:When, last week, I was explaining to the House my intentions regarding the problems of unemployment, I said that my intention was to separate the question into two categories—first, to see what works could be done at home, and introduce both the Financial Resolutions and the Bills dealing with that side of the problem; and then, looking at the problem broadly, I concluded that not only could much be done for the development of the Colonies, but that, by doing it now and generally speeding up, much useful work could be found for the people in this country. The Bill to which this Motion relates is an attempt to give effect to what is my broad general view with regard to the development of our Colonies. There appears to be considerable discussion at the moment as to what is called the development, the economic unity, of a self-supporting Empire, but I hope that no aspect of that question will be raised this morning, because, whatever views may exist and whatever differences there may be, there can be no doubt or challenge that, so far as our Colonies are concerned, we are in the main trustees, and that a great moral obligation attaches to this country to do all that it can to develop them.

This Motion lays the foundation for a long-range policy of constructive Colonial development, and, if any evidence were needed as to the amazing amount of territory involved, for which we are responsible, I would point out that the Bill with which we are concerned this morning deals with and relates to something like 3,000,000 square miles. I think it is true to say that there is practically no product that could not be produced in some part or other of this great territory. With a view to emphasising the importance of what I would call the British side of the question, I would remind the Committee that Nigeria alone imports from the United Kingdom 70 per cent, of her total imports and the Gold Coast 60 per cent., and, indeed, the total value of goods exported from the United Kingdom to the Colonies, Protectorates, and mandated territories in 1927 was no less a sum than £60,000,000. I give those figures in order to emphasise, what is not generally known and appreciated, the tremendous advantage of the development of our Colonies to the improvement of the trade and commerce of this country. I would mention in addition that, during the past five years, these Colonies have bought £33,000,000 worth of stores, and during the same period they have raised £18,000,000 of loans in this country, nearly half of which was spent in Great Britain. I submit that upon all these grounds we are entitled to say that not only is this a field that requires exploring and further developing, but surely there is no more opportune time at which to do it than when it will in some way benefit our own unemployed people at home. It is for that reason that I am asking the Committee to support this Motion.

May I make a request to all sections of the Committee to treat to-day's Debate as a Second Reading stage? There is a lot of talk about good will and anxiety to help in the unemployment problem, and unless there is anything seriously contentious, if there is general agreement that a Bill of this kind is necessary and essential, I submit that I am entitled to ask the House, when they have had a full discussion to-day on the Money Resolution, not to exercise their Parliamentary power to have another full dress debate on the Second Reading.

:With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion about goodwill, may I suggest that he makes his appeal to the whole Committee, including those sitting behind him, because yesterday a great deal of forbearance was exercised on this side but not on the other?

:The hon. Member is quite entitled to say that, and if he looks at my words he will see that I was very careful to say I was referring to no party and no section. I was referring to the Committee as a whole, and I do not want to let it be assumed that I am dictating in any way. As far as we are concerned, no attempt will be made to take advantage of Parliamentary procedure or to deny any right, but when there is a measure which, I am quite certain when it is explained and understood, will meet with the generous approbation of the Committee, I am entitled to say to the Committee: " Give me a chance so that it can become law, so that I can do some of the things that I am asking to do." That is the only meaning to be attached to my request, and it is in that spirit that I appeal to the Committee.

Shortly, the White Paper summarises the Motion. First, there is the establishment of a Colonial Development Fund and the extension of the benefits of the Colonial Stock Acts to facilitate borrowing by certain protected or mandated territories. There is also an Amendment of the Palestine and East Africa Loans Act, to enable interest to be added to capital during the period of construction and to increase the period of the loan. First, with regard to the Development Fund. We intend that this Fund shall be an annual sum of £1,000,000. I have carefully thought over the advisability of taking this amount of money as a sort of snowball sum. If you only spent £500,000 in one year, there would be £1,500,000 the next year, and so on. Anybody who gives a moment's consideration to the Treasury, and what I would call sound financial methods will see at a glance that that is a very undesirable thing. No one could say for a moment that it is a good thing to have yearly piling up a sum, and that no one should know what it is likely to be in the following year. But that is not the primary objection I have to the principle. My objection is this: If this Bill and many of my other proposals are to succeed, and to be as valuable as I believe they can be made, it can only be done by a general speeding-up all round, and under the provisions that I am now taking it enables me to say, in the name of the Colonial Office, to the Colonies: " Now, if you want something done, get on with it. The sum will not be there next year, and if it is not spent this year you are to blame, and you must bear the responsibility."

I believe that the effect of the Colonies knowing perfectly well that if they want assistance, and if they want to take advantage of this £1,000,000, it is far better for them to know it is not for an indefinite period, and it will tend, in my judgment, to speed up the whole machine. I would ask those who, perhaps, would take the other view, to consider the tendency. If a Colony or even a municipality knew perfectly well that by doing nothing now there would still be the money available, there would be the natural tendency to delay, and it is because I attach so much importance to speeding-up that I have deliberately taken the view which I have.

There may be some Members in the House and some outside the House who, in criticising, may say: " After all £1,000,000 is not very much." Those who say that have no conception what £1,000,000 in this Fund can do. First, let me give an illustration. There are many Colonies who, we believe, are prepared to do at this moment work on what I would call a fifty-fifty basis, that is to say, that if we paid half the interest for a period, they would take the responsibility for the other half. On this basis alone, £1,000,000 would enable £40,000,000 worth of work to be undertaken. No one is going to minimise the importance of that. I attach far more importance to the question of speeding-up, getting the Colonies to submit schemes, because, in my view, that will be the best way to help them and help my object. I dare say there are some members in the Committee who, looking at Clause I of the Bill, would naturally ask themselves: "But you are taking in this Clause somewhat identical powers to those existing in the Empire Marketing Board to-day."

:Is the right hon. Gentleman referring to a Bill before the House now?

:I am quite sure the hon. Member knows that technically I am dealing with the White Paper which, presumably, he has seen, but, if not, and I call it a Bill, and he has not seen either, I would advise him to get the White Paper. He will see that it could be argued that this particular Clause did in some way conflict with the existing powers of the Empire Marketing Board, and, frankly, I am going to admit that it does. I had some doubt as to the wisdom of putting that Clause in, because the one thing we have to guard against is one body, such as the Empire Marketing Board, working in one direction and another body trying to do the same thing. Obviously, that is very undesirable, and ought to be avoided. Let me first assume that I had deleted that Clause. The net result would have been that there are things to-day that the Empire Marketing Board would like to do but that they cannot do. I will give an illustration. Supposing, as there was last year, and there may be again, an exhibition in a foreign country where some of our own colonies want to show to the world the things they can produce. It is a good thing to advertise those things. The Empire Marketing Board is precluded from assisting them to do it. I think that is wrong. I do not think that is a good thing, because if our object is to develop our Colonies, and we want to show the world the products of our Colonies, if they themselves want to advertise them and show what they can produce, surely we ought not to allow technicalities to prevent that from being done.

There is another consideration. The Empire Marketing Board is not on a statutory basis; we propose to place it on a statutory basis, and, when that is done, we will take the necessary steps to see that the machinery is so organised that there will be no overlapping. In the interval I give the Committee the assurance that in accepting this particular Clause they will know that we are not only fully alive to all the facts in the situation, but that we will take the necessary steps to see that there is no overlapping. I feel it necessary to explain that to the Committee.

I need not dwell on the various proposals enumerated in the White Paper, and I only desire to draw special attention to the power to assist either by way of loan or grant or the payment in whole or in part of interest for the first 10 years. My experience at the Colonial Office—and I am sure that it was the experience of the right hon. Gentleman— was that our Colonies would often say: "Here is something very necessary and important; we will undertake it if you will help us; we will undertake it—in some cases—if you will give a grant or— in other cases—if you will pay the interest." The Colonial Office have found that this is very difficult, and the Bill enables that kind of thing to be done.

I will give an illustration. In the Sierra Leone there is a drainage scheme which, in the judgment of those on the spot and those who have made investigations, is essential, but it cannot be done because there is no power and no money. There is a harbour at Dar-es-Salaam, in the case of which it is reported to the Colonial Office that the Legislative Council said that the buying of a tug and other improvements are essential, but nothing can be done. I am not confining myself this morning to saying what things will be done, but limiting myself to showing that there are applications in the Colonial Office, which could be granted if this power were given. There is, for instance, a very strong feeling in Northern Rhodesia that, in regard to the enormous copper development that is taking place, none of our Government services are in a fit position to meet the development. That is the report of those on the spot. Then there is the question of the railways in East and Central Africa and the linking up of the main line between Kenya and Uganda. I again emphasise that these illustrations are merely typical. This is what I would call the broad general intention with regard to the Development Fund.

As to the alteration of the Palestine and East Africa Guaranteed Loans Act, I will give two illustrations. Our experience is that many of the Colonies are unable at this moment to go on with any work, because in the period in which they are unremuaerative, the period of construction, they are unable to meet the burdens. We are altering the Act, so that during the period of construction the interest charges can be paid out of capital. That, again, is something that the Colonial Office have been pressing for years. Concurrently with that, many of the Colonies find themselves hampered because of the short sinking fund period. They say that if the money is to be paid back over a period of 40 years they are hampered, and in order to get over that difficulty we are extending the period to 60 years. One other illustration is the question of the Zambesi Bridge. In all the cases which I have enumerated, for my immediate purpose I am emphasising to the Committee that if I had to introduce the Bill on its merits, merely as a necessary Colonial development, as something that was essential to the ordinary development of the Empire, I would justify it on these grounds, but I am mainly concerned at this moment, because I believe that these changes will enable much work to come to this country when it is especially necessary. Those are really the two main grounds upon which I urge it. Therefore, I have gone very broadly into the general idea behind this scheme. I have submitted the grounds which both from the Colonial Office point of view and my own point of view, prompted us to introduce it. I believe that it is essential at this moment; I believe that its ultimate effect will be the benefit of the Empire as a whole, and I cannot conceive that there will be any objection from any part of the Committee.

:In the last Debate on Colonial affairs in the late House the right hon. Gentleman the present Lord Privy Seal made an appeal for continuity of policy, and I am very glad to see that not only did he make that appeal when in Opposition but that he has made good his appeal when in Office. We on this side naturally welcome the compliment paid to our election programme in the adoption of something that was an important item in it, and we shall certainly be the last to introduce into this discussion any factious opposition or any obstruction. As far as possible, we should like to respond to the right hon. Gentleman's appeal that we should discuss this subject fully on this Motion, but as we had no notice that this was to come on first and as one or two of my hon. and right hon. Friends, including the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stafford (Mr. Ormsby-Gore), who are keenly interested in this question are not present, I must at any rate preserve their right to join in the discussion when the matter comes on for Second Reading, and in any case, of course, we shall wish to see the actual text of the Bill.

