House of Commons
Wednesday, April 22, 1942
[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.]
Oral Answers to Questions
Questions
Foreign Service (Exchange Compensation)
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any exchange compensation allowance is given to our consular and diplomatic officials abroad?
It has not been found desirable to adopt a general system of exchange compensation in all countries where sterling has depreciated. My right hon. Friend is, however, considering whether it will be possible to take the exchange position into account when representation and local allowances of diplomatic and consular officers come under review in the future.
Is the Under-Secretary aware that in countries such as America where the exchange rate has depreciated very considerably, many of these officials are suffering very great hardship, and is it really fair that they should have to bear this burden out of their own pockets? Cannot some more equitable arrangement be made whereby officials abroad do not have to suffer through no fault of their own?
As I have said, these allowances come up for review; when they do, this point will be considered.
Ethiopian Prisoners of War
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government have done anything, in co-operation with the Ethiopian Government, to secure the repatriation of invalided Ethiopan prisoners of war, as part of the interchange of invalided war prisoners arranged between the Italian Government and our own?
I am not aware that there are any invalided Ethiopian prisoners of war in Italian hands.
Has an inquiry been made to ascertain whether that is so, in view of the fact that the campaign was fought in Ethiopia before there was any Ethiopian Government, and, therefore, we are presumed responsible for the welfare of Ethiopian prisoners?
I do not think any special inquiries have been made. The Emperor has not raised the point, and I am sure that he would have done so if there were any such prisoners.
Vatican and Japan (Diplomatic Relations)
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received official intimation of the appointment of a representative of Japan at the Vatican; and, if so, will he forward a protest through the Cardinal Secretary of State to the Japanese Government on the barbarous treatment of British prisoners of war in Hong Kong and Singapore, in violation of the conventions of international law?
With regard to the first part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison). With regard to the second part of the Question, representations have been addressed to the Japanese Government on this subject through the Protecting Power and the International Red Cross Committee. These are the appropriate channels and I do not think that a useful purpose would be served by approaching the Vatican as suggested by my hon. Friend.
Royal Air Force
Air Training Corps
asked the Secretary of State for Air what is the latest figure of enrolment in the Air Training Corps; and how many are in school units?
The strength of the Air Training Corps on 31st January, 1942, was approximately 177,300 cadets, enrolled in 1,444 units. Some 25,000 of these cadets were members of school units which numbered 362. Not all cadets at schools are enrolled in separate school units, since school flights often form part of other units.
Can the Under-Secretary give the figures for Scotland?
Not without notice, but I shall be pleased to give my hon. Friend the information he desires if he will put down a Question.
Is everything possible being done to facilitate the provision of uniforms?
Having regard to the general cloth situation and the general Service requirements, I think that the Air Training Corps is getting its fair share of the supplies available.
Helicopters
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether his attention has been drawn to the German revival of the helicopter; and whether, in view of the need for these machines, he will take steps for their early preparation?
I am aware of the German interest in this type of aircraft. Its possibilities are kept under review in this country, but priority in development and production is necessarily accorded to aircraft of wider operational possibilities.
Will the Minister bear in mind not to lose sight of the possibilities of development?
We shall not lose sight of any possibilities of development.
Will the Minister keep in mind the possibilities of the very remarkable Scottish type of gyroplane which is now available?
We shall be glad to take advantage of the possibilities of development of any type of gyroplane, Scottish or English.
Aircraft Production
Co-Operation With Industry
asked the Ministry of Aircraft Production whether he is satisfied that there is a close and effective contact between the Ministry, the Air Ministry and the industrial experts; is there a direct contact between those who decide on programmes and representatives of the section of the industry called upon to carry out the particular programme; do firms receive orders of types of sufficient numbers to plan for a reasonable time, and on which they can carry on until full arrangements are made to produce other types?
