asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that in cases where men serving with the Forces made an allotment out of their pay to their fathers, the Unemployment Assistance Board deduct 9s. out of the 17s. allotment from the father's unemployment allowance; and will he take steps to stop this practice which is causing dissatisfaction?

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to a dependant's allowance, part only of which is derived from the man's own pay. I am not aware that the Board's practice in regard to the treatment of these allowances is causing dissatisfaction, but if the hon. Member has any particular case in mind and cares to let me have details I will have inquiries made.

I will send the right hon. Gentleman the details. May I ask whether on the principle of this reduction he will say whether it has the approval of the Board?

I understand that the Board are now considering whether any change in their previous practice is necessary. As the hon. Member knows, it is difficult for me to say precisely what kind of case he has in his question, but if he will let me know what it is we can discuss the matter.

In the case of allowances, would it receive any consideration?

This is not a matter of the Fund but of allowances.

Will the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind that this bears much more heavily on a widow whose son is serving?

That is just the kind of problem which is now being considered.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will ascertain the approximate number of wives of serving soldiers who, failing to receive their statutory allowances, have been obliged to have recourse to the unemployment assistance authorities; and whether, in that case, they must register for employment which they do not need and disclose their financial position?

I regret that there are no figures available which would enable me to answer the first part of the question. As regards the second part, the Board is not empowered to grant allowances except on the basis of need, and it is therefore necessary for all applicants to provide particulars of their circumstances, but they are not required to register for employment where no useful purpose would be served by their doing so.

In view of the resentment felt by these women in having to go to the unemployment assistance board and being bandied about from one office to another, would my right hon. Friend arrange to have a separate office at which these cases could be investigated with the sympathetic attention that is due to them?

The hon. and gallant Member knows that the origin of these allowances is not with me. We have to deal with needs.

Is the right hon. Gentleman doing his utmost with his right hon. Friend to expedite these payments, as many women are suffering great difficulties at the moment and are being pressed hard for rent?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend is fully seized about that.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the fact that the wives of serving soldiers who cannot obtain their statutory allowances are forced to wait long periods in queues at some Employment Exchanges and unemployment assistance boards to receive advances of the money due to them, he will take steps to arrange shorter waiting periods and the avoidance of waiting in such queues?

Every effort is made so to regulate attendance at local offices that, if instructions are observed, there should be no undue waiting. If my hon. Friend will give me particulars of any specific cases he has in mind, I will look into them.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that there is considerable discontent among those in receipt of grants from the Unemployment Assistance Board in Rayleigh and Dagen-ham and district at their inadequacy following the recent increase in the cost of living; and whether winter allowances will be introduced forthwith?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Normanton (Mr. T. Smith) on 27th September and to the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. E. Smith) on 5th October.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the provisions by which unemployed persons were entitled to additional days' benefit based on their record of employment is now in operation; and, if not, will he state what the position is now in reference to this matter?

The provisions in question are in operation in those cases where a benefit certificate, which is still effective, was issued before the outbreak of the war. In other cases, in the unavoidable absence of the necessary records, it is not possible to operate those provisions, and accordingly alternative provisions were substituted by the Unemployment Insurance (Emergency Powers) Regulations, under which new cases have a maximum of 180 days under the general scheme, and 90 days under the agricultural scheme.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of agricultural workers registered as unemployed at the present time; and how these figures compare with the same date in August last?

At nth September, 1939, the latest date for which figures are available, 20,380 persons, aged 14-64, insured under the agricultural scheme, were recorded as unemployed at Employment Exchanges in Great Britain. The corresponding figure for 14th August, 3939, was 23,733.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this unemployment in agriculture is spread over the whole country or is in particular areas, and whether any special effort is being made to absorb these unemployed agricultural workers on the land?

I think the hon. Member will find that there is no undue proportion of unemployment anywhere; it is widely spread.

Is any special effort being made to get them back on to the land in view of the fact that there is an alleged shortage of agricultural labourers?

It is for that purpose that we have made mobile arrangements whereby our officers can attend fairs and markets and do their best to see what can be done. The figure of unemployment is 8,000 less than it was last year.

Is it desirable to have 20,000 agricultural workers out of work at a time like this?

That question will give a misleading impression. The point is that there may have been 20,000 out of work on that particular day, but that they may be in work now.

asked the Minister of Labour what action he proposes to take, in view of the large number of dismissals taking place in the distributive trades, to prevent employés being thrown out of employment?

It is not within my power to prevent such dismissals. Some dislocation in the distributive trades was inevitable on the outbreak of war, but I would urge employers in these trades, as in others, to do their utmost to avoid creating any unnecessary unemployment, temporary though it may be.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while shop assistants in evacuation areas are unemployed, those in reception areas are having to work up to 9 and 10 o'clock at night? Surely there should be a limitation of working hours in order to absorb some of those who are unemployed?

That is another matter.

Are any special inquiries taking place with regard to the condition of workers in the distributive trades?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will take into consideration the case of those women teachers deprived of their posts as a result of the school evacuation; and whether he will amend the Schedule of Reserved Occupations so as to permit of their undertaking all suitable forms of National Service, and not only first-aid and nursing?

I have consulted my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Education and I am not aware that any appreciable number of women teachers in grant-earning schools have been deprived of their posts as a result of the school evacuation. I am, however, considering, in consultation with my right hon. Friend, whether any amendment of the Schedule is desirable to meet the case of women teachers who have lost their employment in private schools.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that very great distress exists among teachers in private schools who are not qualified to teach in public schools, and will he give this matter his attention?

That is one of the factors I had in mind when I said we were doing our best to meet the case.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the case of a man resident in Tamworth who has been examined for military service and passed Grade I, although his own doctor states that he is six years backward physically and mentally, is only four feet nine inches in height, and weighs seven stone; and what observations he has to make regarding the case?