:May I interrupt the right hon. Gentleman? I was in at the beginning of this debate, and for reasons which we appreciate, he was not in his place; but I must point out that this stage of a Money Resolution is in the normal course of events purely formal and would go through in one minute, and, therefore, if the late Under-Secretary the right hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Ormsby-Gore) is not in his place, he would not have been in his place had the original order been adhered to.

:I am very glad to be instructed by the hon. and gallant Member.

:And I was in a position to instruct you.

:The debate on the Committee Stage on the Unemployment Financial Resolution by no means led me to anticipate that this would be a purely formal stage to-day, and in any case none of us, before we arrived here, had had the advantage of hearing the appeal made by the right hon. Gentleman that we should have the bulk of the discussion to-day on this Motion and not on the Second Reading of the Bill. I know of no Parliamentary precedent for us to regard the Financial Resolution as providing the only opportunity for an important discussion and for the Second Reading of the Bill to be a minor and formal item of procedure. But, broadly speaking, I am only too glad to respond to the suggestion which has been made, and I hope that those of my hon. Friends who are interested in the question and wish to discuss it will, as far as they can make it convenient, discuss it to-day.

I do not propose to follow the right hon. Gentleman at any length, but I wish to make one or two brief observations and to ask one or two questions. May I begin with the minor item in the Motion dealing with the amendment of the Palestine and East Africa Loans Act. That is something which I had hoped to secure myself. The original form in which the Act was drawn precluded, more by an oversight than anything else I think, the Governments concerned from adding payment of interest during construction to the capital, and in the case of a certain number of projects, not the more ambitious ones, but some of them, that would have been enough to make the difference between their embarking on the projects at an early date and postponing them for some time. Therefore, quite naturally, I welcome the change. I also welcome most heartily another proposal which it had been my hope to carry through, namely, the long deferred extension of the provisions of the Colonial Stock Acts, 1877 to 1900, to protectorates and mandated territories. For a long time past the distinction between a colony and a protectorate from the financial point of view has been a quite unreal one. A great protectorate like Nigeria or Uganda is, from the point of view of this country, in a more substantial financial position by far than a small West Indian island, and the control of the Secretary of State is in many cases much more effective when he has not to deal with a largely independent local legislature. From that point of view I think this is a very desirable modification.

It is necessary, perhaps, that a word should be said regarding the extension to mandated territories. A mandated ter- ritory does differ from a protectorate in this respect, that our trusteeship is not only to the conscience of this House, but to the conscience of the nations at large assembled at the League of Nations. We not only inform the League of Nations as to our having kept within the conditions of the mandate, but we do also give a very general account of our stewardship. It is obviously our duty, in the case of a mandated territory, to give to it every advantage which we would give to a Colony or Protectorate. We ought not to take the line that because our position is a somewhat different one we should in any way preclude a mandated territory from advantages which we give to a non-mandated territory, even though that mandated territory may, by the very terms of the mandate, be precluded, for instance, from giving us fiscal advantages. In the case of most mandated territories our administration is as fully effective to secure good finance as it is in any Colony or protectorate, and in the case of any mandated territory where at some future date there may be a development of a wider form of self-government I have no doubt that an essential condition for such a change being ratified or approved by Parliament or by the League of Nations would be that the financial undertakings incurred should be honoured.

There is one question I should like to ask, and it is with regard to the position of Iraq. As the right hon. Gentleman is well aware, the relations between Iraq and ourselves are those of a treaty alliance with an independent State. On the other hand, vis-à-vis the League of Nations, we have always accepted the point of view that we are still obliged to make sure that the mandatory obligations are fulfilled, and they have accepted our treaties as the equivalent, from their point of view of a mandate.

:The reason I did not include Iraq and why I said nothing about it is that, as the right hon. Gentleman and the House will know, very important political issues are involved, and I felt it would be unwise for me to talk about developments in Iraq until the whole political future of Iraq, as between it and ourselves, had been determined.

:I am certainly prepared to leave it at that, and I rather gather that it is in the right hon. Gentleman's mind to leave that an open question, dependent really on the general settlement with Iraq and Iraq's willingness to take advantage of this Clause and not to regard it as in any sense a reflection on her.

:That is it.

:Then I come to the most important paragraph in the Motion, that which deals with the authorisation to spend a sum of £1,000,000 over a very wide field of development. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that, in present circumstances at any rate, £1,000,000 is a considerable and adequate sum, and I think he will find in the first year that it will not be possible to accelerate or to take advantage of more than that sum, although at the end of a period of years the House may be asked to go even beyond that amount.

:If they spend this, well, I will ask again.

:The right hon. Gentleman or his successor will do so. I would like to know if the sum of £1,000,000 is to be entirely spent on new purposes, or is it to take over and include the moneys at present spent from the Exchequer on grant-in-aid Colonies?

:It is independent of the grants-in-aid.

:Then that adds value to the total amount. I agree that the scope is very wide, and I understand that it will cover not only loans and grants for specific works but also, in the case of a poor Colony, any attempt at grading up research staffs to the standard indicated by the Agricultural Research Committee.

:That is my instruction, but of course every Minister in such matters is dependent upon his Parliamentary draftsmen. The intention is clear and definite, and the Resolution is so widely drawn as to exclude nothing that can be called development of any kind.

:I am pleased to hear that reply. I assumed that they would be able to give assistance to organise a capable staff as well as actual works. Does the scope of this Resolution also cover the question of health? The Lord Privy Seal knows very well from his own experience the tremendous bearing of the whole problem of health on effort and develop- ment. There are certain cases in which a whole countryside is unutilisable for agricultural development because no domestic animals can live on account of the tsetse fly, and there are regions where the same pest has killed off most of the human population. I am not sure that the Resolution, widely drawn as it is, will cover such questions as an intensive health campaign or an anti-tsetse and the anti-malaria campaign, and I hope it may be possible to find that they are included, and, if not, I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will widen the scope of the Resolution.

Let me give one instance of our recent experience in Colonial development. A very important hydro-electric scheme was recently carried out in Malaya in one of the most malarially affected jungle districts of that country. In that case, the burden of cost that would have been imposed upon the industrial development would have been enormously increased but for the fact that the company concerned and the Malayan authorities had previously carried out their preventive measures in such an efficient manner that the cost, both in life and in money, was reduced to a negligible figure. I hope the Lord Privy Seal will look into this question.

:I have already ascertained that it is intended to cover that branch of the question.

:I am delighted to know that. As regards the possible overlap between research work done from this fund and that hitherto done by the Empire Marketing Board, I have no doubt that can be easily adjusted, and I think that between those two bodies this matter will be well provided for. I know there are some instances in which the Empire Marketing Board has in the past given assistance which should in future come from this fund. On the other hand, instances have been mentioned where Colonies could be helped from this fund, where the Empire Marketing Board is not able to help. For instance, such questions as foreign exhibitions. A very important Colonial exhibition will take place in Paris in 1931 or 1932. [ Interruption. ] I welcome the tropical element which has been so happily introduced by the appearance of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Macquisten). I notice, however, that he is wearing only an English rose, and not the more appropriate mango blossom.

:I only hope that it is the white flower of a blameless life.

:This important inter national Colonial exhibition which is going to be held in Paris might very well be assisted on a moderate scale out of this Fund. The right hon. Gentle man has mentioned the Zambesi Bridge scheme. Undoubtedly there has been considerable delay, but I feel bound to point out that up to this point the delays have been mainly of a technical character, due to the difficulty of finding a convenient crossing over the shifting sand. Obviously, £1,000,000 or more might easily be wasted in the construction of a bridge like the Zambesi Bridge by beginning at the wrong point. I think the proposals which have now been made have come at the right moment to prevent any future delay. I want the Committee fully to under stand that financial difficulties have not been responsible for the delay which has occurred up to date in regard to the construction of the Zambesi Bridge. There is one thing that I wish to say of a more general character about the framework which the right hon. Gentle man has chosen. I confess that I had hoped that this £1,000,000 a year would have been a Parliamentary £1,000,000, like the £1,000,000 of the Empire Marketing Board, given on the under standing that unexpended balances should be available to the Board in future years to enable it to carry on its programme knowing how much money it would have in future years, not necessarily hustling the development in a particular series of six months, but rather saying to them definitely, "Here is so much money for so many years. Spend that money as quickly as you can within that time," but not saying that it has got to be spent before the 31st March. The next six months may very well be the rainy season in the Colony concerned, when it may be almost impossibe to carry on the work. There is another reason, which goes a little deeper—

:I gather that what, the right hon. Gentleman has, in his mind is the possibility of a develop- ment which necessarily could not be completed in twelve months, but which. as he said, might be spread over three or five years. Under this Bill, if the work is spread over five or ten years, we can grant the whole or part of the interest for a long period, and there will be no difficulty whatever so far as that is concerned.

:I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman has quite got the point I was making. Apparently, you have £1,000,000 a year, and you undertake a certain number of guaranteed schemes up to that total and then it stops, so that any money that you do not spend this year or next year is not available to enlarge the total in future years. A more elastic system enables you, with the same total money, to embark on a larger pro-gramme. The issue, however, really goes deeper than that. My experience of a good many years' work on different kinds of schemes is that there are two kinds of finance in these matters. There is the finance, essentially negative, exercised by the Treasury in preventing the Departments from putting on fat. There is a tendency in every Department gradually to spend more and more, and the necessary function of the Treasury is to apply steady massage to prevent the Department from putting on fat. But when you come to an entirely new line of expenditure, expenditure which you want to promote, then the making of that expenditure subject to Treasury control means the same process being applied, and, even with the best will in the world, subconsciously rather than consciously, the Treasury is always finding objections to getting on with the work. The moment you get rid of the Treasury motive of saving on the year's Estimates, then, while you make sure by the presence of Treasury representatives on your board that there is no waste, you nevertheless have the positive spirit, the desire to find effective schemes, as long as they are effectively carried out, and not a continuous drag holding up the work.

This is especially important when you are negotiating with other parties outside. The difficulties of negotiation are enormously enhanced when you have to go back to another Department which looks at the matter from an entirely different point of view. I have had the double experience of oversea settlement work and of the work of the Empire Marketing Board, and I am quite sure that the fruitful development of the Empire Marketing Board has been due to the elasticity of its finance. The new and valuable lines of work which it discovered as it was going along, and the negotiations which it has clinched at a favourable moment with institutions and Governments overseas and at home, by which it has secured one-half or even a larger share of the expenditure from them in return for assistance from us, would never have come about if in each case we had had to go round and submit the matter to the Treasury for examination, and go through the whole lengthy procedure of struggling against constant resistance. In the case of oversea settlement there has been that difficulty, and I know that in regard to the negotiations with the Governments concerned, and catching them at a favourable moment to agree to a scheme, the difference between the point of view of those who look for better distribution of our population as an object in itself, and who see the indirect resultant advantages of a scheme which may perhaps be expensive per man settled, and, on the other hand, the point of view of a purely financial department which always asks how many men can be got out in so many months, and how much money they are going to cost, is a real hindrance to the development of oversea settlement work. I had hoped, in that work, too, to get some more elastic basis of positive finance such as was found so successful in the case of the Empire Marketing Board. From that point of view, I confess I am rather sorry that the right hon. Gentleman has chosen the system of a fixed money grant to be spent or returned to the Sinking Fund, and also that he has chosen the method of a committee. May I just ask who is to be the chairman of the committee? Is it to be the Secretary of State for the Colonies, or the right hon. Gentleman?