The answer to each part of my hon. Friend's Question is "Yes, Sir."
asked the Minister of Aircraft Production whether he is satisfied that the aircraft and allied industry is working and producing to the maximum capacity; what recent steps have been taken to secure the maximum output; is there a satisfactory system of decentralisation and grouping of firms making common types; and is he satisfied with the arrangements for exchange of advice gained by experience in design, technical and in production?
I shall never be satisfied that we cannot secure some improvement in the output of the aircraft industry, and it is our constant endeavour, as I am sure it is that of the industry, to secure maximum production. Satisfactory groupings of firms making common types of aircraft exist. Group arrangements exist for the exchange of information on both technical and production matters not only directly between members of the industry but also through the medium of my Department, and we continually try to improve these arrangements.
Have the Ministry considered the advisability of setting up representative advisory committees, composed of key-men throughout the industry, in order to advise on methods to be adopted to bring about a greater increase in production?
There are several committees in the industry with which I am in touch—one a technical committee and one a committee of main manufacturers. When we are making one particular type of plane we have it in that group, and we are in constant touch with the group of manufacturers which are making it.
Aluminium and Light Alloys
asked the Minister of Aircraft Production whether the supply of aluminium and light alloys is satisfactory; what refunds have been made by the industry to the Ministry; what is the average profit and are there satisfactory relations between the industry and the Ministry?
As regards refunds and average profits, there are several industries and several hundred firms concerned in the production of aluminium and light alloys. Price adjustments have in some cases resulted in payment to the Ministry and in others by the Ministry, but the subject is highly complicated and one with which it is not possible to deal within the scope of an answer to a Parliamentary Question. Negotiations concerning further adjustments are now proceeding. The answers to the first and last parts of the Question are in the affirmative.
Can the House be informed of the average profits of the firms in this association which have created so many difficulties for the Ministry?
There are very large numbers of firms making aluminium and magnesium castings and strips and other different components, and it is very difficult to obtain an average for all of them which would have any real relevance to the facts.
Can the Minister say whether these people have yet allowed costing officers to go into their factories and find out for themselves what are the costs?
Negotiations on these price matters are going on, and I have not the slightest doubt that our people have been in the factories, but, without notice, I would not like it to be said that they have.
After more than two years of war, does the Minister mean to say that costing accountants of the Ministry are not yet going to these factories to check up?
I said I was almost certain that they have been in the factories, but, if the hon. Member wishes to have that information and cares to put down a Question, I will give him an answer.
Plant Change-Over
asked the Minister of Aircraft Production what steps he is taking to reduce the present long period of idle machines and idle workers in aircraft factories when there is a change-over to the construction of a new type of aeroplane?
In mass production some disturbance is, of course, bound to be caused by a change-over from one type of machine to another. It has long been the endeavour of my Department to reduce such disturbance to a, minimum, and I have given the matter my personal attention during the last few weeks. I hope to be able to make further improvements.
While welcoming the fact that my right hon. and gallant Friend is giving personal attention to this important matter, may I ask whether he has an estimate of the time that has been lost owing to change-overs in production, and what percentage of that time he hopes to save?
I hope to save some of that time, but an over-all percentage would give a rather inaccurate figure. In some cases a particular type has faded out and another has been brought in without much loss, and in other cases there has been a considerable loss of time. My ambition is to reduce the loss of time to our best figure, if not below that.
Would it not be possible for workers to take their annual holiday during these periods?
In some cases it might be possible. In cases, such as the one which was dealt with in the House last week, annual holidays are given.
Has my right hon. and gallant Friend been able to fill up the factories allocated to American machines before the United States came into the war?
That is a different Question.
Royal Navy
Naval Staff
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the great similarity in the circumstances attendant upon the naval losses in the past six months, he proposes to make any change in the direction of the Naval Staff at the Admiralty?
If changes in the Naval Staff were in prospect for the reason implied in the hon. Member's Question, or any analogous reason, it would not be in the public interest to reveal the fact. No such changes are contemplated.
Is the First Lord aware it is a matter of some astonishment and concern to the people of this country that, despite these frequent accidents, the control at the top has remained the same since the outbreak of war?