I have had inquiries made into this case, of which the hon. Member was good enough to send me particulars. There would appear to be no grounds for questioning the correctness of the Board's decision to place this man in Grade I. The Board, when making their examination, had before them a certificate from the man's own doctor.

While thanking the Minister for his reply, does he seriously suggest that a man who is obviously physically disabled and whose own doctor says he is six years backwards physically and mentally, should be put in Grade 1? Will he not give this matter re-examination?

I have made inquiries into the case.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been drawn to recent proceedings of the Newcastle Military Service Tribunal; and whether he is satisfied that the chairman of the tribunal deserves his continued confidence?

Yes, Sir. I am being kept fully informed of the proceedings of local conscientious objector tribunals. My information does not lead me to suppose that the chairman referred to is not carrying out his duties in an impartial manner.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the chairman of such a tribunal whose impatience with applicants in public is such that it leads him to make remarks for which he has later to apologise, is really displaying that proper judicial temper with which these cases should be considered?

I do not accept the setting of the supplementary question. There was one display of irritation with, I think, a handsome apology next day. I would point out to the hon. Member that some of those who give evidence are not themselves easy persons to deal with.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this incident has been repeated, and that it is not limited to the isolated case to which he refers in his answer?

I have nothing to add to my previous answer.

Do we not set an example of this in the House of Commons?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education what steps have been taken to deal with the provision of suitable school buildings and adequate arrangements for milk and other meals, as recommended by the report on Anti-Tuberculosis Services in Wales?

As regards school buildings, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave him on 8th June last. Since that date the outbreak of war has interrupted the improvement of school buildings which was under way, and at the moment it is not possible to forecast the rate of progress which it will be possible to achieve in this respect in the immediate future. As regards the provision of milk and meals, the Board has addressed letters to 26 of the 30 local education authorities in Wales, and in 16 of these cases replies had been received, before the outbreak of war, which promised improvements in the authorities arrangements. The Board propose to continue, so far as is practicable in present circumstances, their endeavour to secure an extension of any arrangements which are clearly inadequate for the needs of the area.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that evacuation, both official and unofficial, has led to a very large increase in the school population in Wales, and that, therefore, these measures are very much more urgent now?

I recognise that.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether his attention has been drawn to the decision of the Isle of Ely Education Committee authorising the employment of boys and girls of 12 years of age on farms for the potato- and beet-lifting season; and whether such a decision was reached with his approval?

My attention has been called to this matter. The decision of the education committee, upon which the Board were not consulted, is in direct contravention of the explicit statutory provisions of Section 18 of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, and of the local school attendance by-laws. I have drawn the attention of the authority to this.

While thanking the Minister for taking prompt action, will he indicate to other education authorities that they should set their face against any tendency to employ children on farms for these specific purposes, particularly in such weather as we are now having?

I hope this question and answer will help. I think education has been sufficiently interrupted without anything further.

May I ask whether the action taken through this authority is sufficient to stop the practice in this case?

We have spoken pretty strong language, and I think it has had effect.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that if this sort of thing happened under the Factories Act, there would be a prosecution? Can proceedings be taken in such cases as these?

I should like to have notice of that question. We drew attention to the matter immediately.

Do not these children regard it as a pleasure?

Is it not also a very healthy occupation?

I ought to make it clear to my hon. and gallant Friends that the Board are strongly in favour of giving every possible opportunity to school children over the age of 14 in evacuation areas to enter rural life.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we have just been told that there are nearly 20,000 agricultural labourers unemployed?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware of the resentment at, and the effect over a large area of, the preferential treatment by the Board, of the Manchester Grammar School, compared with the elementary, central, technical and other secondary schools; what is the reason for this; and in view of the difficulties thereby caused to the local authorities in regard to evacuation, will he now, in conjunction with other Ministers responsible, reconsider the whole problem?

I am aware that the Manchester Corporation were averse to the reopening of Manchester Grammar School. In allowing the school to reopen the Board acted in pursuance of a decision by the Government that they were at liberty to allow the opening of secondary schools on the fringes, or in relatively sparsely populated portions of, evacuation areas, subject to compliance with conditions designed to safeguard the pupils. This discretion does not extend to schools other than secondary schools which comply with the conditions, and the Manchester Corporation have been informed that it will be exercised only in exceptional cases. The Board's decision should not, therefore, have any adverse effect on the city's evacuation scheme.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that for this reason and other reasons the evacuation arrangements are breaking down, and is it the intention of the Board of Education to consult with other Ministers involved in order to consider what steps can be taken to bring about a more satisfactory arrangement?

I can only say that there is daily consultation between the Ministers concerned, and I think the hon. Member will appreciate that it is not entirely a simple problem.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this school is in Rusholme, one of the most populous centres of Manchester, and does he not see the point that once the authorities allow the children to come back to that school, there is no argument against all children coming back?

I am aware of the force of that.

Is it not a fact that this decision was taken by the governors purely on financial grounds, and may I ask whether the decision of the Minister was given on financial grounds, too?

I do not think that is so.

Is it not a fact that most of the parents concerned approve of the action which the Board took, and will my hon. Friend say why the same thing cannot be done for elementary schools?

There is a difference in the ages, and that was one of the biggest factors in making this decision. If you allow the whole of the elementary schools to open, and it is compulsory or voluntary, it is clear that you have to reconsider the evacuation scheme.

Is it not a fact that it was purely on financial grounds, and that these people can afford to pay?

I am afraid it is not.

I say it is.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether arrangements can be made to ensure that pupils attending schools in reception areas for half a day only shall participate in the further educational activities which take place outside the school premises during the other half of the day?