:I am unable at the moment to announce the composition of the committee, and it would be undesirable to make any statement, but I hope to announce it at an early date.

:I will only say that 1 hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not appoint a committee consisting purely of eminent business men with a business chairman. My experience of these committees is not only that they approach the subject without knowing the ordinary administrative details of it, and have to have everything explained to them, which takes a long time, but also that their whole tendency is to guard their business reputation, and, therefore, to be so cautious that it is only gilt-edged schemes, which would succeed anyway, that are likely to get assistance from them. I know that the right hon. Gentleman wants to get on with the work, even at the risk of some failures in the course of doing it. Let me recommend to him, therefore, the kind of composition represented by the Empire Marketing Board. The advantage of that kind of composition is that the chairman, and the person who decides in the last resort, is the Secretary of State, who is interested and concerned in the whole development, and knows a great deal about the problem that needs developing. He is assisted by members of the Government in other Departments. who are also specially interested, as well as by representatives of the Opposition and by a board partly composed of men of business experience and partly of representatives of the different parts of the Empire concerned.

I should like, in all deference, to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be possible, and within the framework of his Measure, to see to it that either he himself or the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies is the chairman, and that the board shall include, besides business men—and, obviously, some amount of general business experience would be necessary—some Departmental representatives and also some representatives of those Colonial territories which will be directly affected. I believe that in that way he will get a body more eager to get on with the work, and, perhaps, not quite so jealous of their reputation if one particular item were criticised afterwards. I trust that I have not delayed the Committee unduly. I would, in conclusion, again assure the right hon. Gentleman that we welcome his proposals in their broad features, although, as I have said, in some respects I should have liked to see them framed somewhat differently, and we shall give him every assistance in getting the Measure through and every support in the actual working out of it afterwards. The more quickly he gets on with the work, the more every section of the House will be grateful to him.

:Might I clear this point up. I must not be assumed to express any opinion on the right hon. Gentleman's views as to business men at all, because he is much more acquainted with them than I am, but I want to make it perfectly clear that the intention of this committee, as well as of the home committees, is not merely to have a camouflage committee in order to stop things being done; it is to have a committee whose experience and knowledge are such that that in itself will be a guarantee that it is a very good thing, and, above all, in all these matters, it is not to be safety first, but there is to be a little bit of risk taken.

:There was no point in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sparkbrook (Mr. Amery) that interested me more than his criticism of the business man and the part he would take in Colonial development. It was a subtle and a shrewd criticism that the business man has a certain limited point of view which requires to be supplemented by the governmental man, who takes the point of view of the State—precisely the argument that we Socialists use in favour of the statesmanlike element being combined with the purely businesslike element in the judgment of great questions of this kind. We welcome the splendid support the Socialist argument has received from the right hon. Gentleman. I want to say a few things about the Financial Resolution and to respond to my right hon. friend's appeal that we should, as far as possible, get our discussion on the Resolution and not expect. a very long or thorough debate on the Second Reading. I recognise the urgency of getting on with this matter, and I fully understand the motive which has prompted him in making that appeal. On the other hand, the appeal comes to us, as to Members on the other side, as a fresh appeal. We naturally took it for granted that on a question of this magnitude we should be able to utilise the rather special advantages which the forms of the House allow to a Measure involving finance, that is to say, that in addition to Second and Third Reading you get the Committee and Report stages of the Financial Resolution, giving several opportunities of drawing attention to the matter, and we feel that this is a matter of very great magnitude. We do not want to give away opportunities of discussing problems of Empire development of this nature, because they do not occur too often. They occur very much less often than some of us would like, and one would not like to give away in advance, without seeing how this Debate goes, an opportunity of raising the subject again.

When I say the question is one of very great magnitude, I have in mind in particular an aspect of it which has not yet been so much as alluded to, namely, the effect of these great development works which may be carried out in pursuance of this Resolution on the human life of the numerous people living in the territories concerned. It may be very good indeed, but it may be very bad, and that is one aspect of the problem to which one would like to direct attention. Another reason for discussion is that there is so much loose talk about Empire development, and so much false economics. Of course, it is very desirable to encourage these works in the Empire, but, as far as unemployment goes, if we are to make advances for the execution of great works, it does not matter whether they go to the Empire or to any other country. I have always understood that any advance of £1,000,000, or £10,000,000, or £20,000,000, or £100,000,000, to another country outside our borders will eventually go out in the form of goods or services produced in this country. If it does not go out in that form, how does it go out? I am prepared to be corrected if anyone can show me how it can go out to the Empire or any other country in any other form.

I am not belittling the importance of the matter at all, because I recognise that there is a great deal of economic friction in these matters. Things move slowly and so forth, and by this procedure, and by our political intimacy with the Empire, we can accelerate the matter, and we can get orders placed here and now. The whole business is urgent from the unemployment point of view. I fully recognise that the other thing is a matter of slow working, and considerable economic friction at this and that point; but there is a certain amount of loose thinking about the matter, and one wants to look into it rather carefully. It is good for the workers of this country to develop the world, and not the Empire only. All world development of an economic nature is good for the workers of the country. We are not to be assumed to think that there is some peculiar magic or virtue in developing the Empire so far as the effect on unemployment is concerned. I am not dealing with other aspects of it. There are very strong reasons for developing the Empire, other than the purely economic reason of unemployment, but that wants to be kept in view.

Coming to the terms of the Resolution, we are conferring very great privileges on certain groups of people in certain parts of the Empire. Do not let us forget it. We look at this matter from the point of view of the terrible urgency of the unemployment problem here. We think we are going to benefit ourselves, but we are going—and do not let us forget it—incidentally to benefit other people to an enormous degree. If we are going to benefit them and to give them this very special privilege, let us see that we get a quid pro quo. I know very well that my right hon. Friend is alive to that, and will take good care that we get a quid pro quo.

:Let us be quite plain. It is no good saying " yes " to that if I do not understand it. I want to know what my hon. Friend means by " other people." This Bill confers rights on certain of our Mandated Territories which are already enjoyed by other Colonies. Because of the accident of their being mandated, why should they not benefit? That is point No. 1. Point 2 is that the Development Fund benefits people who are British subjects within the Empire. I have no intention of benefiting anyone else at all in this Bill, and I do not want it to go forth that there is anything else intended than what I have said.

:I quite appreciate what my right hon. Friend has said, and, if I have not made my meaning clear, it is because I had not had time to develop my point. Supposing you construct a branch railway in Kenya, which I presume is a very likely thing to be done, where are you going to construct it, and for whose benefit is it going to be constructed? I am afraid there is a certain danger in that particular part of the world that an undue preference will be given in large works to certain classes of the population. It is my fear—it may be exaggerated—that certain preferences may be given to a certain section of the population. These privileges which are to be given by the Bill—the use of the credit and financial resources of this country—are very important privileges. If they were given to a group of people who were a small section of the population, it would be conferring a very important privilege on a certain group of planters and settlers, so much so, that groups of planters and settlers all over the Empire might well envy them. I am mentioning that as an example, because my right hon. Friend asked what I meant by it. I mention that as the most precise example of which I can think. I could mention many others where a certain group of people might obtain advantages. I am not only speaking of cases where this would be wrong and unjust, but of many cases where it might be desirable that, say, a company should be established to exploit some particular resource. Very likely it might be quite right that they should receive this privilege, none the less it would be a privilege. There will be a crowd of people surrounding "my right hon. Friend wanting this privilege. At least, I shall be surprised if there is not. He is more alive probably than anyone else to the fact that in the disposal of these great resources, whatever the motive, whether to relieve unemployment or otherwise, you have to be very careful where they go. Because the whole field of operations may become, if one is entitled to quote Milton in this House: quid pro quo. I want to make clear that I meant something rather more precise: Supposing you get an expenditure which develops the land of a certain area, I suggest that it is important that we should keep and eye on the need for getting a quid pro quo, in some cases, for instance, by a definite tax upon the increased value conferred on the land, so that all the financial benefits should not go into private pockets. These are familiar suggestions, especially on this side of the House. You might have a betterment tax. If you take certain parts of East Africa, you will find that this question of taxing the people who have benefited by public expenditure is really a very burning question. That will be intensified by an expenditure of this kind because great value will be conferred upon land. There should be a tax in some of these parts upon land speculation, upon the sale of land, where people have bought land for twopence halfpenny an acre and then sold it for £40 or £50 an acre, the principal difference being due to Government expenditure on development. I suggest that this kind of consideration should be borne in mind in the allocation of expenditure. The Royal Commission presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in the late Government recommended changes in the taxation of certain parts of East Africa in order that some taxation might be paid by those who have profited by this kind of expenditure.

I want to say one word, still pursuing the terms of the Motion before the House, with regard to the question which I have already mentioned very generally, namely, the question of native welfare. One has to speak vaguely, because the Motion is vague. I do not know what the works are going to be; they may be almost anything. If you embark upon some of the works named in this Motion, they will have an immense effect upon the native life of the community concerned. It may be for good or for evil, but it will have an immense effect. Vast numbers of labourers will be got out somehow to work on these works. I want to know under what conditions they will be got out. I am not going to enlarge upon this problem, because my right hon. Friend is quite familiar with it, and I know that it will be considered. I want those responsible to realise that not only has the question to be decided, but that there is a very strong feeling on this side of the Committee, and on the other side of the Committee for aught I know, on the need of considering the actual social and economic and labour effects of these works when carried out on the spot. In- sufficient attention has been paid to that aspect in the past.

Let me give an example. I mentioned railway branch lines, in particular, which might be constructed upon land developed by white settlers to the neglect of land developed by native people. A figure has been given that in Kenya the railways serving land occupied by white settlers were no less than 80 per cent, of the whole. I cannot give that figure on authority—I do not know what authority there is for it—but such a figure has been given. It would be universally admitted, I think, that the construction of railway branch lines has served areas developed by white settlers and has hardly served at all areas developed by the native population on their own lines of agriculture. If expenditure of that kind is contemplated, or is undertaken in any such countries, an endeavour should be made, not merely to strike the balance even, but to build upon those territories developed by native agriculture to a very much greater extent until the balance is somewhat redressed as between them and the areas occupied by white settlers.