I am not aware of any such general feeling among the public. There have been many changes in the Naval Staff since the beginning of the war, and large numbers of them have seen very active service for their, country in the war.
Is not the First Sea Lord the same person as at the beginning of the war?
Yes, Sir, and the country owes an enormous debt to him.
Petition for Exemption, Isle of Bernera
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now able to indicate his decision regarding the request by petition of the people of the Island of Bernera, for the exemption on exceptional compassionate grounds of Mr. Norman Macdonald?
This matter is being further considered. I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as a decision is reached.
Will the Minister bear in mind the very exceptional circumstances of this case?
Yes, Sir, that is one of the matters which are being considered.
Sea Cadets
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many sea cadets are now enrolled; and whether any schools have separate units?
The number of sea cadets now enrolled is 13,500. One school has a separate unit.
Has the hon. Gentleman been able to overcome the shortage of officers?
We are doing our utmost to encourage enlistment into the Cadet Corps in every possible way. A further 6,000 boys are entered, but not actually enrolled.
West Indies
Agricultural Workers (Employment, United Kingdom)
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether steps are being taken to invite agricultural workers in the West Indian Colonies to take up agricultural work in this country for the duration of the war; and what progress is being made?
The question of bringing unskilled labour from the West Indies to this country is under consideration, but it is not possible to make any statement at present. Owing to the wide divergences between conditions in the West Indies and in this country, it it doubtful whether the recruitment of West Indians for agricultural work in this country would be justified.
Have representations been made to the West Indian Colonies?
We are considering the recruitment of unskilled labour for general purposes. Inquiries that I have made so far show that they would not be suitable for agricultural work.
Is it not a fact that, owing to the construction of American bases, there is already becoming a shortage of agricultural labourers in many of the West Indian islands and in Trinidad in particular, and that this is even jeopardising the present harvesting of the crops?
It is, of course, true that the labour situation is much altered by the building of the bases.
Constitutions
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now make a statement as to the present position of the proposed changes in the constitutional government of the Colonies of Barbados, British Guiana and Trinidad; and whether it is the intention of the Government to revise the Constitutions of all the West Indian Colonies on the lines recommended by the recent Royal Commission to the West Indies?
As regards the Constitutions of British Guiana and Trinidad, it has been agreed that the Legislative Councils should be reconstituted on the lines recommended by the West India Royal Commission, by the withdrawal of all official members, except the Colonial Secretary, Attorney-General and Treasurer. The unofficial members will form a majority on the Councils. The necessary Order-in-Council has been passed in the case of Trinidad, while as regards British Guiana, steps for the necessary amendment of the Instruments are now being taken. In both Colonies the question of the franchise has been referred to a local Franchise Commission neither of which has yet reported. In Barbados a Franchise Bill has recently been introduced by the Government containing a certain measure of reform. Details of the Bill are not yet available.
Is it intended to base the new proposals upon universal suffrage, as is the case in the new Constitution of Jamaica?
Until the Franchise Commission has reported I obviously cannot make any statement.
In view of the changes that are going on in the world and the increasing sense of urgency in regard to political and constitutional reform, cannot steps be taken at once to give increasing responsible government in most of the West Indian Colonies?
I think my noble Friend's position is this. These Colonies have had Constitutions and responsible Governments of their own for over 200 years. We do not wish to impose changes upon them if we can get them by agreement.
War Transport
Requisitioned Ships (Post-War Scheme)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport whether he has any statement to make as to the policy of the Government with regard to the post-war disposal of ships built for the Government during the war; and whether any negotiations have yet taken place with shipowning or other interests for this purpose?
