose cost of living has been increased; and are we to understand that this slight increase

  1339
  —with which I am so disappointed—is not to be disregarded in the operation of the means test?
  Sir K. Wood: There is no alteration to the main structure of the present administration of old age pensions. This change is directed to meeting the war-time needs of the old people. With regard to widows, those who have reached the age of 60 will receive the further benefits now proposed.
  Mr. Daggar: I am referring to widows under 60. Does not the Chancellor agree that this paltry increase does not meet the increased taxation imposed in his last Budget?
  Mr. Mack: Is the Chancellor aware that this niggardly increase of 5s. in the case of married couples does not even make up for the increase in the cost of living, and that great hardship will be occasioned to these people and considerable dissatisfaction expressed in all parts of the country? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the extra amount, according to his figures, is not equal to one day's cost of the war?
  Mr. Stephen: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the new figures will still leave the old age pensioner on the destitution scale?
  Sir K. Wood: No, Sir; as my hon. Friend knows well, if there are any such cases, it is quite open for the old people to apply for an increase in their supplementary allowances.
  Mr. Henderson Stewart: Since this is a temporary measure, pending receipt of the report of the Beveridge Committee, when may we expect to receive that report?
  Sir K. Wood: Some time in the autumn.
  Mr. Shinwell: Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that large numbers of old age pensioners will still be left in a condition of extreme poverty?
  Sir K. Wood: No, Sir; I hope that my hon. Friend will explain to persons concerned that it is open to anyone so affected, without any limit to the amount involved, to apply for an increase in his supplementary pension.

  BRITISH ARMY.

    Home Guard (Death Duties).
    Mr. Thorneasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the estate of a Home Guard who dies on active service is charged with Estate Duty?
    Sir K. Wood: The estate of any member of the Home Guard who dies from wounds inflicted, accidents occurring or disease contracted whilst on duty is entitled to the relief from Death Duties conferred on the estates of soldiers, sailors and airmen by Section 38 of the Finance Act, 1924.
    Sir John Mellor: Will the right hon. Gentleman explain how the Scottish case, in which judgment has been reserved, came about?
    Sir K. Wood: I understand that the case is at present before the Court of Session in Edinburgh, and therefore I cannot comment on it.
    Sir J. Mellor: Has not the attitude of the Government in regard to Estate Duty been inconsistent with their attitude in regard to the pensions of Home Guard officers?

    Medical Officers (Civilian Cases).
    Mr. Hannahasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will permit Army doctors to attend civilian cases where the ordinary practitioners, already in many cases over-worked, have their numbers depleted by sickness?
    The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Sandys): Army medical officers may where necessary assist civilian doctors so long as this does not interfere with their military duties. In addition, many medical officers have been granted temporary release from the Army to meet civilian needs.
    Dr. Edith Summerskill: Does this reply apply only to specialists?
    Mr. Sandys: No, Sir, it does not.

    Voluntary Aid Detachments.
    Sir A. Knoxasked the Secretary of State for War when he proposes to receive the promised deputation of Voluntary Aid Detachments?
    Mr. Sandys: My right hon. Friend hopes to receive the deputation very shortly.
    Sir A. Knox: Why has this deputation been so constantly postponed?
    Mr. Sandys: Discussions have been going on in the meantime between the War Office and the voluntary organisations concerned. I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that my right hon. Friend is just as keen as he is to get this matter settled quickly.

  TEACHERS' PENSIONS.
  Mr. W. Brownasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the present actuarial position of the Teachers' Pension Fund?
  The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Captain Crookshank): The report of the first actuarial inquiry into the teachers' pension account was published in 1935 (H.C. 78). It has been necessary owing to war conditions to postpone the second actuarial inquiry, which was due to be made as on 1st April, 1940.
  Mr. Brown: Did the actuarial position revealed in 1935 show a surplus or a deficiency?
  Captain Crookshank: I could not say, but by reference to a document which is called H.C. 78 the hon. Gentleman can see for himself.

  GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

    Public Relations and Press Officers.
    Mr. De la Bèreasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what steps have been taken by his Department to ensure that, in view of the demand for manpower for the Services, young men of military age are not being exempted as Press officers, assistant Press officers, public relations officers and engaged on work of publicity committees, where there are older and more experienced men available?
    Captain Crookshank: I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to officials engaged on Press and public relations work in Government Departments. The question of the reservation of these officers, as of other civil servants, is kept under review by the Kennet Committee. In that con-
    1342
    nection I would refer him to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Deritend (Sir J. Smedley Crooke) on 3rd June.
    Mr. De la Bère: Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware of the very high percentage of these men who are of military age and could be serving, and is he not further aware of the enormous demand of the agricultural community for men? Does it not make an unfortunate impression if these men are exempt while other men who are wanted for work are not exempt?
    Captain Crookshank: If my hon. Friend will refer to the reply to which I have referred him, he will see that his assumption is incorrect.
    Mr. De la Bère: Is my right hon. and gallant Friend not aware of the enormous number who ought to be serving, and does he not think it is very wrong?
    Captain Crookshank: No, Sir, because there is no such number. Again I invite my hon. Friend to look at my answer.
    Sir Herbert Williams: Is it necessary to employ 1,019 people at a cost of £400,000, in order to advertise Government Departments?

    Overseas Trade Department (Staff).
    Mr. W. Brownasked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department how many of the personnel recently found to be redundant are still retained in his Department; and what is the grading and the scale of pay of the officers concerned?
    Mr. Harcourt Johnstone (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): Out of a number of 96 officers recently notified as available for transfer only 25 now remain. Of these one is due to leave at the end of the month, one is shortly to be called up for military service, and three are due to retire under the age limit in a few weeks' time. Details of grades and salaries will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
    Mr. Brown: In view of the fact that, in reply to an earlier Question, it was revealed that a temporary officer could be transferred from one post, exempt from military service to another, within 24 hours, can the Minister say why it has taken two months to dispose of only three-quarters of the people affected and

    1343
    how long it will take to dispose of the remainder?
    Mr. Johnstone: That inquiry should be addressed to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. The Department does not move its own officers.

    Grade.

    Scale of pay.

    Remarks.

    £

    1 Commercial Secretary, Grade 1

    1,200–50–1,500

    —

    1 Temporary Principal Officer

    800

    Due to leave at end of July, 1942.

    1 Assistant Officer

    250–25–625

    Shortly to be called up for military service.

    1 Senior Executive Officer (Higher Grade)

    750–30–1,000

    —

    1 Senior Executive Officer

    700–25–860

    Due to retire in October, 1942.

    2 Senior Staff Officers

    650–25–750

    One due to retire in September, 1942.

    1 Staff Officer

    550–25–650

    Due to retire in September, 1942.

    2 Higher Clerical Officers

    400–18–525

    —

    1 Chief Superintendent of Typists

    300–12–365

    —

    2 Clerical Officers

    At varying rates up to £350.

    —

    7 Temporary Clerks

    5 Record Keepers and Messengers

    At varying rates up to 67s. per week.

    —

    Scottish Education Department (Music and the Arts).
    Mr. Henderson Stewartasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, and to what extent, the Scottish Education Department is co-operating in the work of the committees recently set up under the chairmanship of Dr. McNair and Lord Fleming, respectively; and whether, and to what extent, Scotland benefits from, and participates in, the work of the Council for the Encouragement of Music and the Arts?
    The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. T. Johnston): The Scottish Education Department has already tendered information about the Scottish training system to the first Committee referred to in the Question, and I am keeping in close touch with the second Committee in so far as anything may emerge from its deliberations which impinges upon Scottish conditions. I am considering the re-constitution of the Advisory Council under Section 20 of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1918, with a view to its undertaking inquiries related to education in Scotland.
    The work of the Council for the Encouragement of Music and the Arts extends to Scotland, and the Scottish Education Department is represented on
    Mr. Brown: I beg to give notice, in view of that unsatisfactory reply and of the apparently complete lack of liaison between one Government Department and another, that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.
    Following are the details:
    the Council. I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a brief summary of the activities of the Council in Scotland.
    Mr. Stewart: Is the Scottish Education Department represented on either of the two Committees to which I have referred, and what is the assurance that Scottish interests are in fact reflected in the work of those Committees?
    Mr. Johnston: In the body of my answer I said that I was considering referring matters relating to Scottish education to an Advisory Council on Education, but as the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, the terms of reference to the English Committees would not have been applicable to Scottish conditions.
    Mr. Kenneth Lindsay: While I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the second part of his reply, would he consider remitting to that Council the problem of the training of teachers in Scotland and also the extension of the idea of the boarding school to the ordinary boy?
    Mr. Johnston: I can assent to the first part of the Question, we are already considering that; but I should like to give more careful consideration to the second part of my hon. Friend's Supplementary Question.
    Following is the summary referred to:

    Scottish Education Department (Music and the Arts).