I should like to say a few words as to the labour conditions under which these works are to be carried out. The coming of a great operation, like the building of a bridge, into a district, means the revolutionising of the whole social life of the district, and, possibly, of other districts hundreds of miles away from which labourers are brought, and interference with the whole arrangements of the economic life of the community. We want to make sure that these people are brought under proper conditions and not forced to come. There is considerable evidence that the labour required for work of this kind is inadequate. Therefore, efforts ought not to be made to force on a rapid and artificial development of industry of this kind under the social and population conditions which exist. In most cases, probably, and in East Africa, at any rate, some suitable inquiry ought to be made before people go into the labour market, and, in the crudest manner, try and get labourers to come out. Some further inquiry is needed. This is a matter which is in the mind of my right hon. Friend, and it needs our special attention in regard to works of this kind, because it has been so often neglected in the past. I am not belittling the importance of these works, because they will find immediate employment by the orders which will be. given in this country. From that point of view they should not be despised, but we must not forget that there is a longer and more distant point of view. If we could extend our gaze for 10, 20, 30 or 50 years ahead, we should do far more for the unemployed of this country by raising the standard of living of the population who live in the various part of the Empire than by any amount of other work. I know that my right hon. Friend will bear that in mind. By taking the more distant point of view we can raise the industrial position of the workers of this country enormously by raising the standard of native living throughout the world.

:While realising what lay behind the remarks of the Lord Privy Seal when he asked that this Debate should be regarded as far as possible as a Second Reading Debate, in order that matters should not be delayed, I must, on behalf of my hon. Friends on these benches, retain our rights of criticism until we see the Bill. This is a matter of very great importance and we have had very little time to consider it. Therefore, my right hon. Friend will realise that we must retain our rights of criticism when the Bill comes before the House. One is struck by the very great advance which the introduction of this Financial Resolution marks in the history of the relationship of this country to the Crown Colonies, compared with that relationship not many years ago. It is not many years since a Prime Minister of this country spoke of these Colonies as being a millstone round our neck. Today, the Lord Privy Seal has spoken of the Crown Colonies as a lifebuoy which will bring safety to the old country.

The ideas underlying the action of the Lord Privy Seal in bringing forward this Resolution are thoroughly sound. We all realise that the one thing that will tend most to reduce unemployment in this country is an increase in our trade. What underlies this Resolution is a distinct desire to increase and expand our trade and, thereby, reduce unemployment and at the same time confer the benefit of speedier development upon our Colonies. Although the underlying principle is thoroughly sound, that will not prevent us from offering some criticisms and asking some questions in regard to the proposals for putting it into practical use. The ex-Colonial Secretary has referred to the danger of overlapping with the work of the Empire Marketing Board. Anyone who knows anything of the work of the Empire Marketing Board must realise how very closely and how much on parallel lines the work of this Committee will run with the work of the Empire Marketing Board. I was glad to hear the Lord Privy Seal say that that was in his mind and that steps would be taken to keep the work separate; but I am not sure whether in the course of developments certain portions of the work of the Marketing Board will have to be taken away from it and given to this Committee, and the remaining work of the Marketing Board kept entirely on its own lines, quite apart from what is contemplated here. I should like an explanation of the expression "certain Colonies." How far is the assistance going to be limited?

:There is an Amendment on the Order Paper dealing with that point. The term "certain Colonies" is used in order to get over the difficulty that there are certain Colonies which have self-government and are not dependencies.

:Am I to understand that the word "certain" is put in merely on the ground that, for instance, Southern Rhodesia is technically a colony and is self-governing, and that the others are not. Is Ceylon included or is it not?

:The intention was to draw a border line, a constitutional border line, so that it could not be said that we were in any way interfering with those Colonies that were self-governing.

:Will they be excluded?

:Yes.

:That leaves out any self-governing Dominion or Colony. In the main we are concerned with our tropical dependencies in Africa. I would remind the Committee of the vast importance of Africa. We do not half realise the developments that have taken place in Africa in the last few years. We are too close to them to realise what has taken place. When I went to West Africa, 30 years ago, the expectation of life of a young man who had passed a medical board was only three years after his arival in West Africa. No return tickets were given by the steamers. That situation has been changed. Owing to the work of men like Sir Ronald Ross and Sir Patrick Manson, the conditions of life have been so altered that Europeans can do work out there with the expectation that if they obey the ordinary rules of health they can keep decent health and decent vigour. The revenues of the African Colonies which were reckoned then in tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds have risen to many millions of pounds. A figure was quoted by the Lord Privy Seal of over £60,000,000 in one case, and we have only scratched the edge of it yet. Look at a great territory like Nigeria. There are 20,000,000 of people in Nigeria, more people than in the whole of the self-governing Dominions. Those people are poor to-day but, as was pointed out by the hon. Member for Elland (Mr. C. Buxton) we can make them rich and self-supporting and give them the opportunities of acquiring wealth. They are the people with whom we want to trade and the people who want to trade with us. That is where the great expansion will come.

The ways in which the money covered by this Resolution might be applied are very varied. It has been explained that the Resolution has been so drawn as to exclude nothing that might tend to the development of the Colonies. That is entirely in the right direction; but we must be very careful that schemes are not undertaken which might more properly be undertaken by the Colonies themselves. That is a danger to which we should be very alert. There are wealthy Colonies and poor Colonies, and it is more particularly to the poor Colonies and those that are unable to keep up with what I might call the general march of progress that this scheme will be of particular use.

:I am glad that the hon. Member has emphasised that point, which was clearly in my mind. The object in altering the Act is to see that the rich territories should be put in a position to raise money themselves and would not need the assistance of the Development Fund.

:That is another very important part of the scheme as it facilitates the borrowing of money by the Colonies and enables them by an extension of the Stock Acts to obtain money at a less rate of interest than they otherwise would. That is a very important matter. If a wealthy Colony, which can in the ordinary way go into the money market and obtain a loan at 33 per cent., is able by reason of the extension of the Stock Acts to get it at 5½ per cent, it will be an enormous advantage to the Colony. That, I think, is making a very proper use of the credit of this country. Any Colony which is part of the British Empire, any Colony over which the British Flag flies, whether it is a Crown Colony or a Protectorate, has no need to be in default with the British credit behind it in the repayment of its loans.

The late Secretary of State referred to the composition of the Advisory Committee, and laid stress on the importance of selecting the right people. It is impossible to press the Lord Privy Seal to disclose the names of those he has in mind but I agree with the late Secretary of State that it would be very dangerous to put too many purely business men on the committee. You want men with experience of the colonies and protectorates, that is of first class importance, and it is, of course, an advantage to have some business men upon it. I should like to ask whether it is intended to have a large or small committee.

:A small committee.

:I should also like to know whether it is to be a permanent committee or to be appointed for three or four or five years? It is desirable that there should be continuity of action in a matter like this. I gather that it will be necessary to have something in the nature of a permanent secretariat and an office where the work can be carried on. It is important that should there be no break in the membership of the committee and that when a general line of policy has been laid down it should be understood that that line will be carried out without it being liable to be broken by any alteration in the composition of the committee. That is a matter to which some attention should be paid.

As regards the finance of the scheme I am inclined to agree with the late Secretary of State that it is more desirable to have a free hand and not to be obliged to return to the Treasury your unexpended balances. The Lord Privy Seal took the point of view that if the money was there and was not spent during the year, and it was known that it would go back to the Treasury, it would be more likely that the money would be expended. But it might tend to make people spend money in a hurry before they have had time to realise the whole implications of the scheme, and that, I think, is on the whole a greater danger. There is also this point. I am one of the last to say that Treasury control over public finance should !be relaxed, but the Treasury do not realise as people who have lived in the colonies realise that the conditions there are very different to conditions in Whitehall. It is, therefore, a great advantage I think to have as free a hand as possible in order that when you have decided upon your schemes you will be able to carry them out during a term of years without having them interfered with by having to return your unexpended balances. I think it is better to have a free hand, which I am sure the Lord Privy Seal desires. The scheme, if wisely administered, will be one of mutual advantage to the colonies and ourselves. At the same time people must not imagine that there will be any immediate return; it will take some time for these schemes to develop. We have to take the long view. If this scheme is put into operation it will doubtless make for a more rapid development in the colonies and to that extent will be to the advantage of everyone concerned, but people must not imagine that because we pledge our credit to these colonies and protectorates that they are going to see any immediate return. In five or ten years time we may see great advantages, a great extension of our trade with the colonies and of the trade of the colonies with us. On behalf of the Liberal party I welcome the scheme. We shall do whatever is in our power to see that it is placed on a sound and practical basis.

:So far as the purpose of this Measure is concerned, the only note that has been struck so far which seems I will not say a little discordant, but a little flat, was by the hon. Member for the Elland Division (Mr. C. Buxton), who seemed to provide an example of the quotation—

If there is one feature of it more than another which I might dwell upon as a singular promise for the future, it is the free admission of the principle of a guarantee of interest. That appears to me to bring out in the right manner and to put in the forefront of the scheme what is the real bed-rock principle, and that is this: In these Measures we are not concerned to encourage the promotion of works that are so remunerative that they would be undertaken anyhow by private means. Those can look after themselves. Still less, I am sure we shall all agree, are we in the least concerned to encourage works that will never be remunerative. That would be mere waste of money. There is always, of course, the necessity for guarding against these two extremes. That is where the advisers will come in. What the central purpose of the former is, if I do not misinterpret the right hon. Gentleman's intention, is to expedite works which will certainly be ultimately remunerative but which cannot pay at once on a commercial basis and want a little shove. If that is so, and is recognised as the basis of this scheme I think it might distinguish it from some others which we shall be called upon to consider in the near future.

But be that as it may. It serves to bring up another point, and that is the real reason why the retort of the hon. Member for the Elland Division to the right hon. Member for Sparkbrook (Mr. Amery), on the subject of the business men, was not quite to the point. The judgment in these propositions is to be made not absolutely upon a pure business basis. The business man is there to perform a service to the community which is of the utmost importance. He has to toll the community what propositions will pay and what will not at once; but when you introduce any other element, that is the element of looking ahead and seeing what is not necessarily ready to pay now but what will pay in future, then you want another outlook and vision, the vision of the despised and harmless politician in the best sense of the word.