Yes, Sir. In order to enable British shipowners to replace some part of their shipping requisitioned by the Government and lost during the war, the Government some months ago, authorised negotiations with the General Council of British Shipping with the object of making available to such owners tonnage built on Government account These negotiations which are on the point of completion, have resulted in a scheme under which the owner, to whom a new vessel is allocated in replacement of a loss will enter into an agreement to purchase the ship six months after the cessation of hostilities. The price will be the cost of construction less depreciation on the usual basis adopted by the Inland Revenue. Meanwhile the vessel will be operated on behalf of the Minister of War Transport, the owner being appointed Manager for that purpose. The details of the scheme are necessarily complicated and my Noble Friend proposes shortly to circulate a White Paper.
Is it not clear from the Minister's statement that the new world after the war is going to be the same old world?
To refuse shipowners any right of replacement for requisitioned ships which have been lost by enemy action would be to discriminate against them very unfairly as compared with other owners of property.
Scottish Seed Potatoes (Rail Transit)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport whether he is aware that rail transport from Scotland to England is insufficient to carry the seed potatoes ordered from Scotland by English farmers; that large quantities of seed potatoes which have already been dressed are now being held up on Scottish farms; and whether anything can be done to accelerate their delivery?
The tonnage of seed potatoes to be moved from Scotland to England is considerably larger than that of last season. I am, however, glad to be able to assure my hon. Friend that, thanks to the carefully planned allocation of this traffic to the available means of transport, only a very small proportion now remains to be conveyed. No difficulty is anticipated in completing the movement before the end of the season.
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the situation has much improved?
I shall be very glad to give the hon. Member the exact figures of the present situation if he cares to see them.
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the question of the frosted potatoes of last season's crop has not been cleared up?
That is another question.
Railway Non-Smoking Compartments (Contraventions)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport whether he is aware of the inconvenience and hardship inflicted on non-smokers and invalids by men of the Forces smoking in railway carriages marked "Smoking prohibited"; and whether he will consult with the Service Ministers with a view to stopping this practice?
I have asked the railway companies to do all they can to see that the by-laws on this subject are observed. Non-smokers can assist by drawing the attention, of railway officials to persistent contraventions. I should be reluctant to accept my hon. and gallant Friend's assumption that Service men are the only offenders.
Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that this considerable nuisance is largely due to the fact that a very decent lot of young men and women in the Services have not been accustomed to travelling much and that the answer they usually give when asked to desist is that they have a perfect right to smoke in time of war? That is a widespread impression.
Is my hon. Friend aware that men have to stand for the larger part of the journey when travelling from the North to London?
Ministry of Information
Parliamentary Debates (Broadcast Bulletins)
asked the Minister of Information whether he is aware that the Parliamentary News broadcast in the 6 p.m. and midnight broadcasts, of 13th April, appear to represent the views of the Prime Minister rather than the various views expressed in this House; and will he take steps to see that Parliament is reported in these broadcasts rather than the views of any particular Minister?
No, Sir. I cannot accept the hon. Member's interpretation of these two bulletins. I think that within the limits of short news bulletins the proceedings of the House on this day were fairly reported by the B.B.C.
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the two broadcasts on that day represented the feeling of the House as being that it was not important to have an early Debate on the conditions antecedent to the fall of Singapore and Malaya whereas in point of fact everyone, except the Prime Minister, thought it was?
I have read the report, and I think it adequate. I am not going to put any political pressure on officials of the B.B.C.
That is just what you do do.
Is it not quite correct that our British Fuehrer should be heard at all times on the wireless?
Religious Literature (Parcels to Northern Ireland)
asked the Minister of Information whether, as difficulty has been experienced in some cases in obtaining permits, he will give instructions that permits be granted in all cases for the forwarding of parcels of religious books and literature from Britain to Northern Ireland?
Permits are freely granted to publishers, booksellers and stationers, and there should thus be no difficulty in arranging for the despatch through them of religious books and literature to Northern Ireland. If, however, the hon. Member has any particular case in mind, I shall be happy to look into it.
Does that extend to private sales?
Yes, Sir.
German Atrocities (Molotov Notes)
asked the Minister of Information what further action has been taken with regard to issuing in a popular form the Molotov Memorandum on German atrocities in Russia?