Yes, Sir. It is open to a local education authority under Article 21 {a) of the Code to ask His Majesty's Inspector to approve general arrangements under which certain activities which are to be included in the school time-table are held elsewhere than on the school premises. This is being done in a number of cases and a full-day school time-table thereby provided. My Noble Friend hopes that such arrangements will be made wherever circumstances permit.

Would it be sufficient to have in the time-table the entry "out-of-school activities" or "extra-mural studies"? Is it not difficult to devise a more elaborate time-table beforehand owing to the vagaries of the British climate?

I quite agree with the hon. Gentleman, but I have seen excellent time-tables made out in the countryside, and I think there is a reasonable give and take between His Majesty's inspectors and the schools.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education what steps are being taken by the Board to ensure some measure of education for the large number of children who have not been evacuated from evacuation areas, especially in the North of England; and whether the position of these areas in regard to education is being reviewed by the Board?

Certain steps to provide education for children still in evacuation areas were suggested in the Board's Circular 1479 issued at the end of last month and of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy. The Board are keenly alive to the position both in the North of England and elsewhere.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that in many cities in the North more than half the child population are now amusing themselves in the streets and not being educated, and that teachers are unemployed?

I do, and that is why I said "keenly alive"; but my hon. Friend will appreciate that there is a dilemma which has not yet been solved.

May I ask my hon. Friend why the Government think that cinemas are safer in the hours of darkness than schools during the daylight?

I admit quite frankly that if one looks at it in that way, it seems anomalous, but if we compelled the opening of schools on a compulsory basis for all children, we should have to be prepared to take the risks. At the present time the Government are not: prepared to face that issue on a compulsory basis.

Why not on a voluntary basis? Does my hon. Friend realise that many parents wish their children to get these facilities, as they are safer in the schools than on the streets?

I take note of my hon. Friend's statement, and will draw attention to it.

Cannot the Government be forced to make the evacuation scheme a compulsory one?

So that they can all work on the land?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware that the work of reopening clubs and evening institutes for educational and recreational purposes, which is being recommended by the educational authorities, is being hampered by the instruction that has been issued that the premises so used must first be inspected by the Home Office, and that no teachers shall be sent to them until this has been done; that many of the activities are conducted in premises such as church halls which are being used on other nights of the week for other gatherings with the knowledge and approval of the local air-raid precautions authorities; and whether, in view of the facts, he will consider advising the local authorities concerned that they may supply the teachers for the activities, pending the result of the Home Office inspection?

In authorising the reopening of evening institutes in evacuation areas the Board laid down the condition that adequate air raid protection should be available in or accessible to the institution and that the number of students should not be so great as to impede their rapid and orderly evacuation to a place of safety. In view of the special responsibility which the Board have to take in sanctioning the reopening of schools in vulnerable areas, they are not prepared to relax this condition. I should add that the survey of buildings for this purpose in London has been specially undertaken by the Home Office, and I wish to express the Board's appreciation of the speed with which the survey is being carried out, with the result that a number of evening institutes have, I am informed, already been reopened.

Is the Minister aware that, in spite of that, a large number of these small classes which were held in premises, now being used every night of the week for purposes which are more dangerous, are being held up and destroyed because the local authorities are not allowed to send teachers; and that to withdraw teachers from the children in these centres where they are much better—

Speech.

I am aware of the point to which the hon. Lady refers and we are making an attempt to deal with it as quickly as possible.

asked the Minister of Health what instructions have been issued with regard to the medical inspection immediately prior to their evacuation of the second group of the priority classes to be evacuated?

The supplementary scheme of evacuation is confined to unaccompanied children who have been registered. I have given instructions that the evacuating authorities should carry out medical inspection and, where necessary, the efficient treatment, of all children to be included in the parties.

asked the Minister of Health when it is proposed to commence the second evacuation of the priority classes?

The supplementary scheme of evacuation, which is confined to unaccompanied schoolchildren, has already been carried out in several areas, and I anticipate that it will be completed in all the evacuating areas in the next two or three weeks.

Can the Minister give any kind of estimate of the total number of children concerned in this second evacuation?

The register was 30,000 to 40,000 but the actual number was rather smaller.

In the event of any of the children examined by the medical officers being found unfit in some respect, will they be detained until they are fit?

rose—

I think hon. Members should put any further questions on the Paper.

asked the Minister of Health what attention is being given by the billeting authorities to the need for arranging billets for evacuated secondary schoolchildren within travelling distance of a secondary school; and has he issued any instructions or advice on this subject?

The local education authorities in co-operation with the billeting authorities and with the Ministry's regional officers and His Majesty's inspectors of schools are giving close attention to the re-arrangement of secondary school children in billets where this appears to be called for on educational grounds. I have called the attention of local authorities to the importance in general of making arrangements for carrying on the education of the children, and in a circular issued on 19th May last my noble friend, the President of the Board of Education, emphasised that children of secondary school type should so far as practicable be billeted in or near places where secondary school accommodation is available. He also stressed that for this purpose contact should be maintained between the local education authorities and the billeting authorities.

Will the Minister inform the House how the 52 inspectors of His Majesty's Government belonging to the Board of Education can be available for assistance when they have been mobilised for defence?

I am afraid that I should be involved in a serious quarrel with my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education, if I attempted to answer questions for his Department.

Does the Minister really consider it necessary to evacuate young men of 18 and 19 as secondary school children?

It is very difficult to draw a line between one child attending a secondary school and another. That is one of the matters, however, on which, I think, questions might more properly be addressed to the Board of Education.

asked the Minister of Health whether any arrangements have been made for the treatment of evacuated children in the receiving areas in respect of notifiable and non-notifiable infectious and contagious diseases, minor ailments and injuries?