Let me say a few words as to one or two of the special provisions of this scheme, special provisions, nevertheless, which go rather to the root of the matter. I confess to a certain amount of doubt as to some of the provisions of the scheme, particularly in this regard, that as I understand it we are to lump together under one class such work as grants for research and grants to assist organisation, together with loans, guarantees, grants for interest, for economic development. I doubt whether it is possible to classify these things together in one organisation with efficiency. It is not so much because of the possibility of overlapping in the existing organisation, which has already been examined, but because I find some difficulty in understanding how it would be possible to devise a single machinery to deal with the two sorts of work. Advice as to the grant for research must be given on quite different grounds from advice as to a guarantee for an economic undertaking. However, I imagine that the right hon. Gentleman must be considering the possibility of not confining himself to a single Advisory Committee at the present time, but possibly to duplicate bodies for undertaking the different sorts of work.

In that connection it will no doubt be necessary for him to give very special consideration to the absolutely vital, matter which has been raised by my right hon. Friend on the question of Treasury control. I want to approach this matter wholly from the point of view and in the interests of the Treasury itself. The Treasury is the most powerful organ for good in the body politic of the Civil Service. It is absolutely necessary to the right functioning of Government that it should be strong, vigorous, and not subject to any unnecessary strains which would impair its strength. In order to protect it from such unnecessary strain, is not the most basic principle that the Treasury should always be simply the economiser, and that it should not be called upon to double this function with the function of initiation of expenditure? At any rate that has been so in the past. It is a point in the charter of the Treasury. I am sure it has always been found in experience that whenever the Treasury has been obliged, by legislation or changes in procedure to take part in initiating expenditure, that has weakened its influence and qualified its power for work. To some extent in the original Trade Facilities Scheme, which provides certain precedents for the present occasion, duties of that sort were imposed on the Treasury, I think very much, as experience ultimately showed, to the disadvantage of the general state of affairs.

That is wisdom after the event. For the future might it not be possible to try to arrange matters according to some such general principle as this, that the function of the Treasury in dealing with such expenditure is to lay-down general rules as to the conditions with which propositions must accord in order to come within the scope of the scheme, and, having laid down those general rules, it should be the task of the Treasury to see that those rules are kept and if the rules are not kept to prevent any action being taken in contravention of them? It should not be the task of the Treasury to approve new Schemes. I am sure that it is bad for the status and general smooth working of the Treasury, and it is also bad, as has been said to-day, for getting on with the work. If in future there might be some consideration of that general principle, then I believe that the matter would work more smoothly in the practical life of the Department from day to day.

:It is rather important in relation to the much wider scheme. Important as is this proposal, obviously the financial resolution that I shall be introducing next week will have much wider scope. The principle that is raised now must be raised on both, I answer right away that I accept the general broad view with regard to Treasury control, because I think it is much better for the Treasury. Unless there was some such control, nothing but disaster would follow. There is bound to be some control in every business and in every Government. The road I am travelling on is, that the Treasury are formulating and helping to shape the policy and to laying down the principles in advance. You must get a coordinated principle set out for every interest. I think that that is much better than even the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman.

:I am sure it is better, but at the moment it does not seem to me to be different. The right hon. Gentleman carries me with him in sympathy by his description of the end which, I think, we are both seeking. Let me say a word about the amount which is being set aside under the Bill. I do not think it adequate. I do not say that I regard it as derisory or insignificant. It is something; but I do not for a moment think that the great benefits which we hope to reap, can be reaped upon so narrow a basis. The hon. Member who spoke last described some of the vast potentialities awaiting development, and there is not one member who has any acquaintance with any part of the British Empire overseas, but could describe some other great possibility awaiting development. If the policy be undertaken with commonsense and courage combined, a very much wider horizon is opened up than will be covered by £20,000,000. An hon. Member suggests that it is £40,000,000 capital value, but that is only on the assumption that the whole of the amount is spent with a 50 per cent, contribution from some other source, which is too optimistic. Anything between £20,000,000 and £40,000,000 seems a very narrow limitation.

That brings me to a point which has been argued to the great interest and much to the instruction of the Committee, between the right hon. Gentleman opposite and my right hon. Friend on this side as to the precise form of this grant, whether it should be a strict grant-in-aid without balances, or an ordinary vote with returnable balances. If I may say so, with all due diffidence, this does not seem to be the most essential issue in the matter. The result of the adoption of the strict form of a grant-in-aid would only be this—that there would be casual and uncertain accumulations of funds in a manner which it would be impossible to predict. That there shall be a rise in the amount to be at the disposal of the proper authorities I would say to be essential; but if there is going to be an increase, would it not be better that that increase should be certain in amount, so that it will be possible actually to lay down increasing schemes with certainty of finance? The suggestion —no doubt the very crude suggestion— which I would like to throw out is that even now the right hon. Gentleman should contemplate laying down in the Bill, not only a programme for increasing the amount to be placed at the disposal of the proper authorities, for free interest and consequently for grants, but that the increase should be £1,000,000 a year for five years, so as to amount to £5,000,000 five years hence.

That would give the authorities certainty of finance in. the future, so that they could lay their plans ahead, and be ready to fill out those plans when the time came without doubt or hesitation. It takes foresight to construct great plans of this sort. It will be said that £5,000,000 a year is a capital value of £100,000,000, and some Members on these benches may hesitate, on contemplating so big an addition to the capital outlay of the country. I know it is quite common to argue, particularly from these benches, that these guarantees on our capital account are an injury to, or a weight upon the credit of the country. That, surely, is taking a somewhat short view. Credit is not based simply upon the smallness of one's debt, but upon the largeness of one's assets, and money wisely spent in increasing the value of the nation's assets, is increasing the nation's credit. Our words to all Governments On this subject must be "Courage and foresight."

1.0 p.m.

:At the outset of my remarks, I ought to say that I do not want in any way to embarrass either Front Bench, but I want to put a view, from an angle substantially different from that taken by the Lord Privy Seal this morning. Many of us on this side fought the recent election as declared Socialists. We put to our constituencies a political philosophy which is the very antithesis of the political philsophy advocated by hon. Members opposite; and, in view of the direct clash between Conservative and Socialist philosophy in the constituencies, it is a disturbing experience to come here and find hon. Members opposite, not merely speaking in support of particular propositions made from this side of the House, but speaking in the same vocabulary as that which is used on this side, and indeed spurring us on to greater efforts along the lines indicated from our Front Bench.

In my opinion, there is a distinctly Socialist point of view to be put in regard to the speech of the Lord Privy Seal to-day. The right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down not only supported our Front Bench, but urged them not to be over-cautious in well-doing. As one listened to the right hon. Gentleman's speech, one understood why that encouragement and support should come from him and from the party with which he sits. He said that when the Treasury were laying down the principles governing the grants to be made under this Resolution to the Colonies and mandated territories, we ought not to concern ourselves with encouraging work which, in itself, would be remunerative. He urged that we ought to concentrate on work which would not be immediately remunerative and would therefore require that assistance from State funds which this Resolution will enable us to afford.

I understand why the right hon. Gentleman takes that line. Experience has made us familiar with the desire to take back into the hands of private enterprise any State operation which is showing a profit, and the desire that we should spend the public funds in promoting enterprises which do not offer an immediate return to private enterprise. It is consistent with the decision of the last Government to denationalise the beam wireless service, and with the utterance of the late Postmaster-General that he would if he could sell out the Post Office, which happens to make a very handsome profit in this country. If, when a Tory Government is in office, we are to have profitable State services handed over to private enterprise, and if, when a Labour Government is in office, public moneys are to be placed unreservedly at the disposal of private enterprises in the Colonies, it is clear that a distinctively Socialist view has got to come from these benches.

rose —

:No, do not interrupt me. I know what you are going to say.

:The hon. Member may not know that the Parliamentary procedure is that, if a statement is made that is not correct, it should be corrected, because that will save a continual false impression being given. The hon. Member has not read the White Paper, or he would have seen that the statement that there is unrestricted public money to go to private enterprise is not true, is not intended, and is not provided for in the Bill.

:Before Ministers interrupt, I wish they would listen to what I say. I did not say that unreserved public money was to be put behind private enterprise. There is obviously a very definite reserve laid down in the terms of the Motion itself. What I did say—and if I may be allowed to proceed, the bearing of it will become clear—is that there is nothing in the Motion or the White Paper which places any reserve upon the discretion of the Government as to the enterprises in respect of which these monies should be advanced. What restrictions are to be laid down have not yet been stated, and some of us on this side are concerned to see that the restrictions that are laid down are desirable from our point of view. The Motion says that the money is to be given by way of grant or loan to the Governments of the Colonies and Mandated Territories opinion makes it possible for us to do so.

I think an explicit answer is called for to the questions that were put by the hon. Member for Elland (Mr. C. Buxton). Is it the intention of the Lord Privy Seal and the Treasury to ensure that grants which are made under this Motion shall be accompanied by restrictions which will benefit the native labour that will be employed, which will give back to the community the community values created by the employment of this capital, and which will tend to strengthen, not Capitalism's powers of exploitation in the mandated territories, but the powers that make against that exploitation? Upon the Lord Privy Seal's reply to that issue a great deal depends, from the point of view of some of us here.

It is evident from the Lord Privy Seal's speech the other day that the principle which underlies this Motion will also be applied to industry in this country. It has been made perfectly clear that, in order to cope with the immediate unemployment problem, the power of the State financially is to be put behind private enterprise in this country. Now, both abroad and at home, unless the process of putting State help behind private enterprise is accompanied by restrictions and conditions which operate in a Socialist sense, in my opinion we shall find the Labour Government becoming much more popular with the Capitalist interests in this country than with the labouring interests that we are intended to represent. I do not believe that is in the Lord Privy Seal's mind, and I do not believe it is in the Government's mind, but I hope they will make the most categorical statement that they can make to-day dealing with the points that have been raised by the hon. Member for Elland and by myself.

:I had not intended to take part in the general discussion on this Motion, but I should like to say one word in answer to the speech made by the hon. Member for Elland (Mr. C, Buxton) and, speaking from personal experience, to take objection to the continual gibes and taunts that are being thrown at the Colonists of Kenya. The hon. Member and his friends seem to take their view of the settlers of Kenya from a few lurid examples which are featured from time to time in the popular Press, when the fact is that at least 99 per cent, of the settlers are men of the greatest courage, character, and determination, who have done a tremendous amount towards the development and the well-being of the country of their adoption. There is one particular aspect of this Motion to which I want to direct a few remarks. No body of people are more interested in the proposals foreshadowed by this Motion than are hon. Members for constituencies where the cotton industry is of paramount importance. As a member of various cotton-growing bodies, I had dealings with the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Privy Seal when he was in office once before, and I have grateful memories of the assistance which he has given us, an assistance which we have always received from the various Government Departments.