      COUNCIL FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF MUSIC AND THE ARTS.
      Activities in Scotland.
      Music.
      Concerts are being given at an average rate of some 30 a month. Many of these are held in canteens of munition factories.
      Drama.
      Seven extensive tours have been given by well-known theatre companies, including the Perth Repertory Company and the Old Vic Company. These tours have included not only the large towns but also smaller towns, mining villages and the Highlands. An annual grant is given to the Scottish Community Drama Association in aid of their activities among adults.
      Art.
      Thirty-nine exhibitions have been held, of which 24 are of original paintings, 5 of reproductions, and 10 of Industrial Planning. A certain number of these have been held in factory canteens, and some have been available for the Army. Others have been held at public galleries and other institutions.

    Producer-Gas Vehicles Department.
    Captain Crowderasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport what staff there is in the Department which deals with producer-gas and who is the director in charge?
    Major Petherickasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport, who is now in charge of the department dealing with producer-gas in the Ministry of War Transport; and what qualifications the holder has for this post; what is his salary; and what is his age?
    The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport (Sir Arthur Salter): The Director of Producer Gas Vehicles is Sir Alfred Faulkner, who is 60 years of age and has special experience of fuel problems. The salary attaching to the post is £1,200 per annum. The senior staff at present proposed includes an administrative officer, and three technical men, a mechanical engineer, a chemist and a production engineer, with the necessary technical and clerical assistance.
    Captain Crowder: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the salary of £1,200 a year is in addition to the pen-
    1346
    sion which this gentleman receives on retiring?
    Sir A. Salter: The pension is adjusted so that the total receipts, including the salary and the reduced pension, are equal to the salary which Sir Alfred Faulkner previously received in his previous post.
    Major Petherick: Is my right hon. Friend absolutely convinced that such a post is necessary at all?
    Sir A. Salter: My Noble Friend certainly thinks it is, or he would not have made the appointment.
    Mr. Thorne: Can the right hon. Gentleman state the method of producing this kind of gas?
    Captain Crowderasked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether Sir Alfred Faulkner is still employed in his Ministry?
    The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. T. Smith): No, Sir.
    Captain Crowder: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether he was retired under the age limit?
    Mr. Smith: I think I had better refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given to his previous Question.

  FOOD SUPPLIES.

    Oats (Aberdeenshire).
    Flight-Lieutenant Boothbyasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that large quantities of sweet marketable oats are now available for purchase in Aberdeenshire, and that even larger quantities of last year's crop have been allowed seriously to deteriorate owing to lack of local storage accommodation; and whether, if the Ministry is not prepared to purchase these oats, he will remove them from the list of rationed feeding-stuffs?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Mr. Mabane): I am aware that considerable quantities of oats are available for purchase in Aberdeenshire. Arrangements have been made for further purchases by my Department in this area in the immediate future, and there will also be a large demand for oats as rationed feeding-stuffs in the month of August. My Noble Friend is not prepared to remove oats from the list of rationed feeding-stuffs.
    Flight-Lieutenant Boothby: Is my hon. Friend aware that thousands of quarters of oats are rotting in Aberdeenshire, and of the failure of the Ministry of Food to take the necessary action? What is the use, in those circumstances, of asking farmers to grow more oats?
    Mr. Mabane: I was not aware of waste to the extent suggested, but instructions have just been issued to purchase a very large quantity of Aberdeenshire oats. The demand in August for such food-stuffs will be very large indeed, and I think that will relieve the situation. The Ministry of Food are anxious that these oats shall not be wasted.

    Convictions, Old Bailey.
    Mr. Thorneasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he can make a statement about the case of Seymour Sydney, who was tried at the Old Bailey on Friday, 10th July; the number of tons of food found by the police and its value; the amount of money paid by one of the defendants to Seymour Sydney for food stored in the West End; and whether he has seen the statement about the defendant made by the judge who tried the case?
    Mr. Mabane: Seymour Sydney was sentenced to four years penal servitude and fined £2,000 for offences against the Department's Statutory Rules and Orders, and at the same time sentences were imposed on other persons involved in the case. The approximate number of tons of food found by the police was 20, and the approximate value based on the maximum retail prices was £1,200. I assume that the reference in the third part of the Question is to the amount paid by Jean Alphonse Pages to Sydney for the food which had been seized by the police. I understand that Pages paid approximately £2,700 for these foodstuffs. I have read the statement referred to in the Question.
    Mr. Thorne: When this man comes out of prison will he have been relieved of his financial obligation?
    Mr. Mabane: I would like notice of that Question.

    Plums (Growers' Prices).
    Sir W. Smithersasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food why, in view of the fact that retail prices of the various sorts of plums have been
    1348
    announced, the growers' price has not been announced, and will he announce it forthwith?
    Mr. Mabane: Growers' prices of plums were announced at the same time and in the same Press notice as the wholesale and retail prices. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the relevant Press notice issued by my Department.
    Sir W. Smithers: Will the hon. Gentleman have a look at that Press notice? Farmers may be uneducated, but they cannot find the growers' prices in that notice, and this delay causes great uncertainty among the growers, who do not know yet.
    Mr. Mabane: I will look into that.

    Milk (Children).
    Wing-Commander Jamesasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that children who for medical reasons are unable to attend school cannot, even upon the certificate of a doctor, obtain the milk to which children attending schools are entitled; and whether speedy step will be taken to alter the regulations to meet the cases of children suffering from protracted disabilities?
    Mr. Mabane: As my hon. and gallant Friend will be aware, there is no restriction on the amount of milk that can be obtained by consumers at the present time. Arrangements are being made which will enable children who are unable to attend school to obtain a priority supply of milk at home during any future period of restriction.
    Wing-Commander James: Will that answer apply to the case about which I have written to my hon. Friend?
    Mr. Mabane: I am sorry, but I have no knowledge of the case to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. Perhaps he might discuss it with me afterwards.

  TRADE AND COMMERCE.

    Hot Water Bottles.
    Mr. Hannahasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the House any information about the possibility of using heat-resisting glass as a substitute for rubber in the manufacture of hot water bottles?
    The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Captain Waterhouse): Consideration is being given to the possibility of increasing the output of substitutes for rubber hot water bottles, including those made of heat resisting glass, having regard to the competing demands for labour and materials for war production.

    Clothes Coupon Prosecution.
    Mr. Thorneasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give any information in connection with the case heard at Bow Street police court against George Black who obtained 13,000 yards of material which should have been covered by 26,000 coupons; and what action did he take in the case?
    Captain Waterhouse: Paprika, Ltd., a company in which George Black is a majority shareholder, purchased 13,000 yards of rationed material without surrendering coupons. Accordingly, proceedings were instituted by the Board of Trade against the company and Mr. Black. They were each fined £2,000. Proceedings are pending against the suppliers of the material.