The Molotov Notes on German Atrocities were published on 5th March, and since then sales have been very considerable and all the necessary reprints to keep pace with the demand have been made.
Questions
Postal Facilities, Elm Park
asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that there is now a large population resident at Elm Park; that the nearest full Post Office facilities are some miles distant at Romford and Hornchurch; and whether he will provide full services at a shop in Elm Park?
Elm Park already has a sub-post office, which transacts the main classes of Post Office business. I should be glad to consider the provision at this office of any additional facilities for which there is a substantial demand.
Does that apply to sending telegrams?
I understand that there is a telephone kiosk just outside at which telegrams can be dictated.
Miners (Release from Armed Forces)
asked the Secretary for Mines whether any definite decision has been taken about withdrawing miners from the Forces to return to their own work; and, if so, what principle is to be adopted in the selection?
I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for Ince (Mr. G. Macdonald).
Does the Minister know the conditions under which some of these miners are returning, that they get only £2 for clothes, shoes, pit clothes and everything else, and that last Sunday I met two men who were in borrowed clothes because of the £2?
British Army
Home Guard
asked the Secretary of State for War whether officers and other ranks of the Home Guard are entitled to use the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes' establishments when on duty with Regular troops?
Members of the Home Guard when in uniform are entitled to make use of the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes' canteens.
R.A.S.C. Repair Shop (Court of Inquiry)
asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the comments passed by the chairman of the Middlesex Sessions on Lieut.-Colonel Sir Claude Holbrook; and what steps he proposes to take to deal with Lieut.-Colonel Sir Claude Holbrook and to remedy the state of affairs in his depot?
I have seen the comments on 16th April by the chairman of the Middlesex Quarter Sessions to which the hon. and gallant Member refers. With regard to the first part of the chairman's statement, the House will be aware that the occasion of these remarks was the conviction of six civilian employees and two soldiers on charges of stealing War Department property. The accused were arrested in December last. In the course of the investigations by the civil and military police certain allegations were made concerning the conduct of the Commandant, Sir Claude Holbrook and certain other officers at the depot at which the men were employed. These allegations were immediately reported to the military authorities and the General Officer Commanding London District accordingly decided to set up a court of inquiry with the following terms of reference:
With regard to comments made by the chairman of the Middlesex Quarter Sessions to the effect that the Commandant of the depot failed to give proper assistance to the police in their investigations, I understand that Sir Claude Holbrook was not present at the time and that application is being made to the chairman for a statement on his behalf to be made today.
As the chairman of the Middlesex Sessions takes a serious view of the conduct of Sir Claude Holbrook, is it not rather significant that the fact that the Colonel is the official typical old-fashioned party candidate for the Rugby by-election—
rose .
Following is the extract from the Report of a Court of Inquiry assembled at No . I M.T. Depot, Royal Army Service Corps, Feltham, by order of the General Officer Commanding, London District .
In recording their opinions and recommendations, the Court wishes first to deal with the question of irregularities alleged to have been committed in No. I Heavy Repair Shop, Royal Army Service Corps, by certain persons who were alleged to be either party to, or responsible for, such irregularities:
(1) The Court heard the evidence of — and questioned both Colonel Sir C. V. Holbrook, C.B.E. and — on the more serious of the detailed allegations contained in certain Police reports which had been submitted to them.
(2) As a result of the evidence produced to them, and elicited by them, the Court consider that the majority of the allegations, and certainly the serious ones, are the result of statements made by incriminated persons and of entirely uncorroborated gossip in the M.T. Depot itself.
(3) The Court consider that the Police reports might, in the first instance, have been forwarded to the Commandant for investigation and report before investigation by a Court of Inquiry, should such have then been deemed necessary.
(4) The Court are of the opinion that Colonel Sir C. V. Holbrook, C.B.E., took every reasonable precaution to ensure that no private work of any kind was carried out in the Heavy Repair Shop by military or civilian personnel,
(5) In view of the evidence produced by Colonel Sir C. V. Holbrook, C.B.E., and — in complete refutation of the allegations made against them, the Court have not pursued their enquiries as to — and — as they consider these should, if so required, be a matter for investigation by the Commandant.