There are one or two questions that I would like to ask. We all welcomed the statement of the right hon. Gentleman in regard to the development of cotton growing, that he is one of those who want to make the Empire independent. With that thought of course, I entirely agree. He then talked about aeroplane surveys to save an unnecessary waste of time. In his idea there is undoubtedly a touch of Mussolini which is rather attractive. But I do hope there is not going to be any skimping of the actual surveys. He must realise how essential it is to have the most careful preparation. You must have the land very carefully and scientifically examined and experiments made as to the best kinds of cotton to be grown upon it, and at the same time when you are making experimental, scientific researches, you must make your arrangements for setting up the necessary ginning plant. You must be very careful not to have too many ginneries, which lead to useless competition, or too few, which lead to unnecessary cost.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that you ought to take some risk in the development of the colonies and dependencies, but one has to be particularly careful as regards these cotton growing areas. In some forms of development, if you make a mistake, you can cut your loss and begin again. That is not so with cotton growing. If you make one false step and have one failure, you will never restore the confidence of the native. You will never get him to start again and believe what you say, that cotton is going to be a useful and lucrative crop for him. In other forms of development, as I say, you can cut your loss and start a new scheme and ask for more money, but if you make a serious error in developing areas for cotton-growing, you will never be able to restore the confidence of the natives. I know the right hon. Gentleman will realise that the industrial problem in our colonial empire is the exact reverse of the problem in this country. Our difficulty here is to find work for the men who are looking for it, but in East Africa the great difficulty is to find men to do the necessary work. You have to be very careful in starting these new schemes of development that you do not put too heavy a strain upon the resources of the population of the country, and do not take too many men away from other forms of industry and agriculture which are already established in the various colonies and dependencies, and use them only for temporary work or for the establishment of new industries.

The more money that is spent in two directions the more I shall welcome it. The first is in scientific research. There is no doubt that the more money that is spent in scientific research the more you increase the productivity of the country. Another direction in which unlimited resources ought to be available is in dealing with the health of the people in those various colonies. By so doing you will not only make them capable and ready to do more work, but you will also increase the population and the chances of development. Obviously the next important way of spending the money is on transport, not only on railways, but on roads and harbours, so that you can get your goods away as cheaply and with as little delay as possible. I think all of us will welcome the erection of a bridge over the Zambesi. That is the only way in which you are going to speed up production in a country ripe for further development.

There is one more word I want to say. One hopes that the Empire Marketing Board is going to follow up very closely any development in our African territories. It is very galling to many to think that the increased spending power of the natives due to our money and our enterprise is being used in buying goods from other countries. If only we can make sure that the natives in those areas where we have either cotton-growing schemes or other forms of development, can be persuaded to purchase British goods, instead of those of other countries, it will be a great advantage. I do not know where the blame lies, but anything that the Empire Marketing Board can do to push our goods at the same time as we are pushing our development, will confer a real benefit upon the trade of this country.

There are many Members who want to speak in this debate, and I am very glad to think it is so, and that the present House yields to no other in the interest it is going to take in Colonial and Imperial affairs. I must admit that I have a great envy of those who are in responsible positions, and who have the opportunity of initiating developments of this kind. They have a great position, a field of work of unlimited possibilities, and I can assure them that any proposal of the kind foreshadowed in this Motion will receive the unstinted support and co-operation of Members on this side of the Committee.

:I want to make a slight variation from the opening sentences of speeches on this side by saying that not only do I not wish to embarrass the front Bench, but that I do not intend to do so. I feel so profoundly sympathetic to the tremendous task that my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal has taken in hand, that I think from this side of the Committee he required not so much criticism as wholehearted encouragement. I have listened with great sympathy to the speeches from these benches, given from the hearts of men who live among the unemployed and know what unemployment is. When I heard the proposals put forward by the Lord Privy Seal I felt that these Members were being answered by practical measures, criticised though they may be for the first time, and that, therefore, the Lord Privy Seal would receive, if these benches had been filled to-day, hearty encouragement from their occupants.

I rose, not only to say that by way of encouragement, but to make some little variation, too, in the points of view from this side of the Committee. I have every sympathy with what has fallen from the lips of the hon. Member for Elland (Mr. C. Buxton). I have as great an interest in the native inhabitants of our Colonies as anyone in this House. I have interested myself in that problem. I have done my little best to bring about improvements in their condition. That is one subject which can, of course, he brought into relation with the task of finding work for the unemployed, and it is a question that can be brought up from time to time as we see the projects of the Lord Privy Seal develop. A point was made by the hon. Member for Elland that in the long run—and I agree that it may be a very long run—it does not matter very much whether we develop the resources, and the capital of the whole-world or whether we concentrate on the British Empire. That may be true. But that does not come into account in the present emergency. We have to find employment at once, and I would suggest two things by way of example, that it is not so valuable to us to lend money to Berlin to build a bridge over the Spree, as it is to use that money at the present moment to re-build Charing Cross bridge, from the point of view of unemployment.

The other point which I want to make is based on my experience as an old administrator in public affairs. As a great municipal authority we wanted to control our expenditure, and we said that we could better control it by spending it ourselves than by lending it to other people, and we established a system called direct employment. I would suggest that all the safeguards which the hon. Member for Elland claimed should be made in connection with this expenditure, can be made by this House if the money is spent in our Empire, over which we have some control, than if we lent it to authorities outside the British Empire. I have perfect confidence in the Lord Privy Seal and the Members of the Cabinet that they will see that the warnings and the admonitions which have quite rightly been administered from this side of the House, will be carefully taken into account. We shall have plenty of opportunity from time to time to criticise and admonish the Cabinet if we find that they are not carrying out the principles which were laid down in their election policy.

:In welcoming whole-heartedly the project put forward by His Majesty's Government, and in ex- pressing a desire to co-operate in every way in making it a success, I want to say that we are not in the least interested as to whether any particular expenditure under this proposal is Socialism or not. We desire it as a practical step to help both operatives and industry in this country, and at the same time to start a flow of permanent trade by opening up undeveloped country, and thereby advancing in the standard of living populations at present on a low economic standing in the world, whose standing can be heightened and purchasing power increased by providing them with the necessary facilities. The bulk of the projects under this scheme will necessarily be carried out on a basis of State Socialism. Countries like East and West Africa, where the railways are owned by the State and the land is largely owned by the State, can be under the control of the State and have been under successive Governments for many years past; and so really the issue which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. W. J. Brown) raised to-day was, I think, raised only on account of his great ignorance of the British Empire overseas and of the 'subject before the House this morning.

:I hope that that assumption is inspired by the sheer politeness of the right hon. Gentleman.

:It struck me that an hon. Member who, coming into this House for the first time, made sneers not only at us on our side of the Committee, but against his own Front Bench, and who was so eaten up with the sense of his own importance, deserved a rebuke from one who has been 20 years in the House. I do not want to pursue the one and only controversial speech which unfortunately intruded our Debate this morning. We will co-operate with the right hon. Gentleman in insuring, and in supporting him in insuring, that the safeguards which have always characterised the British Government in regard to employment of labour on these particular works shall be very closely and carefully watched. Undertakings of the same kind were given in the East Africa and Palestine Loans Act, and the Colonial Office have always been vigilant in this matter. The policy has been, particularly in West Africa where recourse has had to be had on the State railways to what is known as political labour, to take every step possible to diminish that and to promote an ever increasing proportion of free labour engaged in public works of this kind.

Take the Benue Bridge which is being constructed by the Nigerian Government; that is a typical example of the kind of thing which will be carried out under this scheme. Every step has been and is being taken by the Government of Nigeria to promote the free flow of labour, and to see that the tribes from the locality are called out only at a time when it will not interfere with their cultivation, and only on a particular number of days in the year, and under conditions which I am glad to say have recently been under the review of the International Labour Office at Geneva. With regard to the particular form of this Motion, I hope that before the right hon. Gentleman and the House finally pass from the control of the Bill, the question of possible overlap between ex penditure under the Bill and expenditure by the Empire Marketing Board will be carefully explored. It will be most un desirable if the way in which that over lap is avoided is for the Empire Marketing Board to be cut out altogether from research development and research schemes in connection with the Colonies and Mandated Territories. It is important that the research of the Board, which is the most important part of their work, should be over the whole Empire—

:Incidentally, it would eat up my money as well.

:So many projects have been started by the Empire Marketing Board in which it is essential that the work should be carried out partly in this country, partly in two or more Crown Colonies or Protectorates, and partly in some Dominion, that it would be most unfortunate for the Treasury to be allowed to lay down a hard and fast rule in future whereby the Board was no longer to be regarded as having a fund out of which research in the Colonies was to be defrayed. It is essential to keep science, which knows no boundaries, very largely in the hands of the Empire Marketing Board's control. I hope, therefore, that the research expenditure under the particular scheme which we are discussing this morning "will be in connection with those purely local problems, peculiar to colonies or groups of colonies, that ought not to come before the Empire Marketing Board because they have some purely local significance and are not of universal interest. The division should be made on those lines. Meanwhile, I hope that the Advisory Committee which is to be set up under this new financial procedure will have a distinctly personal liaison with the Research Grant Committee of the Empire Marketing Board. I think there will be no overlapping if there is somebody on this new Colonial Development Advisory Committee who is also in close touch with and gets all the papers dealing with the scientific activities of the Empire Marketing Board. I suggest that that should be very carefully considered.

Let me pass to another point, namely, how exactly the Treasury control which must exist in some shape or form ought to be exercised with a view to getting the maximum benefit out of this new grant. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the view that by giving the annual surrender to the Treasury you will speed up expenditure. I know what happens in practice. In the month of March, at the end of the year, you get an upsetting of the normal working of the machine, a sudden rush to get work done at the last minute in order that you may spend all the money which has been given for that financial year, and after that the work eases off. The whole trouble in Colonial development and the relations between the Colonial Office and the Treasury has always lain in the fact that development in a Colony ought to be continuous over a period of years, whereas the Treasury necessarily look at the particular Budget position in this country on a particular date; and round about the end of March there is always this scramble for a few odd pounds, as it were, which very often upsets the proper programme of development work. It is the great difficulty of bringing into good relations our method of closely accounting annual finance in this House and a develop- ment scheme carried on in a distant Colony with Treasury assistance.

Let me pass to another point in regard to Treasury control. Undoubtedly some of the best schemes which can be carried out, under procedure of the kind outlined by the Government to-day, are schemes for which the material data cannot be provided in the form which the Treasury likes. I will take a typical example of the sort of project I have in mind. One of the recommendations I made after my tour in West Africa was that when the Government of Nigeria was in a financial position, as it is not to-day, to carry out a big development railway, or when it could get assistance from the Imperial Government to do it, it ought to consider the project of the Lake Chad Railway to connect Lake Chad with the present Eastern Railway of Nigeria. The shortest connection will be 480 miles long, and the work would take at least six years, in view of the labour conditions. A great part of the track would run through forest country. Minerals lie under those forests, but exactly what minerals and how much of them there is you cannot tell until you have actually built the railway.