    Perambulators.
    Mr. Kirbyasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that there is a short supply of baby push-cars, and perambulators; and whether he will arrange an increased output of these articles on a utility design basis at prices within the means of ordinary wage-earners and the wives of men serving in the Forces?
    Captain Waterhouse: Materials, capacity and labour, which in peace-time would be devoted to making perambulators, are of course in demand for war production. Some simplifications in design to save materials and labour were introduced last year and have been followed by a considerable increase in production, and the position is being examined to see whether further progress can be made on these lines. The Central Price Regulation Committee are investigating the prices, including the question of maximum prices, as suggested by my hon. Friend.

  COLONIAL RESEARCH COMMITTEE.
  Captain Peter Macdonaldasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies
  1350
  whether he is aware that the four scientists appointed to the new Colonial Research Committee are all individuals with a large number of other commitments vital to the war effort; whether he intends this committee to engage on continuous and active work; and whether he will set up a sub-committee of men who can give whole-time service to the scientific colonial survey which is required?
  The Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Harold Macmillan): I think that I should make the position clear to my hon. and gallant Friend. My Noble Friend is looking to this Committee for the general supervision and inspiration of Colonial research, and not for detailed work. There are already bodies and organisations available to advise and assist in the carrying out of research in particular subjects, and I have no doubt that the Committee will make full use of such agencies and will not hesitate to recommend the establishment of subcommittees or any other new machinery which may be required.
  Captain Macdonald: Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that whatever committees are appointed to carry out these researches will be able to devote sufficient time to their labours, in order to achieve useful results?
  Mr. Macmillan: Yes, because as I said in my reply, the function of this Committee is to organise research and to place it in the correct quarters, not to carry it out itself.
  Captain Macdonald: Will the right hon. Gentleman set up another Committee to explain the work of this Committee?
  Mr. Macmillan: I would like to make this clear; it is an important matter. The proper way of carrying out research is not to set up rival organisations to existing bodies, but rather to organise the placing of research in the proper quarters where it can be carried on. That is the function of this Committee, to organise and manage the carrying-on of research by other agencies.

  RAGS, ROPES AND STRING (SALVAGE).
  Mr. Spearmanasked the Minister of Supply what steps he is taking to prevent wastage of rags, ropes and other textile materials?
  The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply (Mr. Peat): An Order, which comes into force on 20th July, has been made under the Defence Regulations prohibiting the destruction, abandonment or mixing with refuse of any rag, rope or string, or any article made wholly or mainly from such materials. Directions were issued to local authorities in November last year, requiring them to maintain or see maintained in their districts an efficient service for the collection of rags as well as other materials. Publicity in various forms has been and is being given to the urgent need for these materials, and to the new Order.

  SHIPPING SITUATION.
  Earl Wintertonasked the Prime Minister whether he intends to make any statement to the public, by broadcasting or in any other way, to call attention to the seriousness of the shipping situation and to urge the utmost economy in the use and consumption of all goods obtained from overseas?
  Mr. Attlee: The Noble Lord's suggestion will be noted.
  Earl Winterton: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to explain the reason why the Government refuse to make a statement on this situation? Why does it help Hitler to tell the people the truth about the seriousness of the shipping situation?
  Mr. Attlee: It is not a question of telling about the seriousness of the situation. The question is about the details, but perhaps the Noble Lord will have an opportunity of making that point later on.
  Earl Winterton: No, it will be in Secret Session.

  AGRICULTURE.

    Uncultivated Land, Newmarket and South of England.
    Mr. Ross Taylorasked the Minister of Agriculture the area of cultivable land in the vicinity of Newmarket used for horse-racing and training purposes; and the area of such land already ploughed up?
    The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. R. S. Hudson): Out of a total of 2,359 acres in the Newmarket area held by the Jockey Club for horse-racing and training purposes, 1,668 acres have been requisitioned or earmarked for military purposes and 196 acres have been ploughed up and put under arable cultivation, leaving an area of 495 acres for the original purpose. I should add that out of a total of 7,990 acres of grassland on stud farms in the same area, 2,910 acres have been ploughed up and a considerable part of the remainder is used for the grazing of dairy herds.
    Mr. Taylor: Having regard to the great reduction in the number of horses, will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether ground used for training might at least be further used for agricultural purposes?
    Mr. Hudson: No, Sir. I do not accept that, because it is earmarked for military purposes.
    Major Heilgers: Is the Minister aware that much of the remaining land is of very poor quality indeed, and unlikely to grow corn? Will he consider first ploughing up golf courses and other land used for sport before curtailing horse breeding further?
    Mr. Granville: Why does not the Minister use his influence to get land such as this used for battle training purposes, and not allow the Secretary of State for War to steal all his good farms in East Anglia?
    Earl Wintertonasked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that there are still in the South of England thousands of acres of commons and also of parks, public and private, uncultivated, though capable of bearing cereal crops; and whether he will instruct the war agricultural committees to use their powers to have these lands cultivated and take steps to ensure that they are supplied with the necessary labour and implements for the purpose?
    Mr. Hudson: The extent to which land of the classes described can be brought into cultivation is conditioned, as my right hon. Friend recognises, by our resources of man-power and implements, to which I would add fertilisers. The augmentation of the supply of all these requirements is receiving my constant attention, but is not within my sole con-

    1353
    trol. No further instructions to war agricultural executive committees are needed to stimulate them to use their powers to the fullest extent consistent with the available resources.
    Earl Winterton: In view of my right hon. Friend's reply and the bearing of the whole question on the shipping question, I beg to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Motion for the Summer Adjournment.

    Domestic Poultry Keeping.
    Captain P. Macdonaldasked the Minister of Agriculture whether, in view of the anxiety caused to domestic poultry keepers by the recently announced scheme for rationing, he can make a clear statement to the effect that there will be no necessity for every family to reduce their flocks down to only one hen per head; and that it will still be open to anybody to keep more hens if they can provide sufficient scraps and vegetable produce to maintain them?
    Mr. Hudson: The limitation is in respect of feeding stuffs rations and not in respect of the numbers of hens that may be kept. As my hon. and gallant Friend is no doubt aware, steps have now been taken, by the distribution of leaflets through local food offices, to remove doubts or misunderstandings respecting the new arrangements.
    Captain Macdonald: Why should there be so much ambiguity about all statements coming from the right hon. Gentleman's Department, which cause confusion in the minds of the public, and necessitate the issuing of thousands of pamphlets to clarify a position that need never have arisen?
    Mr. Hudson: I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy of the new "Quiz" which has been circulated.
    Captain Macdonald: And I will tell my hon. Friend what I have made of it.
    Mr. Mathers: Would it not be better, instead of distributing leaflets, to divert some of the grain being used at the present time for the manufacture of beer?

    Aerodrome Grass.
    Mr. Wilfrid Robertsasked the Minister of Agriculture, what action he has taken to ensure that grass from aerodromes is made use of?
    Mr. Hudson: Arrangements were made last year for utilising for food production, as fully as might be consistent with essential operational requirements, any land available at aerodromes.

  LIBYAN OPERATIONS (TANKS, TEMPERATURE).
  Sir A. Knoxasked the Minister of Production what was the temperature of our tanks during the recent battles in Libya; and what was the temperature of the enemy tanks during those same battles?
  Mr. Boulton (Vice-Chamberlain of the Household): I have been asked to reply. My right hon. Friend regrets that this information is not available.
  Sir A. Knox: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries as to whether there is any truth in the statement that in the recent Battle in Libya the temperature in our tanks was as high as 120 and that in the German tanks was only 80, and also whether there is any truth in the recent statements in the German official news service that Rommel has fitted refrigerator apparatus in his tanks?
  Mr. Boulton: My right hon. Friend is of the opinion that in view of the reply which he gave to the hon. and gallant Member on 8th July an inquiry of the Commander-in-Chief at this point is not warranted.
  Major Lyons: Will inquiry be made to see whether the statement about, and photograph of, the German air-conditioned tanks printed in the "News Chronicle" three or four days ago are untrue or not, because if that is right, it cuts straight across the statements made in this House by Ministers in the last few days?
  Mr. Boulton: I will take a note of that point and convey it to my right hon. Friend.
  Sir P. Harris: Will the tight hon. Gentleman telegraph an inquiry to Egypt to find out how much justification there is for these rumours which are being circulated round the country about these tanks being air-conditioned?
  Sir William Davison: Do the Government realise that this is a matter of very great urgency, and that it must be settled one way or the other?