(Here follow the Court's comments on certain detailed administrative changes which the Court recommend.)
(6) Finally, the Court wish to record that, in their view, no stores accounting procedure can be proof against wholesale conspiracy such as that which in this instance appears to have led to the malpractices culminating in the present Police Court proceedings.
Questions
British Prisoners of War
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that letters from Sulmona Camp, of 17th March, report that after an interval of three weeks, during which no parcels were received, a consignment arrived but there were hardly enough to go round; and whether representations can be made through the Protecting Power for more punctual delivery of the parcels sent forward by the International Red Cross?
The supply of parcels to this camp, in common with others, was reduced for a time through the diminution of the reserve at Geneva referred to in an answer given to my hon. and gallant Friend on 17th February. All possible steps are, however, being taken to restore the full deliveries of parcels as quickly as possible.
Is it not a fact that the situation got no better between 17th February and 17th March?
I said in my reply that we are doing all we can to restore full deliveries of parcels.
Adopted Children (Death by Enemy Action)
asked the Minister of Pensions whether he will introduce legislation so that people who adopted a child prior to the Adoption Act of 1926 shall, in the event of the death of such adopted child by enemy action, receive the same pension rights as they would have received if the child had been legally adopted under the terms of the 1926 Act?
For the purposes of the pensions instruments which my right hon. Friend administers a person who adopts a child under the Adoption of Children Act, 1926, is treated as the parent of the child since the effect of the adoption is to impose on him the obligations and liabilities of a parent. There are difficulties and objections to treating similarly a case of de facto adoption, whether occurring before or after the passing of the Act referred to. My right hon. Friend is, however, reviewing the whole position, which is a very complicated one, to see whether any change in the present provisions is called for.
Trade and Commerce
Restrictions
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can make a statement of Government policy in regard to the export and domestic retail trades; and whether this involves restricting every kind of trading unconnected with the production of war material?
The policy of His Majesty's Government is to limit the production of goods for home consumption to the minimum required to maintain the health and efficiency of the people and, for export, to trade which assists the prosecution of the war. Much has already been done to these ends, and further restrictions on manufacturers and traders in both home and export trade will no doubt have to be imposed as they become necessary for the full mobilisation of our resources.
While admitting these necessities, is there no help that can be given to these unfortunate traders to enable them to keep alive for post-war trade?
My hon. and gallant Friend is aware that the Retail Trade Committee is considering these various problems, and we hope to have a report before long.
Toilet Preparations, Northern Ireland
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will state the total quantity of the goods supplied to hairdressers in Northern Ireland during any period before the war which is equal to that of the operation of the Limitation of Supplies Order (Toilet Preparations) up to date; and what is the percentage of such goods supplied during the latter period of the quantity supplied during the former period?
I regret that I have no information about the amounts of these goods supplied to particular areas of the United Kingdom.
Questions
Greece (Food Supplies)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Economic Warfare what progress has been made by the United Nations in arranging for a regular supply of wheat to feed the starving people of Greece?
I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which I gave him yesterday.
Boys (Registration)
asked the President of the Board of Education how many boys between 16 and 18 years of age registered; how many were invited to an interview; and what percentage attended?
The number of boys between 16 and 18 years of age registered in England and Wales was approximately 597,000. The returns from local education authorities are not yet complete. Those so far received cover some 414,000 registrations, from which it appears that about half the boys were found to be engaged in some suitable activity in their leisure time, or to be in full-time education. My right hon. Friend is unable to state the number of boys invited to interview, but nearly 90,000 boys have so far been interviewed and, generally speaking, the response of the boys has been satisfactory.
Is it desirable that figures of this description should be given, for may they not be of use to the enemy?
Imperial War Cabinet
asked the Prime Minister the present position in regard to the formation of an Imperial War Cabinet in London; and what further representations have been received from, or made to, the Dominion Governments on this subject?