It is, therefore, a long shot. It is a case where there is no existing traffic. You will be taking a railway to a country which is practically outside the orbit of the world's commerce at present, inhabited by a couple of million of people, where there are still strange forms of currency and where only the most valuable articles, like the most valuable hides and skins, ever reach the world, the nearest railway station being 500 miles away. There, right in the heart of north eastern Nigeria, is a developable country of great importance in the history of the old trades of Africa, and a country that could be developed, but one from which you will not be able to get the detailed traffic surveys, and in connection with any scheme we shall require those elements of statesmanship and courage which have been referred to this morning.

Take another instance, British Guiana, which has probably the most valuable standing forest country in the whole of the British Empire. There is a particularly difficult forest engineering project there, coupled with a very difficult labour problem. The problem is, how to exploit the enormously valuable standing timber, bow best to develop the land when you have cleared away the virgin forests, and how the hinterland of that wonderful looking country, at present unharnessed by man, can best be harnessed. In any case it would be a long time before there is any return from the money, but the very excuse which Britain can present to the world for possessing these vast undeveloped countries is that we are a great country, with great experience and great financial resources, and it is our duty to the world, as well as to our own people, to ensure the maximum development of those territories. I hope therefore the schemes to be considered under this Bill will not merely be schemes already considered, which just want the impetus of a few years' interest to put them into actual operation, but that this Bill will afford an opportunity to take stock of the uncatalogued and at present only dimly appreciated ultimate resources of the Colonial Empire.

Finally, let us make certain that all these projects of railway and harbour development are undertaken as part and parcel of a whole plan and not merely because one particular Colony or one particular Government is more energetic than its immediate neighbour. The plan of African railways hitherto has not been thought out on a sufficiently broad basis, and I only hope now that the financial basis is made more easy, that a wider and longer view will be taken and that the right hon. Gentleman will set up an Advisory Committee which will take that wider and longer view and will be able to persuade the Treasury that the previous dark relations between the Colonial Office and the Treasury over every single project of Colonial development during the past 30 years had better cease, and that they ought to get on to a more amicable and smooth working basis.

:No Minister could be better pleased with the general reception of his proposals in all quarters of the House than I am. I took note of the blessings, the criticisms and the threat, but I think any discordant note I have heard this morning is rather due to ignorance of the facts, and I am quite sure that when the facts are known those who engaged in criticisms will be the first to realise their mistake. I remember the late Sir "William Harcourt giving a description of the House of Commons in which he had his 20 years' experience behind him, and I would advise all new Members to keep clearly in mind the advice that he gave. Whatever their views of the House of Commons may have been before they entered it, and whatever they said about it before they became Members of it, there is one thing for them to keep in mind, and that is that the House of Commons will always be informed but will never be lectured. That is something which the Members of all parties will experience in a very few years' time.

I want to be quite frank, and I wish to remind the House of my own position on this question. This Measure is essentially a Colonial Office Bill. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Spark-brook (Mr. Amery) has told us that had he been in office he would have liked to have introduced a Bill of this kind. The late Government, however, would not allow that to be done, not because it was not necessary, but because the right hon. Gentleman had not as much enthusiasm as T have. That is a fact that should be kept in mind. Why am I introducing this proposal? A good many valuable suggestions have been made in this Debate with which I sympathise, and they will all be considered, but I would ask my hon. Friends to remember that this Measure has been introduced on a Friday afternoon four weeks after I have taken office. This Measure has been introduced by a Labour Government, not only because we believe in Colonial development and because it is urgent, but because I think it will assist me in carrying out my idea of dealing with unemployment.

We have heard a good deal about the promises made during the election. I took part in the recent election, and I think I addressed as many public meetings as any other hon. Member, and I quite agree that the question of unemployment was a burning issue. In a matter like this we shall not be judged by any slogan, but by the contributions we make towards a solution of the unemployed problem. It is because I believe that the proposals I am dealing with will make one of those contributions that I have treated the question in this way. Whatever we do in regard to roads and unskilled trades, I wish to point out that I am very anxious to see something done for the skilled men who are losing their craft. You may kill the skill of a man by putting him on an unskilled job. One hon. Member is very anxious that in expending this money none of it should go to private enterprise. I am not going to be bound down by a rule as to whether the money shall assist private enterprise or not, and none of those factors will operate as far as I am concerned. The ignorance of introducing that subject is shown by the fact that railways and harbours, and docks, and many other things are to be dealt with under this Measure.

:Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question as to whether any of this money will go to any concern which is not helping the unemployed? I have not had an answer to that question.

:Of course, the hon. Member cannot have an answer to that question, and I think that a few more weeks or years' experience will convince him that it is absurd to ask for such thing's as that.

:I hope I shall not descend to the level of manners shown by the right hon. Gentleman.

:The White Paper has been issued, and it says nothing about private enterprise. It states very clearly that there shall be grants and loans to certain Governments for certain things including harbours and railways, all of which are not State owned. Let me give another illustration of the absurdity of dogmatising about private enterprise. In many of these Colonies you have young British settlers who have gone out there under terrible conditions. Very often, they find themselves handicapped, and they may even be ruined by a bad season. Sometimes they are unable to make good because they have not sufficient capital to purchase a tractor which would help them in a much better way than anything else. Under those circumstances, is it wrong to grant a loan to that man in order to enable him to purchase a tractor.

:Then some of this money may go to private enterprise?

:If what I have just stated is private enterprise, then that is so.

:I must deal with the facts.

:Frequently, we hear some public expression of a desire to do something, but all the time those behind the scenes know perfectly well that there are certain people ready to sit on the thing, and in the end nothing is done. That is a common experience of committees. It is true that we might sanction £20,000,000, and it would look very good, but then you might set up a committee with such restrictions that, although you talk about spending £20,000,000, the committee would see to it that you did not spend a shilling. That is the common experience of all Governments. I say at once that that is not my intention in appointing this committee. The committee will not be appointed for that purpose, and I will see that they carry out our policy. I intend the committee to be a live body, and I will see, so far as it is humanly possible, that the money is spent in a common-sense and businesslike way.

The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sevenoaks (Sir H. Young), a former Financial Secretary to the Treasury, has spoken about a sum of £5,000,000. I do not wish to make an unfair retort, but, when we come to read the OFFICIAL REPORT on this point, it will be interesting to note this special proposal for the expenditure of £5,000,000, remembering that the late Government took no step whatever to vote the £400,000 which was badly needed. I do not intend to ask for £5,000,000, or anything approaching that sum at this stage. If the expenditure of this money can be justified, there will be no difficulty about coming to Parliament and asking for more. May I point out that the sum I am asking for forms an infinitesimal portion of the things I want to do at home. It would be absurd for me to ask for £5,000,000 for the Colonies at the present moment, because I have far more substantial schemes to deal with at home. It is only fair that I should let the Committee know exactly, and, therefore, I conclude by saying that I had not intended in any way to take advantage of the Parliamentary position. I accept to the full all the safeguards put in by those who realise that they are entitled to speak on the Second Reading, though I hope that that will not be necessary except to point out certain things. I would point out to the Committee that this is only the Money Resolution, and that there will be a Second Reading, and if hon. Members desire to exercise their full powers, I will show them exactly where they will be and where I am. It is much better to face the facts.

This is the Money Resolution. There will be a Second Reading, and Committee, Report, and Third Reading stages of this Bill alone. This Bill is nothing compared with the powers and schemes that must follow. There must be another Money Resolution for home affairs, with Second Reading, Committee, Report and Third Reading stages, and these Bills are merely my temporary Bills, not interfering in the least with all the other Parliamentary matters that must be got through before the end of this month if the House is going to rise then. I urge hon. Members to help me, but I equally warn them by saying that I am going to get these Bills. I want to make that perfectly clear. I am not going to have Parliament rise with me entrusted with the responsibility of unemployment without these powers, because each week that I am unable to obtain them hampers me in doing things that I ought to do. I am entitled to appeal to the House, and I only appeal in that spirit, for all the help, asistance and co-operation that I can get. I will say to the right hon. Gentleman the ex-Secretary of State for the Dominions that the administrative details of the Measure that I shall be introducing will be work for the Colonial Office, and I anticipate that I shall have enough on my slate without even bothering about them.

:May I ask my right hon. Friend if the passage of this Resolution will mean that the question which was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for West Wolverhampton (Mr. W. J. Brown) will be excluded from subsequent discussion?

:No. Hon. Members will have two opportunities. The question can be raised on the Second Reading, and also in Committee, when on any particular provision of the Bill that deals with that point the whole issue can be raised.

2.0 p.m.

:I do not want to keep the right hon. Gentleman for more than a minute, but, before we part with this Money Resolution, I want to put this point. I do so with some authority, because it is a matter which the Public Accounts Committee of this House has discussed this very year, indeed within the last two months. I dare say the right hon. Gentleman has not had time to read our Report, but we dealt with the financial side of the Empire Marketing Board, and the right hon. Gentleman may know that, as a Committee entrusted with certain duties by this House, we found the financial part of the Board to be very unsatisfactory from the point of view of Parliamentary control. My right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Sir H. Young), and also my right hon. Friends on the Front Bench, have already referred to the question of Treasury control, and we must realise that Treasury control is, after all, a certain part of our own control, as Members of Parliament, over the grants which the taxpayers may make. The point upon which I want the right hon. Gentleman to consult with the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is that, in dealing with the Empire Marketing Board, we laid it down in our Report—and, after all, the Chairman of the Committee was the present President of the Board of Trade, so that the right hon. Gentleman will be consulting his own colleagues—we laid it down that it was very undesirable that these activities of the Empire Marketing Board should be withdrawn, to use our own words, from the control of Parliament or of the Treasury on behalf of Parliament, and placed at the discretion of a single Minister. We objected to the carry-over system with regard to the funds of the Empire Marketing Board. We said that they should be limited to the actual requirements of the year, and that there should be appended to the Estimates a list of what was likely to be required. We also suggested that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury should, ex officio, belong to the Publicity Committee and the Research Grants Committee. That may have been done; I do not know; but, anyhow, that was our view in regard to the Empire Marketing Board and its research work. In this Money Resolution and in the White Paper two different sets of expenditure are fore shadowed. The first paragraph deals with the promotion of scientific re search—

:I do not know whether the hon. and gallant Gentleman was here, when I made my speech—

:Yes.

:I then pointed out that the Resolution did not show the position clearly, especially in regard to the question of research, and I explained to the House that I proposed to rectify that at a later stag 3 by bringing the Empire Marketing Board under statutory control—it is not in that position now. That is really in accordance with the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee. We are taking the necessary administrative steps to prevent overlapping.