  ARMED FORCES (PENSIONS AND GRANTS).
  Mr. Wilfrid Robertsasked the Minister of Pensions whether a widowed mother, previously dependent upon her only son, is entitled to the same pension rights as a wife in the event of the death in action of her son?
  The Minister of Pensions (Sir Walter Womersley): The award of pension to a mother is conditional upon need, and the rate varies with the amount of the support given by the deceased son or the amount which he might reasonably have been expected to give had he survived. The widowed mother wholly dependent on her deceased son would invariably receive a pension.
  Mr. Roberts: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that in the case of a widowed mother who was dependent on her son before the war it is time to end completely the means test and put that mother in the same position as a wife?
  Sir W. Womersley: If a mother applies for a pension, we naturally have to inquire as to her means to give an appropriate pension.
  Mr. Mathers: Is the Minister aware of the anger that is felt at the different treatment in this war from the last war in a matter of this kind?
  Sir W. Womersley: No, Sir, I am not.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. Arthur Greenwood: May I ask the Leader of the House, first, to state the Business for the next series of Sittings, and, secondly, whether the Government have given further consideration to the point I put about a Public Session? If it should be that the Government persist in a proposal for a Secret Session, will the reasons be stated, after Strangers have been espied, for the change in their attitude, which apparently took place overnight? Also, has my right hon. and learned Friend given further consideration to the proposal made by my hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), as to the publication of a much fuller statement than is normally made when we have a Secret Session—a suggestion to which my right hon. and learned Friend rather gave some support?
The Lord Privy Seal (Sir Stafford Cripps): May I first deal with the Business? The forthcoming Business will be as follows:
First Sitting Day—Supply (16th Allotted Day), Committee. Home Office Vote. A Debate will take place on Defence Regulation 18B.
Second Sitting Day—Supply (17th Allotted Day), Committee. Ministry of Labour and National Service Vote. A Debate will take place on the administration of the Factories Acts.
Third Sitting Day—Supply (18th Allotted Day), Committee. Board of Trade Vote. A Debate on the Concentration of Industry and Utility Production, and Retail Trade, will take place.
During the week progress will be made with any outstanding Business, including the Lords Amendments to the Pensions (Mercantile Marine) Bill.
With regard to the other question which the right hon. Gentleman put to me, about to-day's Debate, the Government gave their reasons——
Mr. Gallacher Mr. Gallacher rose——
Sir S. Cripps: Just a moment, please.
Mr. Gallacher: I think it is only right that we should have questions on the Business now; because when the statement is made on the other matter, all the questions will be about that.
Mr. Buchanan: On a point of Order, may I respectfully submit. Sir, that the hon. Gentleman has raised a point of some substance? The right hon. and learned Gentleman has announced the forthcoming Business. Now he proposes to make a statement in relation to to-day's Secret Session. Would it not be fairer to all concerned if we got questions on the forthcoming Business out of the way and then discussed what must be a much more complicated subject?
Mr. Speaker: That is a matter for the convenience of the House.
Sir S. Cripps: I was only answering the question that the right hon. Gentleman put to me. If the House thinks it more convenient for them to be answered in two sections, I am certainly prepared to do so.
Mr. Gallacher: I would like to ask the Lord Privy Seal whether, in view of the astonishing statement made by the Home Secretary at Question Time that there is a periodical publishing material which he claimed that the "Daily Worker" was banned for publishing, whether we cannot have a discussion on this astonishing statement of the Home Secretary and the ban on the "Daily Worker"?
Sir S. Cripps: If the Home Office Vote is put down, anybody who speaks upon a matter coming within the province of the Secretary of State for the Home Department would be in Order. I merely indicated that the Debate would take place on Defence Regulation 18B because a number of Members of the House have expressed a desire that there should be such a Debate.
Mr. A. Bevan: If suggestions are made that the day should be divided between that and the point raised by my hon. Friend, will the Leader of the House have any objection?
Sir S. Cripps: It would not be for me to object as to what questions are raised by hon. Members, and I imagine that any question that arose on the Home Office Vote would be in Order. It is only for the convenience of the House that it is generally indicated what the main discussion will be on these days so that the House may have an opportunity of knowing.
Mr. Bevan: As it is the practice on these occasions for one main subject to be got out of the way before another main subject is started, would the Lord Privy Seal therefore be prepared to consider representations, through the courtesy of Mr. Speaker or the Chairman of Ways and Means, to have this done in that way?
Sir Irving Albery: Is it not a fact that these Supply Days are allotted through the usual channels according to a certain precedent and that this Supply Day was allotted in accordance with that precedent?
Sir S. Cripps: That is the usual practice, but, of course, if the House feels that there is something else that urgently needs discussing, no doubt arrangements can be made. It certainly is the hope of the Government that the main part of the
1358
Debate on the First Sitting Day will be on Defence Regulation 18B, as by collecting opinions through the usual channels they believe that to be the desire of the majority of the House.
Mr. Maxton: Will the same Ruling be generally true oh the following Sitting Day when the Ministry of Labour Vote is to be put down, that we shall not be confined strictly to the limited question which was mentioned by the right hon. and learned Gentleman?
Sir S. Cripps: I understand that hon. Gentlemen opposite asked specifically to have this subject matter dealt with. [HON. MEMBERS: "Who?"]. The Labour party; a great many of them sit opposite. And again, I imagine that it will be more for the convenience of the House if the Debate on that day is mainly to be concentrated on the subject matter of the Factories Acts.
Mr. W. Brown: May I ask what steps are taken to consult the wishes of Independent Members of this House?
Sir S. Cripps: Any Member, however independent, can approach the usual channel and indicate his wishes, and it is then for the usual channel to select the matters which are considered to meet the wishes of the greatest number of Members.
Mr. Granville: In view of the important statement which has been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on old age pensions and of the fact that these Regulations will start, as I understood from his statement, three weeks from when the Debate takes place, and although the Debate on the Third Sitting Day is upon the Board of Trade Vote and may be an important Debate, would it not be better to try and hold the old age pensions Debate, in view of the urgency of this matter in the coming winter, on the Third Sitting Day instead of on the Board of Trade Vote?
Sir S. Cripps: I think it would only make the difference of one Sitting Day whether we stick to the present arrangement or alter it, and on the whole it will be easier to stick to the present arrangement.
Major Lyons: Will the Government give some time during the next Sittings, or certainly between now and the Recess