Yes, Sir. These matters are dealt with in a circular which I have addressed to local authorities and of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.

Will the Minister also consider the great importance of nursing attention, by which most of this work could be done and which has been, I think, rather left out of his circular?

There is a reference to it in the circular, but I admit that references are not in themselves sufficient. I am anxious about obtaining as much assistance in the reception areas from the skilled staffs in the evacuation areas as we can possibly manage.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that medical men in certain areas to which children have been evacuated are being informed that payment cannot be made out of the funds provided for the medical attendance and treatment of these children unless such medical men have joined the scheme for the protection of practices instituted by a voluntary organisation of medical men; and whether he has sanctioned such procedure?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative. I have received a complaint that the condition to which the hon. Member refers was being imposed in one area, but it was ascertained on inquiry that this complaint was without foundation.

Is the Minister aware that there is dissatisfaction in this matter; and has he received representations from the Medical Practitioners Union, a body affiliated with the Trades Union Congress; and, if not, will he receive representations from that body on the matter?

I have received representations as a result of which I had the scheme for the area in question examined and found no such condition as is suggested.

asked the Minister of Health what consultations were held between his Department and local education authorities before the evacuation of school children took place; and whether consultations are entered into with the local education authority before sanction is given for the return of an evacuated school?

Frequent consultations with the local education authorities as such were conducted through the Board of Education. I have also had the advice of a standing advisory committee which contains representative officers of local education authorities. Any consultation with a local education authority before the return of a particular school is sanctioned would be a matter for my Noble Friend the President of the Board of Education.

Is the Minister aware that the granting of these facilities before consultation has taken place, is creating difficulties for these local authorities?

I think the hon. Member was discussing that matter with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education only a little while ago. I heard the interchange.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to a letter sent by Mr. H. E. Fellowes, executive control officer, Braintree Rural District Council, to the parents of evacuated children of Trinity county school. Wood Green, intimating that unless a further 4s. per week is paid in respect of each child over 14 years of age steps will be taken to distribute the children over other parishes; whether the authority of his Department was obtained for the issue of this letter; and whether he will give instructions for the withdrawal of the letter and prevent any such threats to break up the educational facilities provided by the school in the present exceptional circumstances?

My attention has been drawn to the letter to which the hon. Member refers: it was not issued with my approval, and I am in communication with the local authority on the subject.

asked the Minister of Health whether a parent who has evacuated his child to the country by private: arrangement can now get his child billeted in that area; or whether any alternative arrangement for billeting can be made?

I would refer the hon. Member to a circular which I have issued and of which I am sending him a copy. As regards the second part of the question, if the parent of a school child is prepared to transfer the child to the reception area to which its school has been evacuated, the child can, with the prior consent of the local authority for that area, be billeted there under official arrangements.

In the case of children who were at the time of the first evacuation on holiday and who remained there at the request of the Government, will the Government take steps to pay the fares of those children, who have forfeited their return fares, to the area where they can be received with the school to which they belong?

I would be quite prepared to examine any case of the kind which the hon. Member brought to my attention.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are many hundreds of such cases, and will he not consider the general question and issue instructions to the billeting officers to make payments in these cases?

As the hon. Member knows, he and I have had some consultations on the matter, and I shall be willing to continue them.

Will the parents of unofficial evacuees receive a grant to cover the cost of the return fares of children home in order that they may come under the official scheme?

There are further questions on the Paper on that point.

asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the strong objection entertained by a great many parents to the inoculation of their children, he will remind the local authorities of all areas to which children have been evacuated that the consent of the parents must be obtained before such children are inoculated?

I will bear this in mind in connection with any communication to local authorities on the subject.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that blind persons evacuated from London are receiving domiciliary assistance from the local authorities at a lower rate than obtains in London; that these blind persons anxious to retain their London homes cannot afford to pay the rent and their London landlords are unable to sustain the loss unless the London authorities render assistance; and what arrangements to this end he has in view?

The rates of domiciliary assistance paid to blind persons are a matter for the decision of the local authority concerned, and I have no authority to give any directions in the matter. I understand that the practice of the London County Council is to pay domiciliary assistance to blind persons evacuated from London at a rate based on that current in the reception area adjusted according to the needs of the case and that they are considering the question whether any special provision should be made to cover the rents of the London homes of these persons.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that these people were informed that their stay would not be prolonged, that the London County Council would make lots of arrangements to help them to pay their rent, and that the council are now saving something like 10s. a week for every evacuated blind person?

I should hesitate to accept such a statement without further inquiry especially in the presence of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Hackney (Mr. H. Morrison).

Did the right hon. Gentleman not answer a supplementary question which referred the questioner to a later question, and will he say whether the question in the name of the hon. Member for the Forest of Dean (Mr. Price), No. 45, is the question to which he referred?

Yes, Sir.

Could the Minister answer the supplementary question now, seeing that unwittingly the House has been misled?

That would be creating a dangerous precedent.

asked the Minister of Health whether any con- cessions can be made in the poorer reception areas in connection with supplies of blankets, coal, gas and electricity for evacuees?

I have no reason to suppose that the billeting allowances payable to householders are inadequate to enable them to carry out the duties which they have undertaken: supplies of blankets are being made available to local authorities to meet the needs of householders who are unable to make this provision. If the hon. Member has any particular case in mind, I shall be glad to look into it.

asked the Minister of Health what is the number of expectant mothers and mothers with young children who were evacuated at the outbreak of war; what is the approximate number who have since returned to their homes; and can he say what are the principal reasons given by such mothers for their return home?