The position remains generally as set out in the reply which the Prime Minister gave to the hon. and gallant Member on 5th February last, to which there is nothing to add.
Does my right hon. Friend really think that a Minister of State sitting in Cairo constitutes an Imperial War Cabinet?
No, Sir, and I have never heard anyone suggest that that was so.
Local Authorities (Duties and Responsibilities)
asked the Prime Minister how many duties and responsibilities have been put on rural and urban district authorities by various departments since the war began; and whether, as the majority of the staffs have been called up and it is difficult to obtain qualified persons to perform those functions, he will prevent further functions, such as fuel rationing, being put on these authorities, in view of the importance of preventing unavoidable errors being the cause of grave injustices to the ratepayers?
As my hon. Friend is aware, many duties and responsibilities connected with important services, such as Civil Defence and the collection of salvage, have been imposed on local authorities and their staffs. It would be misleading to attempt to assign any actual number, since the terms such as "duties and responsibilities" do not admit of any quantitative assessment. As regards the latter part of the Question, while I am fully conscious of the burden which the war has placed upon local authorities, I regret that I cannot take any such general action as is suggested by my hon. Friend.
May I say that this Question was put down before the statement in the House yesterday? At the same time, if there is any intention of putting further burdens on local authorities, the chances of any scheme being properly administered are very slight.
War Cabinet (Naval Advice)
asked the Prime Minister, having regard to the abrogation of the Admiralty Patent by the Order in Council of 1904 and subsequent Orders, who is now responsible for the professional naval advice on which the War Cabinet acts?
The advice available to the War Cabinet when they are considering operational questions relating to any or all of the three Fighting Services is provided by the Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have the assistance of a number of Sub-Committees composed of staff officers of all three Services. This arrangement has developed from the institution in 1923 of the Chiefs of Staff Sub-Committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, and not from the relation of the Admiralty Orders-in-Council to the Letters Patent constituting the Board of Admiralty, or from that of the analogous Instruments appertaining to the War Office.
Is it not a fact that the great development of the staff system as outlined in the White Paper issued yesterday has had the effect of depriving the Sea Lords, other than the First Sea Lord, of all say in matters for which apparently they still hold responsibility, through the First Sea Lord, to this House?
I do not think that my hon. and gallant Friend quite realises what the position is in regard to the Admiralty Orders-in-Council and the Letters Patent constituting the Board of Admiralty. Perhaps he will look into the matter, and he will see exactly what the position is.
Have the Sea Lords any responsibility?
Certainly, and I replied to that point the last time my hon. and gallant Friend put a Question, but the responsibility must remain with the First Lord of the Admiralty to this House.
Have the Sea Lords the same responsibility they had before 1904, and will my right hon. Friend consider the advisability of reverting to the situation that then existed?
That point was also raised in the previous Question. As I am advised, there has been no substantial difference in practice from 1869.
Does not my right hon. Friend think it would be a good thing to revive the Patent of Admiralty whereby Sea Lords were responsible to the King for the Defence of the Realm, and so cut out the amateur strategists at the top?
I do not think we should revert to a practice by which Ministers are responsible to anyone but to this House.
Had the admirals in charge of the Ark the same responsibility?
War Plans (Allied Co-Ordination)
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the persistent demand from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and those who speak for it in this country for a second front in Europe, steps will be taken in the near future to effect greater co-ordination between the war plans of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the other Allies?
My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is not able to give information on such subjects.
Have all steps been taken to inform the representative of the U.S.S.R. about the possibility or otherwise of an offensive in Western Europe?
Has not the time arrived for the Prime Minister of this country to go to Russia to meet Stalin, or vice versa , and arrange for closer collaboration with this country?
rose —
On a point of Order. I put this Question to the Prime Minister six months ago, and he said it was worth considering, so the time has now arrived to consider it further.
It is still worth considering.
Production
Regional Boards (Reorganisation)
asked the Minister of Production whether he can now make a statement on the reorganisation of the regional boards?