1359
for the consideration of the Motion relating to certain phases of Army pay standing on the Order Paper in the name of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Major Taylor) and others?
Sir S. Cripps: There will not be any opportunity to set aside a day upon that matter before the probable date of Adjournment, but on the actual Adjournment of the House, of course, any private Member can raise any matter.
Mr. Buchanan: Is the Lord Privy Seal aware that the private Member who used to have that right has had it filched from him, and that on the last Adjournment Debate the whole of the speeches on one subject were drawn from the two front benches?
Sir S. Cripps: My hon. Friend will appreciate that I have nothing to do with who speaks in the House of Commons.
Mr. Buchanan: Yes, but the Lord Privy Seal could approach his Ministerial colleagues in the matter. If he could substitute a little common sense, which is sometimes very much lacking in these cases, it would be better.
Sir S. Cripps: The hon. Gentleman would not like it if there was a Debate and there was no reply made by the Government.
Mr. Buchanan: No, but there is no need for the great big men to come stampeding in—[HON. MEMBERS: "Who are they?"]—I am referring to the last occasion when we debated the Ministry of Labour and there were two speakers from the Front Bench. The Minister came in when there was no need for it. The Minister could have handed the matter over to somebody else and have allowed more back benchers to take part, and someone else could have replied if he was engaged on important business.
Sir S. Cripps: I am always careful to ask Ministers to pay respect to the House by coming here in order to deal with matters arising out of their respective Departments. There have been many complaints in the past of Ministers not coming in order to answer on the appropriate occasion.
Major C. S. Taylor: On the point raised by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for East Leicester (Major Lyons), may I ask the Leader of the House whether he appreciates the urgency of the question of Army pay and allowances, especially in view of the fact that large numbers of highly-paid American troops are coming into this country at the present time?
Sir S. Cripps: The matter has been considered, but, as I have already stated, there will not be an opportunity before the Recess.
Viscountess Astor: Is it not true that when the pay of the American troops gets over here five dollars is worth only 10s., and will the Lord Privy Seal take that into account?
Mr. Maxton: If a sufficient number of Members of the House make representation that they desire one of the Supply Days to be devoted to the War Office Vote, will the Government be able to refuse the request?
Sir S. Cripps: If a sufficient number of Members ask for any particular Vote to be put down on a Supply Day, obviously the Government will pay the most serious attention to that request.
Mr. Maxton: I wish to put a stronger point than that. It is not for the Government to decide whether they will have Supply Days or not? If I go round this House and canvass sufficient names in favour of the Vote for the Secretary of State for War, it will be necessary for the Government to grant a Supply Day.
Mr. Bevan: On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. There is a point surely of very great substance here. The Government cannot have control of Supply. If the Government have control of Supply, we may as well all go home. The only control we have over the Government is to refuse Supply.
Mr. Speaker: That is not a point of Order.
Mr. Bevan: I understand that the point which was put to the Lord Privy Seal by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) was whether, if a sufficient number of Members indicated their desire to have the War Office Vote put down in Supply, the Government would be able to resist such a claim.
Sir S. Cripps: Nobody would ever suggest that they would either wish or attempt to resist such a claim. The only difficulty is to decide between a number of Members who have different wishes as regards Supply Days which of them represents the majority wish of the House.
Commander Sir Archibald Southby: May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether it would not be possible to shorten the Recess by one day in order to discuss a question which is of vital importance to the Army?
Mr. Speaker: I do not think we can discuss the matter any further at this stage.
Sir S. Cripps: Perhaps I may now proceed to answer the other question which was put to me by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wakefield (Mr. Greenwood). On 9th July, I made a short statement to the House giving reasons why the Debate on shipping should be held in secret, and not in public, and I can certainly add nothing to those reasons in public. The right hon. Gentleman asked me whether a statement would be made in the course of the Secret Session on why the decision of the Government in this matter had, apparently, undergone a change. I explained this matter on 9th July as will be seen from column 953 of the OFFICIAL REPORT of that date, and I do not think it necessary to repeat that explanation. If the House so desires, it will be possible to have a statement in Secret Session amplifying the reasons why the Government consider it necessary to hold the shipping Debate in Secret Session, but no such amplification could be made in public.
Mr. Shinwell: May I ask my right hon. and learned Friend whether it is not the case that, on the previous occasion to which he refers, he promised that the issue of a summary of the Debate would be considered by the Government in consultation with——
Sir S. Cripps: I am obliged to my hon. Friend for reminding me of that. So long a period has elapsed since the right hon. Gentleman's original Question was put to me that I forgot to answer the third part of it. That matter has now been considered, and it is felt that to secure the agreement of the whole House upon any
1362
long form of summary, which would be the only alternative to asking Mr. Speaker himself to draft whatever form of summary he thought right, would be so difficult that it would be impracticable to do it in the course of the Debate to-day, and that therefore it is better to maintain the practice that has been followed during the course of the present war with regard to Secret Sessions.
Mr. Shinwell: May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, a question for my own guidance and the guidance of other hon. Members? I wish to know whether, in the event of my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Privy Seal directing your attention to the presence of Strangers in our midst, and that matter being under consideration, you will put the Question to the House, "That Strangers be ordered to withdraw," and that a Division can take place on that Question in public?
Mr. Speaker: Yes, a Division, of course, can take place on that in public if any hon. Members wish to vote against the Question, "That Strangers be ordered to withdraw."
Mr. Lipson: In view of the decision of the Government to hold the shipping Debate in secret and the further decision that only the usual statement is to be issued after the Secret Session, may I ask what steps the Government propose to take to bring home to the people the gravity of the shipping situation?
Sir S. Cripps: I am not prepared to answer that question without notice. A Question on the subject was, in fact, put on the Paper to-day, and was dealt with by the Deputy Prime Minister.
Earl Winterton: Surely the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the only answer which I received from the Deputy Prime Minister was that the point would be noted; and is not that really a fantastic answer, in view of the gravity of the situation?
Sir S. Cripps: I do not regard the answer as fantastic, and I should have (bought that the Noble Lord would have been only too glad that his suggestion was being duly noted.
Mr. Bevan: Last week when the Government intimated their desire to go into Secret Session on this matter, I made a suggestion about a statement

1363
being issued afterwards. I did so in order to deal with the point about the gravity of the situation being brought home to the people. Now the right hon. and learned Gentleman has said that that suggestion is impracticable, but the Government have not made any substantive suggestion. We are now about to go into Secret Session on this very important matter on which the co-operation of the whole people is necessary, and we have no way of conveying to the people our apprehensions about the situation.
Sir S. Cripps: I think the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. As he knows, one of the reasons for a Secret Session is in order to put Members of this House in possession of facts which cannot be published. The general impression which is created upon the minds of Members by such a Secret Session can be indicated—[HON. MEMBERS: "No"]. I say the general impression created upon the minds of Members—[HON. MEMBERS: "No"]. I think, Mr. Speaker, I am almost quoting words which you have used yourself when I say that no account can be given of what happens at a Secret Session, of who speaks, of facts and other things, but that the general impression created upon the mind of a Member of Parliament can be communicated to his constituents—[HON. MEMBERS: "No"]. I say "the general impression as regards the gravity of the situation."
Mr. Speaker: I must point out to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that he is now treading on rather delicate ground. I think his description was not really quite correct.
Sir I. Albery: On a point of Order. I desire to draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that the Ruling which the right hon. and learned Gentleman has just attempted to give the House, is in direct contradiction of the Ruling which was given to the House by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney-General. It would be important in the circumstances to have a definite Ruling. Possibly you, Sir, might not consider it desirable to do it at once, but the House is getting into a very difficult position and certainly would require advice and direction from you.
Mr. Speaker: It is a very difficult point on which to give a Ruling on the spur of
1364
the moment. The matter has been under my consideration several times, and each time I find it more difficult to give proper expression to what is the true position, but I shall try to do so as soon as I can.
Mr. Hore-Belisha: In view of what has transpired and what the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Lord Privy Seal has said, perhaps he would reconsider the position. I gather he has said that the Government desire to have this Secret Session because the House will then be put in possession of facts, in regard to which they can give a general impression to the public.
Sir S. Cripps: I must ask the right hon. Gentleman not to misquote me. What I said was that Members could give their general impression, not of the facts connected with the Secret Session, but their general impression of the gravity of the situation.
Mr. Hore-Belisha: There is plainly a misapprehension. Is this not an illustration of the danger into which the House falls if it abrogates its essential character as the focus and centre of public opinion? Of course, the Government have secret information about shipping as upon other subjects, but this House is, in its essential character, the focus of public opinion. If there are doubts and apprehensions, this is the place where they should be expressed. If it is desired to evoke from the nation a particular concentrated effort, in view of the gravity of a particular situation, this is the place in which the matter can be discussed in order that the public opinion may be created. Now, it is plain from what has transpired and from your intervention, Mr. Speaker, that this Secret Session has been asked for upon a misunderstanding. [HON MEMBERS: "It was not asked for."] It has been asked for by the Government on a misunderstanding. We have recently had cases in which Members have been charged with breach of Privilege because of the very misunderstanding to which my right hon. Friend has referred. We would all be in a very difficult situation subsequently if we did convey an impression to our constituencies. Would the Government then consent to have a Debate on shipping upon the known facts and tendencies as they have been discussed freely both in America and this country?
Sir S. Cripps: No, Sir. The Government are not prepared to reconsider this