About 11,000 expectant mothers and 445,000 mothers and young children were evacuated. I am at present awaiting a return from local authorities as to the numbers who still remain in the reception areas, and will communicate with the hon. Member as soon as I have complete information. Reports made to me indicate that a desire to return to their husbands and homes and also a difficulty in adapting themselves to the conditions of country life are among the principal reasons for returning.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that certain local authorities and statutory bodies, part of whose property has been taken over for war casualties, are at present lacking the necessary information respecting financial adjustments between them and the Government, including the specific charges they are entitled to make; and whether, in view both of the confusion this may cause and the expenditure or financial loss already incurred, he will issue the necessary instructions in the near future?

I have informed local authorities and other similar bodies that the reasonable cost of treating and maintaining casualties in hospitals and generally any additional expenditure due to the participation of hospital authorities in the Emergency Hospital Scheme will be met by the Exchequer. I have forwarded to the representative associations of the local authorities concerned certain proposals as a basis upon which interim payments from the Exchequer shall be made and I await their replies. I hope it will be possible to announce the arrangements at an early date.

Meanwhile, does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that a number of these bodies are in very great difficulty because they cannot have this information?

Yes, I fully realise that, but I have forwarded to them proposals, and I hope it will not be long before the matter is cleared up.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the falling off in rates due to vacated property in evacuation areas where air-raid precautions costs are high and the higher incomes in reception areas where air-raid precautions costs are very low, he will take steps to make all air-raid precautions costs a national charge upon the Exchequer?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on 21st September to the hon. Member for North Southwark (Mr. Isaacs).

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me an outline now?

I will send the hon. Member a copy.

asked the Home Secretary how many meetings of the Advisory Committee on Camouflage, announced on 2nd August, have been held during the months of August and September?

The first meeting of the committee was held yesterday.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for his very instructive reply and while thoroughly appreciating the promptitude with which his Department reacted to the appearance of a particular question on the Order Paper, I would like to ask him a supplementary question— whether he can assure us that the committee which got to work yesterday will be in a position to ensure that the waste of money and the failure to achieve effectiveness in certain types of camouflage, due to the consistent ignoring of well-established scientific principles, will now be remedied?

My hon. Friend has unwittingly done the Department less than justice. I can assure him that the arrangement by which the committee met yesterday was made before his question appeared on the Paper, and before I had an inkling that it was going to appear. As regards the remainder of the question, I would only say this, that the committee has been so constituted as to bring to bear on this important question of camouflage the opinions of many people who hold differing views on the theoretical and practical aspects of the question. The reference to the committee is very wide, and I have no doubt that the committee will be in a position to address itself to the question.

asked the Home Secretary whether he can now say when he will be in a position to make a statement on the cost of the Auxiliary Fire Service throughout the country after he has decided what is to be the establishment of whole-time paid personnel appropriate to present and local conditions; and whether he is aware of the concern that prevails in the country concerning the unestimated and heavy expenditure now incurred?

The proposals submitted by local fire authorities in England and Wales are under consideration by my Department, in consultation with the regional commissioners. I cannot yet say when the complete results of this examination will become available, but my hon. Friend may rest assured that the numbers of paid personnel will be reduced wherever those now employed are more than enough to meet requirements.

If I put this question down in a week's time will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give a reply?

Perhaps my hon. Friend does not appreciate that there are not fewer than r,200 separate establishments to be considered, and I should not like to commit myself to a statement that the whole of the work of examination of the detailed returns to be called for will be completed in a week's time.

Does my right hon. Friend make any differentiation between the various parts of the country because a great deal of waste is going on in areas to which children are being evacuated and which are believed to be the safest?

I have tried more than once to make it clear to the House that in the establishment as fixed before the war differentiation was carefully made according to the supposed vulnerability of the areas concerned.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has now been able to satisfy himself that persons following other occupations have been appointed to air-raid precautions and other civil defence posts and thereby drawing two incomes at the same time; and whether he intends taking any action to abolish this practice?

As I stated in reply to the hon. Member's question on 5th October, persons are not ineligible for whole-time paid service in the air-raid precautions service merely because they are in receipt of an income from other sources, but they must be in a position to give whole-time service at such times and for such hours of duty as are required of them and to take the necessary training for their service. Inquiries into the cases which the hon. Member has brought to my notice are being made locally in order to make sure that these conditions are being observed, and as soon as they are completed I will communicate with him.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that a person employed during the day and earning an income in respect of that employment is really available for the whole of the night for this A.R.P. work? How is it that the right hon. Gentleman is accepting that as a matter of course?

I am not accepting anything as a matter of course. I am always prepared to look into anything that may be represented as verging on the unseemly, but I really cannot undertake to concern myself as a general rule with other sources of income that volunteers may enjoy or the financial condition of their household.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the fact that they are paid with public money, he will issue instructions that all local authorities should compile lists of all their paid air-raid precautions workers and that these lists should be available for public inspection?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave on 5th October to a similar question by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for the Chatham Division of Rochester (Captain Plugge).

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear in any further declarations which may be necessary that there is no reflection by this House on the patriotic services of these people, who for two years have been training to fit themselves, but that it is purely and simply a question of economy?

I am making a statement on the subject at the end of questions.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is now able to state the total number of voluntary air-raid precautions workers and the total number of paid air-raid precautions workers in Glasgow; and the total amount expended up to date on air-raid precautions salaries, wages and expenses?

According to the returns furnished by the Glasgow Corporation there were, on an average, 5,077 paid whole-time volunteers employed in the air-raid precautions and fire services in September, their pay in that month amounting to £48,842. Up to date information as to the number of unpaid volunteers is not available.

Referring to the last part of the Minister's reply, can he say if and when he will be able to get information as to the number of voluntary A.R.P. workers?

A return has been called for, and I hope it will be available very soon.

asked the Home Secretary whether he contemplates putting the whole of the air-raid precautions personnel in the country into uniform; what would be the total number of persons involved; and the approximate cost per person?