:It is not overlapping that I have in mind, if the right hon. Gentleman will excuse mle— I heard every word that he said this morning—but what I want his mind to work upon is that there are two different financial schemes. First, there is the question of research and the improvement of marketing and the like, and, secondly, there is the guaranteeing of loans and interest. With regard to loans, of course, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks said, Parliament cannot hope to control every single item of loan policy, and the idea of its doing so has already been abandoned in the Trade Facilities legislation. But I would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, with regard to the other part— research and so on—not to let it drift into the position into which the Empire Marketing Board's funds have got, and as to which the unanimous recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee of this House is that they do not concur in it. Let the loan part be as free and easy, if I may use that term, as the right hon. Gentleman likes, but let the other part, for which Estimates can he laid down, be very strictly denned, so that Parliament should not part year by year with large sums of money and leave them at the discretion of Ministers over whom, except through putting down Estimates, we cannot have any very great control. I hope the right hon. Gentleman is not going to get up and say that we did not do this with regard to his predecessor. As a matter of fact, this Report was only signed about a fortnight before the last Parliament. We are under the same disadvantage as we were yesterday, of not having seen the Bill, so we may be making small criticisms unnecessarily, but, if the right hon. Gentleman can draw that fundamental distinction, I am sure that it will be in the interest of the general taxpayer, for whom, after all, we speak in the House of Commons.

:I should like to put one point with regard to the health services. I am glad to know that the Lord Privy Seal recognises the importance of these, and I would ask him to think, not only of the Colonial health services in connection with tropical diseases, which are very common, but also to bear in mind the question of venereal disease. We recognise that the medical services very often have to be the advance guard in Empire or Colonial development, and I should like the Lord Privy Seal or the Colonial Secretary to see that the Colonial medical services at the present time are in a position to meet any sudden demand which may be made upon them. If we are going to have this large amount of development, it may be found that the medical service has perhaps not the full personnel that might be desired. There is another point, and that is that, in case of any schemes of development which may be handed over to private firms, the medical services should be maintained under the Colonial medical administration. Do not let us have ordinary medical men going out to the Colonies with, perhaps, not very much experience, but let us keep the Colonial medical service, which means the health and development of the Empire, in the hands of our own Colonial medical authorities.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported upon Monday next.

:I regret that it was not possible for me to be in the House yesterday, but I was rather startled to read in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-day that there are still some 500 of these claims put in by ex-British Civil Servants of Ireland which have still to be dealt with. This is entirely; in accord with a very considerable volume of correspondence that I have had from ex-British Civil Servants in the Irish Free State who complain bitterly that, in spite of repeated applications, they are unable to obtain any satisfaction for their claims other than formal letters of acknowledgment. I will not mention names, but I can give them to the Under-Secretary if he desires. One letter is from a man who sent in a claim for compensation in April, 1926, and has received nothing and is suffering considerable hardship. Another sent in his resignation five years ago and is still awaiting a settlement of his claim. Another gave notice of retirement in October, 1924. Several appeals to be allowed to retire were disregarded. He is very anxious to emigrate to New Zealand but cannot go until he gets his claim settled. Another sent in his notice in October, 1924, left the Irish Civil Service in 1927 and has received no pension or lump sum. He says his circumstances are very much straitened and he finds it very difficult to get on. The last man, who served 29 years in the Navy and retired on a pension, entered the Irish Customs in 1919, was dismissed in 1927 and offered an inferior position. He tendered his resignation and asked for a pension or office and has received neither.

This sum is a grant which this country very generously gave to the Irish Free State Government to assist them in paying claims which the Privy Council on two occasions has held that these ex-British civil servants are entitled to. I think I can say that everyone in the House is of opinion that the settlement arrived at was a fair oce, and it is very hard lines that these men should be waiting for four, five, and, I believe, six years, and cannot get their compensation which they have been held to be entitled to by the Court of Chancery in the Irish Free State, as well as the Privy Council. Before we part with this Resolution I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary, before the money is paid over, to get an assurance from the Free State Government that these unfortunate people, who have been waiting so many years to get their fair and just compensation, which was arranged for by Article 10 of the Treaty, shall receive it without any further delay. The few instances I have given indicate the great hardships that are suffered by some of these people who are in very straitened circumstances indeed. I know that members of the Government are as sympathetic as the late Government were, and I hope the Under-Secretary will give us an assurance that before the money is finally handed over to the Free State he will get a definite pledge that every expedition will be used to settle these claims.

:I am sure the hon. Gentleman will understand that the object of the Bill which will follow this Resolution is to speed up the process. The whole business has been held up because of the confusion caused by the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council conflicting with the opinions held both by the previous Government and the Government of the Irish Free State. When the concurrent legislation is passed through the Parliament in Dublin, these matters will be attended to much more speedily. It will be no use sending cases to me. All cases have to go before the Board.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by Mr. Pethick-Lawrence and Mr. Ponsonby.

:I am sure that everyone who listened to the long Debate which we had yesterday on this question would like to congratulate the right hon. Lady the Minister of Labour on the patient way in which she dealt with all the inquiries which were brought before her. I am afraid that, though I may congratulate the right hon. Lady, I cannot congratulate the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, who seemed to think that when hon. Members put queries they were doing so in a critical way in order to interfere with the conduct of business, when really the whole object was to try and get information. There were two questions which were raised by me yesterday, and one of them he did not answer at all. The first question was as to whether interest is paid on the overdraft on the Unemployment Insurance Fund, and, if so, on what amount? The second point which I raised, and which was answered by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, was as to whether hon. Members in the House would have an opportunity of debating the question on the Estimates. I should like to ask this specific question. At what point, and where, can we find the particulars of the Estimates of the Minister of Labour which are paid for out of the Unemployment Insurance Fund? Where can we find the full details?

This matter of the Unemployment Insurance Fund is a very confusing thing to Members of Parliament, and it would be very useful if we could be provided with some kind of a balance-sheet in order that we could see exactly where this Unemployment Insurance Fund is so heavily in deficit. Would it be possible between the passing of this Motion to-day and the Second Reading of the Bill to provide us with some kind of White Paper in order that we can see exactly, possibly for the last 12 months, the working of this Insurance Fund? I am sure that the right hon. Lady will admit that to one, like myself, who tries to refer to certain books and papers which are issued it is very difficult, even from the very excellent Memorandum she has issued, to see exactly where this large deficit has arisen. If the right hon. Lady can possibly suggest how some further information can be given to hon. Members, I am sure it will be appreciated by those of us whose only desire is to help in this matter.

:The information, generally speaking, concerning the administration of Employment Exchange work and its relation to Unemployment Insurance will be found in the Ministry of Labour Annual Report. There, I think, the hon. Member will find very full details. With regard to the question of interest, the Fund has always paid interest on borrowed money, and the rates of interest vary according to the date on which the loan is negotiated. The rate has varied from 4⅝ per cent, to 5⅛ per cent. The average rate up to the end of June comes cut at 4.91 per cent. The total burden of interest on the Fund at the present moment is £2,000,000.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by Miss Bondfield, Mr. Pethick-Lawrence, and Mr. Lawson.

:I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary whether it is really necessary to go forward with all these duties which are included in Clause 4. In the Debate which took place on Monday and Tuesday, there was an overwhelming majority for Free Trade, and we on these benches are looking forward confidently to the time, early next year, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer will sweep away one and all of these miserable and oppressive taxes. I want to ask the hon. Gentleman whether it is worth while putting through a special Act during these few intervening months before the duties are abolished altogether? It seems to me that it is a waste of the time of the House that we should be occupied in dealing with a purely temporary Measure of this kind, when there are very much more urgent matters, such as unemployment, to which we might be devoting our attention. I would ask the hon. Gentleman to explain why it is necessary to bring forward a Measure of a purely temporary kind at the present moment?

These duties are imposed by the Tyn-wald of the Isle of Man, and it would be quite unprecedented for us here in this House to reverse what is, in a large measure, the decision of the Isle of Man Tynwald. I should like to say that, whatever may be our views about the merits of these particular duties, any further divergence between the duties which are imposed in the United Kingdom and those which are imposed in the Isle of Man, would cause considerable inconvenience, and, apart from the constitutional aspect, it is very much better that they should approximate to the duties in this country.

Question, put, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 5 ( Interpretation and short title ) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, without Amendment; read the Third time, and passed.

:I beg to move, in page 1, line 8, to leave out the word " proviso," and to insert instead thereof the word "provision."

This is a manuscript Amendment, and is merely drafting. It is necessary in order to make room for the Amendment which stands in my name upon the Order Paper. Perhaps it would be for the convenience of the Committee if we took the discussion now. If the Government are willing to accept this drafting Amendment, we take it that they will be willing to accept the next Amendment. The object of my Amendment is to provide that any Order in Council that may be made dealing with a very important Dependency, and one of great strategic importance to the British Empire, should be laid on the Table of this House, so that this House may have an opportunity of criticising it. I do not think that is an unreasonable request. I can remember many occasions when the present Secretary of State for India was in Opposition that he insisted that we should not give uncontrolled power in the making of laws to the Executive. I move the Amendment to preserve the rights of this House, although I am fully in favour of the provisions of the Bill, and sincerely hope that it will receive its Third Reading to-day.

:The Government are prepared to accept both Amendments.

Amendment agreed to.

:I beg to move, in page 1, line 18, at the end, to add the words:

" Any Order in Council which may be made in pursuance of the powers conferred on His Majesty by this section shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it has been made, and if an address is presented to His Majesty by either House of Parliament within the next thirty days on which that House has sat after the Order in Council is laid before it, praying that such Order in Council may be annulled, His Majesty in Council may annul such Order, and such Order shall thenceforth be void, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done there under."

I have moved the Amendment in slightly different form from the Amendment on the Order Paper, after consultation with the Secretary of State for India, leaving out the first three words, "Provided always that." It is purely a matter of drafting, in order that the Amendment may conform with the Government of India Act.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 2 ( Short title, construction and printing ) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, with Amendments.

:I understand that it is not only intended to take the Report stage immediately, but that it is desired that the Bill should receive its Third Beading at once. Although I imagine that the Bill is non-controversial, I would point out that an Amendment has been passed, and that it is the general procedure of the House that where an Amendment has been inserted time must be given for consideration of the Amendment before taking further proceedings. I would ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether it would not be more in accordance with the ordinary practice of the House to give time for consideration of the Amendment, before taking the Report and Third Reading.

:If the hon. Member presses the point, of course, we shall fall in with his wishes, but the Amendment has been on the Order Paper, and it does not raise any novel point. It is an addition which has been inserted in many similar Bills, and, as we are very anxious to get it finished to-day, I should be glad if the right hon. Member would not press the point.

:In view of the very generous recognition given by the hon. Member of the general principle that a Bill should not proceed to its further stages when an Amendment has been inserted in Committee, and in view of the non-contentious nature of the Bill, I do not desire to press the point.

Bill, as amended, considered; read the Third time, and passed.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 3.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine minutes before Three o'Clock, until Monday next, 15th July.