1365
question. As I have said before, they have considered it very carefully. There are many matters which can be discussed in public, and there are other matters which cannot, and this is one of those things which cannot. The Government do not consider it proper that in the House of Commons speeches should be made from one side alone in public and that there should not be a Government reply. They do not think it proper that people without responsibility for the situation can make suggestions and give currency to rumours which cannot be denied by the Government by giving facts which cannot be disclosed, and although I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Devonport (Mr. Hore-Belisha) that the House of Commons is the proper place for the expression of public opinion—a sounding board for the nation—it is also, in time of war, the proper place to discuss serious problems which cannot be communicated to the whole of the nation but which can safely be communicated to Members of the House of Commons. In the course of this discussion the Government may get valuable advice and assistance from Members of the House of Commons. The Government on this occasion are anxious to avail themselves of the opportunity of having a discussion with Members of Parliament which cannot arise if the Session is held in public
Mr. Hore-Belisha: I do not quite follow what the Lord Privy Seal means. He said originally that Members could give an impression as to the seriousness or otherwise of the situation. Surely it is open to Government spokesmen to do exactly the same. If responsibility is subsequently to rest upon Members, it is a responsibility that can be assumed by the Government.
Sir W. Davison: Is it not desirable that the House should know what the Government have to say in this matter in Secret Session before making up its mind? If we find that the reasons given to the House are inadequate, we can then press that the matter should be discussed in public. Surely we shall be making fools of ourselves if we do not allow the Government to tell us in secret about a matter affecting the safety of the country before making up our minds.
Mr. Shinwell: Will the Lord Privy Seal state precisely the difference between
1366
stating facts broadly—not disclosing actual figures of losses—on the shipping position in public and stating facts about the setback in Libya when the Prime Minister exposed facts which were unpleasant?
Sir S. Cripps: The difference is a very large one; one may assist the enemy, and the other will not.
Mr. Garro Jones Mr. Garro Jones rose——
Hon. Members: Divide.
Mr. Speaker: Does the hon. Member wish to raise a point of Order?
Mr. Garro Jones: Yes, Mr. Speaker. May I submit that at present we are at Question Time and that speeches are now being made which would only be permissible on the Motion that the House should go into Secret Session?
Mr. Speaker: It had better be left to me to decide when a question is put in such a manner that it becomes a speech.
Mr. Buchanan: In view of the fact that on the occasion of a previous Secret Session many of us felt that what the Government disclosed to us was not valid for a Secret Session—I am not opposing the decision to have a Secret Session if the Government desire it—I want to ask the Lord Privy Seal whether he intends to disclose to us facts that cannot be disclosed to the world outside?
Sir S. Cripps: The reason why the Government have decided, as I have already stated, that it would be advisable to hold the Session in secret is because we wish to make a frank statement on the whole situation. I cannot try to anticipate exactly what is to be said by the Government speakers.
Mr. Bevan Mr. Bevan rose——
Hon. Members: Divide.
Mr. Maxton: Since the Lord Privy Seal cannot accede to the wishes of the House that a report—[HON. MEMBERS: "It is not the wish of the House"]—of our proceedings should be made public, would he go to the length of restraining the two Ministries principally concerned, especially the Ministry of War Transport and the Admiralty, from sending out their reports to the newspapers?
Sir S. Cripps: There is no question, think, that the House desires to have such

1367
a report made. Certainly neither of these two Ministries would in any circumstances send out any report of what happened in a Secret Session.
Mr. Maxton: Is it not a fact that following a previous Secret Session reports appeared in the newspapers almost immediately after the Debate, coming from responsible Ministers and making certain representations which were not the story we got here?
Mr. Bevan: Is the Lord Privy Seal aware that our main difficulty arises not out of a desire to resist the Government's demand for a Secret Session? If the Government ask for a Secret Session on such an important matter as this, the House is bound to give it to them, but our difficulty is this, that the Government do not seem to have applied themselves to the seriousness of the problem of how we or they will communicate to the nation as a whole our sense of the gravity of the situation and how the nation can cooperate in dealing with it. We are not in a position to tell the nation what our advice is about this matter, because they will never hear it.
Mr. Gallacher Mr. Gallacher rose——
Hon. Members: Divide.
Mr. Gallacher: On a point of Order. I want to ask you, Mr. Speaker, in view of the many confusing statements made by those who are at the moment composing the Government, whether, if I hear the Government's statement and I am deeply impressed with the seriousness of the situation, the urgent need for economy and the absolute maximum effort, I am entitled to go among shop stewards and workers and impress them with the terrible seriousness of the situation and the need for economy and maximum effort, without giving any facts?
Mr. Speaker: Before we go any further I should like to say what is my view with regard to the statement which the Leader of the House has made about Members being allowed to give a general impression to their constituents, of what took place in Secret Session. The House will remember what was known as "The Observer" case. When that case went to the Committee of Privileges that Committee used in their Report the word "impression"
1368
and said that a Member need not say exactly what took place in Secret Session but even that an impression must not be given of what took place in Secret Session. It was very largely on that finding that I gave my Ruling in the case of the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern), who had not used the actual words which were used in a Secret Session but gave his impression. It was on that Ruling that I came to the conclusion that a prima facie case had been made out with regard to the hon. Member for Shettleston, so I think it would be wrong to give the impression to the House that Members are at liberty to give an impression of what took place in a Secret Session.
Mr. Attlee: May I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that the essential difference is this, that if an hon. Member states in words that there has been a Secret Session, and then proceeds to give his impression ——[Interruption.] May I put my point, as I happened to be Chairman of the Committee of Privileges on that matter? I think the line which the Committee of Privileges took was that whereas the proceedings in Secret Session may impress Members and to that extent may be reflected in their speeches, their impression must not be directly connected in a speech or statement with a Secret Session. I think that is the point.
Earl Winterton: On a point of Order. May I make this point clear, as I was a member of the Committee of Privileges? A serious constitutional point has arisen. I was a most enthusiastic supporter of my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister as Chairman of the Committee of Privileges on that matter, but I venture to say that my right hon. Friend has given a wholly wrong impression of the Committee of Privileges. Certainly, he is not entitled to speak on their behalf without consultation.
Sir S. Cripps: May I suggest to the House that after this very useful discussion we might now proceed to the next Business?

NATIONAL EXPENDITURE.
Eleventh and Twelfth Reports from the Select Committee brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 102 and No. 103.]
ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY.
  [15TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Sir DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair.]

  SUPPLY.
    CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1942. [Progress.]
      CLASS I.

        HOUSE OF COMMONS.
        Motion made, and Question proposed,
        "That a sum not exceeding £335,661, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum
        1376
        necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1943, for the salaries and expenses of the House of Commons, including a grant in aid to the Kitchen Committee."
        Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again "—[Mr. James Stuart]—put, and agreed to.
        Committee report Progress; to sit again upon the next Sitting Day.

  SECRET SESSION.
  Notice taken that Strangers were present.
  Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to Standing Order No. 89, put the Question," That Strangers be ordered to withdraw."
  Question agreed to.
  Strangers withdrew accordingly.
  [The remainder of the Sitting was in Secret Session.]
  The following Report of the Proceedings in Secret Session was issued, under the authority of MR. SPEAKER:
  The House considered the shipping situation and heard a statement from the Government.