Yes, Sir, and I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the answer which I gave to the right hon. Member for South Hackney (Mr. H. Morrison) on 10th July last. I cannot in present circumstances give the total number of persons involved, but the estimated average cost per person is IIs.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is a scandalous waste of money and that more than 1,000,000 people are involved? The Army cannot get material for uniforms and we ought not to give these uniforms to those in the A.R.P. services?

I am afraid that I cannot accept any of the statements just made by my hon. and gallant Friend. This is not a luxury uniform. It is a utility garment in the nature of an overall which will serve for the protection of the wearer's ordinary clothes, and the vast majority of the recipients will be unpaid part-time volunteers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to a report from Leeds, the crest of the local authority is to be embroidered on these uniforms?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that women ambulance drivers, for example, have to climb on and off all kinds of vehicles and are suffering very great inconvenience and dirtying their clothes as a result of this simple and inexpensive uniform not being available?

That was one of the main reasons for the decision taken in July, after many representations had been made and after the fullest consideration, to supply this uniform.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the complaint that the uniforms and overcoats supplied to the ambulance drivers referred to are made of cotton, and will he make it clear that they are for the purpose of protecting clothing and are not meant really as warm wraps?

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

(by Private Notice) asked the Home Secretary whether he has any statement to make about the organisation of Civil Defence personnel.

Yes, Sir. I am glad to have this opportunity of saying something to the House on this matter. In view of the importance of the subject and of the interest which it has aroused, I hope I shall be pardoned if my reply is given at some length.

Before the outbreak of hostilities no one could foretell the form or extent of the emergency which we might be called upon to face. Our preparations were based, and were necessarily based, on the assumption that the Civil Defence organisation would be called into action at the beginning of hostilities to meet intensive, and perhaps continuous, aerial attack. If we had based our organisation and our plans on any other assumption we should have been grievously at fault, and hon. Members will, I am sure, agree that I should have failed, and failed lamentably, in my duty, if I had not done all that was possible to ensure that we could counter successfully what is so commonly referred to as the "knockout" blow.

Having planned our organisation on that assumption, we had, at the outset, to mobilise our volunteers, the whole body of them that was available, both whole-time and part-time, and I can confidently say that the way in which that mobilisation was carried out—something entirely new in this country's experience —afforded clear and convincing evidence of the spirit of our people and reflected the greatest credit on local organisation throughout the country.

On a point of Order. I understand that the right hon. Gentleman is answering a question which was put to him by the right hon. Member for South Hackney (Mr. H. Morrison) as to the future reorganisation of Civil Defence. I am ready at any time to listen to a Minister making a defence of the past operations of his Department, but is it proper that that should be done in reply to a question dealing with the future?

It seems to be quite all right. It is a matter of a statement being made on the part of the Minister of the Crown.

In setting so big a machine in motion there have naturally been some mistakes and some abuses, but no more, I suggest, than were inevitable in so widespread an undertaking. Do not let us magnify them to a degree which distorts the whole perspective in which our Civil Defence should be viewed. So far, I think, I shall carry the House with me; but the course which events have taken is not that which was expected and against which we were bound to prepare. There have been a few alarms, but there has been no attack from the air on our civilian population. In these circumstances it has been suggested that it is wasteful, both in money and man-power, to keep standing by whole-time a considerable number of men and women who, up to the present, in the absence of actual attack, have not been called into action. I do not dissent from the view that, now that we have mobilised, our organisation calls for some reconsideration. This is a matter to which I have been giving close attention, and in a moment or two I will indicate to the House the lines on which I am asking local authorities to proceed; but before I do so there are one or two general considerations which I feel I should place before hon. Members, and one or two misapprehensions which I should like, if possible, to clear away.

In the first place, I wish to say quite definitely that there can be no question at present of any wholesale demobilisation of our whole time Civil Defence personnel. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said only the other day

"the fact that we have not yet experienced the ordeal of aerial bombardment affords no reason whatever for any over-hasty or wholesale dispersal of our Home Defence forces."

So far as Civil Defence is involved, the battle has not yet been joined, but the mentality which so early has been saying "turn on your lights and turn off your volunteers" is not the mentality which is going to win the war. Who can say whether or when the attack may not be launched in earnest. The fact that up till now the war has so largely been what our gallant Allies call a "guerre d'attente"—a war of waiting—must not lull us into any false sense of security. The lines of Civil Defence must be kept manned and ready for action. just as much as our anti-aircraft and ground defences must be kept continuously manned. This will necessitate the employment of a substantial nucleus of whole-time volunteers who are paid for their whole-time services.

The establishments of personnel, both whole-time and part-time, for each area, which were communicated to local authorities early this year, were determined after most careful consideration of the various factors involved—the size, character and possible vulnerability of the area. Some critics still talk as though the same scale of preparations had been urged on all parts of the country alike. I can only say that this betrays a complete ignorance of the organisation they are calling in question. Incidentally, may I make it clear that the suggestion, so often put forward, that my Department has insisted that local authorities should engage a certain number or proportion of whole-time personnel is entirely erroneous? Our scheme of Civil Defence has always assumed that, so far as possible, we should rely, and rely in the main, on part-time volunteers; but we have always recognised that in many, if not the majority, of areas some element, varying from area to area. of whole-time service would be necessary if we were to secure the continuous manning of key posts. Our so-called establishments of whole-time personnel have indicated, not the numbers up to which local authorities should necessarily or automatically enrol, but the numbers up to which, if need be, the Exchequer is prepared to carry the cost.