  MILITARY SERVICE (PROTECTION OF BUSINESSES).
  MILITARY SERVICE (PROTECTION OF BUSINESSES).
TRADE AND COMMERCE.
  Perambulators.
  Perambulators.
  Retail Trade Committee (Report).
  Retail Trade Committee (Report).
CIVIL DEFENCE.
  Fire Service (Midlands Area).
  Fire Service (Midlands Area).
  Detainee, Holloway Prison (Inquiry).
  Detainee, Holloway Prison (Inquiry).
  REGISTER OF ELECTORS.
  REGISTER OF ELECTORS.
  MEALS IN SCHOOLS SCHEME.
  MEALS IN SCHOOLS SCHEME.
FUEL AND POWER.
  Coal Industry, Scotland.
  Coal Industry, Scotland.
  Scottish Coalfields Committee.
  Scottish Coalfields Committee.
  POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION.
  POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION.
  MESSRS. SLAUGHTER AND MAY (FOREIGN OFFICE).
  MESSRS. SLAUGHTER AND MAY (FOREIGN OFFICE).
FOOD SUPPLIES.
  Plums (Growers' Prices).
  Plums (Growers' Prices).
  Wheat Germ (Proprietary Medical Products).
  Wheat Germ (Proprietary Medical Products).
  BRITISH PRISONERS OF WAR, FAR EAST.
  BRITISH PRISONERS OF WAR, FAR EAST.
  ROYAL AIR FORCE (TOBACCO SUPPLIES).
  ROYAL AIR FORCE (TOBACCO SUPPLIES).
  LONDON TELEPHONE DIRECTORY.
  LONDON TELEPHONE DIRECTORY.
Preamble
The House met, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

KIDSGROVE GAS ORDER, 1942.
Special Order proposed to be made on the application of the Kidsgrove Gaslight Company:
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) for affirmative Resolution and referred to the Special Orders Committee.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (VISCOUNT CRANBORNE) (Lord Cecil): My Lords, I rise to move that this House do go into Secret Session on the Motions with reference to shipping standing on the Paper in the names of the noble Lord, Lord Winster, and the noble and gallant Viscount, Lord Trenchard. I fully recognize that a Secret Session is not a device which normally commends itself to all your Lordships; indeed, none of us likes it very much in principle. The privilege of public debate is one of the most precious assets of our Parliamentary system. But these are abnormal times, and by its capacity to adapt itself to abnormal times our Parliamentary system will stand or fall. And to-day I think we shall all agree that we in this country are under one overriding necessity: that is, to do nothing which could possibly help our enemies. On no subject is it more necessary to remember this than on the subject of shipping. As the House knows, the attack on shipping is, as much as, or even more than, the great offensive which the enemy are conducting on land, the spear-point of their strategy. They seek not merely to starve us out, they seek even more, to destroy the mobility of the Allied Forces, and anything they can find out about the shipping situation, either in the present or in the future, is worth its weight in gold to them.
We have pretty good evidence that they do not know at present the exact position, and I think it is—and I am sure the House
900
will agree it is—essential to keep them in as much ignorance as we can about it. How anxious they are to get information is shown by their own broadcasting stations, and especially the new British Broadcasting Station which, as your Lordships know very well, is ostensibly a British station, but really a German one. In confirmation of this I should like to quote to the House an extract from the issue of this station on the 10th of July—only just a week ago. This is what the Germans said:
"The best way to end the Churchill régime is to demand the truth. We want to know the truth about who is to blame for the situation in Egypt, about how much help we are giving to Russia, and about the true facts of our shipping losses and what risks we are taking; also, about whether the convoy route to "Russia is worth while."
And they go on to say:
"These are the things which should not be debated in secret."
Now, why do they want to know about our shipping losses and the convoy route to Russia? Why are they so strong against a Secret Session? I suggest to your Lordships there is only one possible reason, and that is that they do not know the facts, and they want us to give them to them. And that seems to be a conclusive reason, to my mind at any rate, against discussing this question in public.
This, as I understand, is fully recognized by the noble Lord, Lord Winster, and others, and I know very well they have tried to meet this difficulty by limiting the scope of the Motion to the question of shipbuilding. I should like to say how greatly we appreciate the efforts they have made in this respect. But I suggest that this limitation does not, and cannot, eliminate the danger that valuable information may be given to the enemy. Any discussion on shipbuilding, I suggest, invites the following questions—I put them in a very crude form but they would no doubt be elaborated in any debate: When, and at what speed, are we building merchant ships? How, and by what methods, are we building merchant ships? And, above all, why, and as a result of what situation, are we building merchant ships? This inevitably opens up the whole question of the shipping question to-day. I am quite certain that the noble Lord, Lord Winster, would make every effort to avoid saying anything which was in the least dangerous or indiscreet, but

901
noble Lords know that debates in this House do tend to range rather wide.
And, moreover, it is quite possible that two things, quite harmless in themselves and said by different speakers, when taken together may lead to important deductions. Any noble Lords who have ever been members of another place, as many of us have, will remember the methods employed in the days before the war, and possibly even now, by lobby correspondents. When these gentlemen wish to find out information about some political developments they ask first one member, and then another, and each of these members unquestionably will think he has spoken with the utmost discretion. But at the same time, at the end of the day, we always find that the lobby correspondents have got the whole picture and put the whole story together. It is like a jig-saw puzzle, of which the individual pieces mean very little, but when you put them together they form a coherent whole. In the case of lobby correspondents it does not matter, because, as we all know, they are a very patriotic and discreet body of men, and they do not publish anything they should not; but the same methods of deduction may be, and are J think, employed by the enemy for much more sinister reasons. They are continually occupied in trying to put two and two together, and they are exceedingly skilful at it.
For this reason alone, after very prolonged consideration and reconsideration of the point, the Government have come to the reluctant conclusion that at the present critical moment any debate on any aspect of shipping must be held in secret. This is not, I would assure the House, because we have anything to conceal. It is really entirely for reasons of national security. It will not be suggested that Parliament in recent times has been starved of information. The Government have a pretty good record in that respect, and during the debates we have had in the last few weeks an immense amount of information about our armaments has been divulged to the House and to the country in Public Session. Indeed, I believe that the main criticism outside Parliament, if not inside, has been that too much information has been given, and not too little. The Government are most anxious that the people of this country and Parliament should be as fully
902
informed as possible, but there is a point beyond which we cannot go on account of the risks involved. We think that that point comes on the question of shipping.
I am not going to say for a moment—and I will say this to my noble friend Lord Winster and others—that there should never be a public debate on shipping. I am not going to lay down a law of the Medes and Persians, but I do say that, at the present very delicate moment, when the interests and security of other nations besides ourselves are involved, it would be dangerous and wrong to have a debate of this kind in public. For these reasons, which I feel sure will receive the support of the overwhelming majority of the House, I beg to move that the noble Lords' Motions be debated in secret.
Moved, That the Sitting of the House to consider the Motions of the Lord Winster and the Viscount Trenchard be in Secret Session.—(Viscount Cranbarne.)
LORD ADDISON: My Lords, I am sure we are indebted to the noble Viscount for his exposition of the case. I am afraid that in many respects I shall not be able to find myself fully in accord with what he has said, and I would also suggest that if I were it would have a much wider application than to the present discussion. The Order Paper appears to-day in a different form from what it was before. It was limited, so far as this subject is concerned, to the Motion of my noble friend Lord Winster, and I would call your Lordships' attention to the care with which it is worded. It is "to call attention to the arrangements at present in force for building merchant ships." That is all. That is as far as it goes. But for reasons it is not necessary for me to inquire into, we now have on the Order Paper a Motion in the name of the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, which is as wide as the Seven Seas. It is "to call attention to the shipping problem." That might include anything from the Arctic to the Antarctic, from the Orient to the Antipodes. I do not wonder that the Government would like that Motion discussed in secret; I should if I were in the Government.
It is a very proper decision on their part in these perilous days. But I rather suspect—in fact I more than suspect; I know—that the decision to have the discussion on the Motion of my noble friend Lord Winster in secret was arrived at

903
before it had occurred to the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, to put his far-reaching Motion on the Paper. Therefore, so far as I am concerned, I am not interested, if I may say so, in discussing the Motion of the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, with regard to Lord Trenchard's Motion. It is entirely appropriate to an indiscreet Motion like that, but it is entirely inappropriate to a very proper Motion such as has been put on the Paper by my noble friend Lord Winster.
I would, with great respect, give one or two reasons for that conviction. The Motion, I suggest to the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, raises two issues—first, that affecting the character of the Motion put down by my noble friend Lord Winster and, secondly, the function of Parliament. It is on the second that I feel very strongly. With regard to the Motion itself, as I have already said, its words were deliberately restricted to discussing the arrangements for building merchant ships—not even naval vessels. It will be within your Lordships' recollection that on various occasions since the war began we have had most interesting and profitable discussions affecting supply. We had more than one discussion on whether there should, or should not, be a Ministry of Supply, in which many of us went into considerable detail as to the imperfections of our existing arrangements, and so on. That was carried even further in discussions on the provision of aircraft, and, if I remember aright, the indiscreet Viscount below the gangway (Lord Trenchard) took a very prominent part in those public discussions. Public, my Lords. There were quite a number of these public discussions, and they were of very great value. It is fair to say that they added to the credit of your Lordships' House in the opinion of the country, for we voiced in advance what the Government reluctantly afterwards conceded. They were valuable discussions, and there is no difference in character or intent between them and the discussion which is sought to be promoted by my noble friend Lord Winster. It is exactly the same.
I am in complete accord—I am sure we all are—with what the noble Viscount, Lord Cranborne, said as to not saying anything which will help our enemies. Of course we are, every one of us. It is
904
true to say that you may search the Official Report in vain to find any sentence in any of the debates which were in public on exactly kindred subjects, which was in any way harmful or improper. The speeches were confined, by all the patriotic members who took part in them, strictly to the matter under debate, with due regard to the national interest. I never, myself, heard a word of complaint about any one of them, and I should not think the noble Viscount has done so either. In the last war, I remember—and I may be forgiven for referring to it—we became more and more frugal, not more and more generous, in our adoption of what the noble Viscount has described as the "device" of the Secret Session. We became very reluctant to adopt the Secret Session. This particular matter, if anyone will refer to the details of the proceedings of the other House—namely, merchant shipbuilding—was discussed" openly on quite a number of occasions with great public advantage.
If your Lordships will allow me, not for vanity's sake but because it happens to be handy, to refer to one of my own publications, it would be interesting to recall some figures which were the results of the agitation in public that went on at that time. Previous to the last war our merchant shipbuilding capacity, I am glad to say, was in a much healthier state than it was before this war. I see that in 1914 we produced 1,674,000 tons of merchant ships—many times greater than it was, I have no doubt, three or four years before the beginning of this war. Then, during the first two years of the war when shipping was the business of the Board of Trade, it declined in a calamitous way. It declined in 1916 to 607,000 tons, and the concern of us all was very great. I find on looking at these records that on April 23, 1917, when the submarine campaign was at its height, I myself was responsible for a Cabinet memorandum recommending a consolidation of the measures for merchant shipbuilding, and I see that I had worked up, on the advice of the iron and steel and other departments, who of course helped me to prepare the case, to an ambitious programme reaching 3,000,000 tons.
Sir Eric Geddes, as he then was, was put in charge, and your Lordships will be interested to see that the shipbuilding effort of the country for twelve months

905
ending May, 1917, when the more organized system began, was 773,000 tons. That was the output for twelve months. After this more organized system had been adopted, for the year ending May, 1918, the output was 1,406,000 tons, so it had nearly doubled. In the light of that experience, and of the fact that my noble friend has accumulated a mass of material which he submitted to me in advance, for I do not: profess to have any first-hand knowledge of these matters during the present war, there is abundant material for examining as to whether the methods now being adopted are as efficient as they ought to be. We do not need to give the enemy any information when we say we are all anxious to build as many ships as we can. Nobody will deny that, and the only question is, are the methods now being adopted as efficient as they ought to be to secure that end? That is the question my noble friends wish to discuss. We discussed an exactly kindred question when we were examining munitions output, aeroplane output and other topics. A precisely analogous thing was then discussed with great advantage in public.
Turning just for a moment to the second objection which my noble friend entertained to the Motion of my noble friend behind me (Lord Winster), there is the function of Parliament to be considered. Tire Leader of the House gave us a very interesting, and I have no doubt an exceedingly accurate, picture of how our enemies put together in a jigsaw puzzle various odds and ends, bits said by this man and by that, and so on. I wonder if they could have pieced together with so great advantage any group of statements on output as those made lately by responsible Ministers in the other place. I confess that I was rather shocked myself, as an old hand at this business, when I saw the frankness with which some of our Ministers did talk about these things, and have talked about these things, They have given, I think, much more detail than they might have done. Anyhow, if the German jigsaw puzzle expert wanted material to work on, there it was. I do not say that such material has been presented by any of my noble friends, who are not in a position to present it for one thing, and perhaps we have not the ability to give these picturesque accounts. At all events, I am sure the noble Lord's warning was fully warranted; but it seems to me quite frankly that he might with
906
advantage address his remarks to some of his colleagues.
That, however, is another point. The point I am now on is to what extent is Parliament intended to discuss these matters. Clearly we ought not to discuss matters without the fullest regard to the national safety and the national interest. There will be no difference between us on that. At the same time it is the duty of Parliament to discuss these matters, and great benefits have arisen during this war from Parliament exercising its functions. It is the duty of Parliament publicly, openly and frankly to discuss, within the limits I have mentioned, matters of public concern affecting the conduct and issues of the war, and Parliament has often done it. I suggest that the noble Viscount has given what I may call a picturesque upbuilding of the case about telling the enemy about our losses and all the rest of it that has nothing whatever to do with the Motion of the noble Lord, Lord Winster. It might have to do with the Motion of the noble Viscount, Viscount Trenchard, but certainly not with our Motion. We want to discuss what the arrangements are for building merchant ships, and whether they are the best that can be devised. There are some material criticisms that my noble friend would be able to make according to the material he has available. I suggest that they ought not to be excluded from Parliamentary discussion. The whole history of the discussions during the war shows that they should not be excluded.
The character of the case itself is one which is most appropriate for public, free Parliamentary examination within the limits I have prescribed for all of us. I suggest that it is our duty as those who are charged, so far as we are charged, with the preservation of the rights and duties of a free Parliament, to examine very carefully the proposals of the Executive and that we should not be muzzled in our discussions. I think there is a much greater interest in this matter than might perhaps suit the convenience of some of the Departments of the Admiralty. Quite frankly, so far as the Motion of my noble friend is concerned—and that is the only matter I am speaking about—I regard the proposal that this should be discussed in secret as quite unsupported by any reason the noble Viscount has given but I do regard it as

907
an unreasonable intrusion by the Executive upon the rights and duty of Parliament, and for that reason we object to the Motion as it stands. I may say we shall voice our protests. We have no desire whatever to divide the House upon it, because we regard it as much greater than a Party matter. This is a matter affecting the functions of Parliament, and in my judgment the noble Lord's colleagues have committed a grave error of judgment in requiring Parliament to discuss a matter such as the building of merchant ships, or the methods adopted for doing so, as a secret matter on which public knowledge should be excluded.
On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (CAERNARVON) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on recommitment of the Bill: Bill reported without Amendment.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (MOLD GAS AND WATER) BILL.
House in Committee (according to Order) on recommitment of the Bill: Bill reported without Amendment.

SECRET SESSION.
The Notices on the Paper in the names of Lord Winster and Viscount Trenchard were as follows:
Lord Winster—To call attention to the arrangements at present in force for building merchant ships; and to move for Papers.
Viscount Trenchard—To call attention to the shipping problem; and to move for Papers.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON): Strangers will withdraw.
Then, in pursuance of the Resolution that the sitting of the House to consider the Motions of Lord Winster and Viscount Trenchard be in Secret Session, the Official Reporter withdrew.
House in Secret Session.
House adjourned.