It is also a mistake to suppose that, except in one or two isolated cases, more whole-time volunteers have been engaged than was contemplated by our emergency plan. Still more is it a mistake to imagine that the larger proportion of out Civil Defence personnel consists of those employed on a whole-time paid basis. I greatly deplore that the vast volume of purely voluntary service now being rendered is not more generally and generously recognised. In our A.R.P. services as a whole it may be estimated that only one in eight is a whole-time paid volunteer. Indeed, it is true to say that in many areas the numbers of whole-time personnel at present enrolled in particular services—I have in mind such vital services as rescue and first-aid parties—arc considerably less than we have contemplated as requisite to meet a period of extreme and intense emergency, and in certain cases, if we are to maintain a reasonable margin of security, some increases will actually prove necessary.

In planning our Civil Defence organisation, both the Department and the local authorities were in a sense planning "in the air." There was no previous experience in this country to guide them; our Civil Defence is a new creation.

It is one thing to plan on paper and quite another to see the plan in actual working, to see your troops, not as figures on a schedule, but actually on the ground. We have now seen our organisation in working, and naturally, as we look along the lines, we see that certain adjustments are called for. In some parts we have perhaps some surplus strength and there reductions will be possible; in others, the line is too thinly manned and more volunteers will be needed, both part-time and whole-time. It is now possible, for the first time, for the local authorities and the Department to review their dispositions in the light of actual working experience. What, therefore, we are endeavouring to do at this moment is to arrive at the whole-time nucleus for each service in each area which, bearing in mind the varying requirements of the services and the varying conditions of the areas, may be regarded as appropriate in the present circumstances, but we must always keep in mind the possible need for rapid expansion should those circumstances change.

Perhaps the problem of readjustment may be summed up in the word "flexibility." We have to devise a system whereby we can maintain our Civil Defence organisation, manned with the minimum of whole-time personnel necessary to secure that it should always be ready for action and ready to meet the first attack, but at the same time capable of rapid expansion to deal with repeated and intensive attack. It is on these lines that I communicated over a week ago with all fire authorities throughout England and Wales with regard to the Auxiliary Fire Service, and I am now communicating with scheme-making authorities as regards the A.R.P. and casualty services, in a circular framed after much consideration and close con- sultation with those best acquainted with conditions in various parts of the country.

Let me illustrate the principles we have in mind from the Auxiliary Fire Service. We shall maintain in each area a suitable number of first-line units in constant readiness. These will generally require a substantial number of men available full-time except in so far as arrangements can be made for other volunteers to be available for duty at very short call. Behind these first-line units we shall have the second line, which will come into action only after an interval, for which only a very small nucleus of whole-time men would be employed, primarily for purposes of maintenance and to bring the appliances into action. The crews of the second line will depend in the main on part-time personnel who will answer the call as soon as possible, when required.

The conditions of the various services of Air Raid Precautions and of the casualty services vary. Some will be required to come into action more speedily than others, but subject to this we are asking local authorities to apply the same criteria and to arrange for a nucleus standby force which can be readily supplemented by part-time volunteers, and other volunteers who are able to leave their employment and temporarily to undertake full-time service. In reviewing these services I am taking full advantage of the local knowledge which the regional commissioners possess of the organisations in their several regions. Their advice and assistance are most valuable.

There are two points arising from the action I am taking which I feel it is very necessary to emphasise. In the first place, by reducing our standby forces in this way we must realise that inevitably we run certain risks. It is possible that the attack launched on some given place might be so heavy that our first line might prove insufficient to meet the needs of Civil Defence; but risks are inseparable from war and reasonable risks we must be prepared to carry.

In the second place, the adjustments which we are proposing authorities should make will increase the already vital importance of the services of large and larger numbers of part-time volunteers. Greater responsibility than ever will now rest on citizens to give their part-time services so as to ensure that we can readily reinforce the whole-time nucleus if and when the call for action comes. I am confident that we can rely on the realisation by the citizen body that participation in Civil Defence is a national obligation. It has, indeed, been suggested that it is one which every citizen might not unfairly be asked to undertake. There is an attraction about this suggestion, but it is beset by very serious practical difficulties. We could not undertake to extend our training on so vast a scale as would be required, nor could we undertake to equip so vast a part-time army. There is in this country a general and an ardent desire to serve, and our Civil Defence organisation offers that opportunity for service which so many are seeking. There are some areas—a few—which have the proud record that their services are continuously manned by part-time volunteers, but, in general, and particularly in our big centres of population and production, which demand a high degree of protection, where the great mass of the people are in employment, it is not possible, solely on a basis of part-time service, to secure the continuous manning of key posts and essential services, throughout the 24 hours.

Large numbers of part-time volunteers may be available, but they tend to be available all at the same times. The extent to which the necessary whole-time nucleus can be limited must depend on the numbers of part-time volunteers who are in a position and are willing to undertake terms of duty at any time throughout the day, and on the rapidity with which volunteers otherwise employed could at time of raids leave their work and proceed to duty.

I should have liked to have been able to give, here and now some estimate of what the expected reductions will amount to. I cannot, however, give a definite figure at present until local authorities have completed the reviews which I am asking them to make and until their proposals have been collected and collated a complete picture of our revised dispositions cannot be obtained. I can, however, say this, that on the basis which we are now adopting it is not proposed that the first-line units to be maintained—which require to be manned in most areas by a substantial number of whole-time volunteers —should, for the time being at any rate, amount to more than some 50 per cent. of the total strength of such units which has previously been contemplated as necessary to meet continuous and intensive attack. This, of course, assumes that arrangements can and will be made for securing that our second line can be brought into action within a reasonable period of time. In some services, and particularly in cases where personnel can be readily assembled, a lower percentage may be kept as the first stand-by line.

The application of the principles I have described will be that in a number of areas, often those which are probably less vulnerable but where volunteers had enrolled and had been engaged almost up to full war strength, not inconsiderable reductions may become possible. I must, however, in fairness to the House and in fairness to my responsibilities as Minister of Home Security, make it quite clear that it is equally true that in a number of areas, often those which are among our major centres, no reductions may be made except in so far as it is found possible to arrange for the necessary continuous duties to be carried out by part-time volunteers. As I have said, I anticipate that in some cases some further engagement of whole-time personnel will be found necessary. What we shall effect is the removal of inconsistencies, the ironing out of inequalities, while at the same time we shall, wherever possible, reduce the number of posts to be kept continuously manned and build on the system which it was always envisaged should be the system of our Civil Defence—a number of key posts and a nucleus of whole-time workers who could be reinforced and brought up to fighting strength at short notice by the second-line party who could be relied upon to turn out and to turn to in times of emergency.

Before concluding, may I be permitted to say one word about the volunteers themselves, the men and women who have undertaken to serve their country in this way? Some thoughtless sentiments have, I think, been expressed about them. They have been accused sometimes of having secured a soft and well-paid job. I cannot help thinking that we should not have heard accusations of this kind had the emergency and the risks which volunteers have shown themselves ready to face actually matured.

Civil Defence is not a soft job; it is true that it has not yet been put to the test, but even in these first days of war the life of the volunteers has not always been so easy as supposed. Long hours were put in at the outset and are still being put in, often under conditions of great discomfort, and much valuable work was accomplished in the final preparation of posts and the keying up of the whole organisation. The unremitting efforts of the officers of local authorities also deserves our greatest gratitude. Since then we have taken steps to settle down to collective training, and this period of freedom from raids has been of the greatest value to us in bringing our organisation on to an active service basis. I think we may all feel heartened by the response which the people of this country made to the call for volunteers and I regard it as most unfortunate that they should be subject to any disparagement or discouragement. No one says of a sentry keeping guard that he is just doing nothing. No one suggests that our ground defences standing by are a waste of money or of men. In the same way our Civil Defence volunteers are keeping watch, standing ready to go to the assistance of their fellow citizens wherever the call of danger and of duty may come. These men and women are not slackers; they are not parasites. They have answered a call to service and the country is, I believe, grateful to them. Perhaps, sooner than we expect, we may have occasion for greater gratitude and cause for greater pride.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether the statement which we have just heard is considered to be comparable in its scope to the statements which we have had from those responsible for the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, and, if so, why was no notification given to the House through the usual channels that we were to have this lengthy, argumentative and eloquent statement? We would all like an opportunity of paying a tribute to these workers, but it is rather a disadvantage to have this sort of statement without notice.

I am somewhat at a disadvantage because I did not know myself that my right hon. Friend's answer would be so prolonged. In the circumstances, it must not be taken to be comparable with statements that have been made on previous occasions, but perhaps it would be desirable when answers of such length are contemplated in future that they should be made more by way of statements than as answers to questions.

Mr. Speaker, may I now, in the light of your experience, put to you the point of order which I mentioned earlier, as to whether a statement of that kind, reviewing the past and the future, is an appropriate subject for an answer to a question?

I am afraid I must agree with what the Prime Minister has said.

In connection with the recruitment of part-time volunteers, may I ask my right hon. Friend that he will consider employing these part-time volunteers nearer where they live, and not choosing people who live in Hampstead to work in Battersea and people who live in Fulham to work, say, in Clapham? It would be very much easier if they were employed nearer their homes; it would be far more satisfactory and it would save an enormous amount of work.

That was the basis of the organisation.

The Minister has told us about this vast organisation which is working all over the country. Will he tell the House what is the value of this vast and expensive machine when some officer outside his Department altogether may prevent any warning reaching the population or his own workers, as in the case of the Firth of Forth raid? Will he give an assurance now that never again will a dangerous and extensive raid of that kind take place without timely and full warning to the population?

May I ask who is the Minister responsible, and when will his decision be announced, in regard to the principle of governing the area over which an air-raid warning will be given corresponding to the magnitude of direction of a particular attack; and has the Minister responsible for making that decision obtained from the Air Ministry particulars of the continuous threats of raids which might keep the whole country in a perpetual state of air-raid warning?

I think these are matters which had better be reserved for a separate statement.

On the Order Paper to-day there are questions by several hon. Members including myself containing the very point which I have raised. One was addressed to my right hon. Friend and was transferred to someone else. It is not fair to the House if no one is to make a statement on this most urgent matter.

As the House is not meeting on Monday, could the right hon. Gentleman come along on Monday and make a further statement?

If we are to have a further statement like the one we had to-day in answer to my question, I will put it down for a written answer.

Surely we should not go into this subject without ascertaining from the Leader of the House who is the Minister responsible whom we can criticise for failing to issue air-raid warnings in time, or, as an hon. Member stated, for issuing too many.

I am not sure if the right hon. Gentleman was present when I answered that point. I said the High Command was responsible for the issue of warnings, and, therefore, the Air Minister is responsible in this connection.

In view of the 20 minutes' statement which has been made and the threat of another 20 minutes' statement at an early date, I would like to know if it is possible to debate the question later on.

Is the Minister taking into account that a large number of people are prepared to give whole-time service without pay?

I think I did make reference to that point.

asked the Home Secretary whether, while allowing gas masks, which are the property of the Government, to be taken from passengers going abroad, he will give instructions that gas masks which are the property of the persons carrying them shall not be taken from them?

I am not aware that persons who have purchased respirators have been asked on leaving the country to surrender them, but if my hon. and gallant Friend can let me have particulars of any case in which this has happened I will have inquiry made.

I can tell the Minister of a case in which a neutral, taking diplomatic bags from his legation, has been made to give up his gas mask.