No, Sir. I expect very shortly to have the report of the Citrine Committee. Until I have received and studied that, I cannot make a further statement.
Great Britain and United States (Exchange of Information)
asked the Minister of Production whether he will consider the appointment of a deputation of accredited representatives of British industry to visit the United States of America for exchange of information and experience in war production; and whether he will invite a corresponding visit from leading industrialists in the United States of America to this country, so that full advantage may be taken of plans and processes for increased output in the United States of America and Great Britain?
I think that the purpose which my hon. Friend has in mind will best be served, not by the appointment of a single deputation, but by arranging from time to time for representatives of particular branches of production to visit the United States of America. I propose to develop this practice as far as possible and shall encourage visits from similar delegations from the United States.
Have any consultations taken place with representatives of American productive industry who were recently in this country about an appropriate interchange of views and experience on this question?
Yes, Sir.
Soap Rationing
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether, in view of the serious position arising out of the rationing of soap for spinners whose clothes become saturated and soiled with black oil, taking the whole of the weekly soap ration of one person for effective washing of one person's working attire, he will reconsider granting a supplementary soap ration?
All industries which, previous to rationing, supplied soap for use in the wash-places provided for their workers are still able to obtain soap for this purpose. The needs of classes of workers not covered by these arrangements are still under discussion.
Food Supplies
Hotels and Restaurants (Meals)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food when it is proposed to make an order further limiting the food to be supplied at meals in restaurants and similar establishments; whether price-control is to be imposed; and from what dates these restrictions will be effective?
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food what is to be the maximum price of a meal at a hotel or restaurant?
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether the discussions regardings meals in hotels and restaurants have yet been concluded; and with what result?
The Order to give effect to the Government's decision on the further regulation of meals in hotels and restaurants is in course of preparation, and an announcement will be made as soon as the Order is made.
Is it expected that the Order will be issued before next Wednesday?
I could not give the exact date, but it will be as soon as possible.
Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that no fixture of maximum prices will relieve the evil that persons can get much bigger meals in hotels than they can possibly get at home?
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food what is the maximum value or weight of rationed meat allowed to each customer who partakes of a meal in a hotel, restaurant or café; and if, and where, a generous or excessive portion of rationed meat is supplied at any single meal, he will impose a penalty both on the caterer and the consumer?
There is no restriction on the quantity of meat which may be supplied at a meal in a hotel, restaurant or café nor is it considered practicable to impose such a restriction. The total weekly allowance of meat which these establishments can obtain is, however, limited to Id. worth in respect of each main meal served. Each establishment is left free to make the best use of supplies allocated to it.
While I thank my right hon. and gallant Friend for his explanation, as the rest of the community have to manage on either is. worth of meat or 4 oz. of bacon, does he not think it wholly inequitable that a caterer may' supply 9d. or IS. worth of chop or steak or 2 oz. of bacon?
I assume that the man who runs the establishment is a business man, and I do not know how long his establishment could keep open if he were to give his customers 9d. worth of meat each.
Potato Crop
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he will expedite the purchase of the potato crop now held on farms in clamps, in view of the pressure of work which is shortly coming for the planting of the new spring crops and the loss of weight involved in long storage?
The purchase of potatoes offered to my Department for early disposal and of longer keeping varieties required for later use is proceeding rapidly. Regard is paid to labour requirements for other crops when purchases are made from growers and loss of weight in storage is compensated by the seasonal increase in growers' prices.
Is my right and gallant Friend aware that producers in some districts have experienced very considerable delay in getting their potatoes removed from the clamps?
I have looked into the position in the district which my hon. Friend represents, and I find that between the middle of February and the middle of March clearances were over 36 per cent., and they have been very much accelerated this month.
Fish
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food what steps have been taken to improve the supplies and distribution of fish?
Landings of fish by British vessels are limited by the number of vessels now available. The home supplies have been considerably augmented by supplies brought from Iceland under the Agreement negotiated by my Department last year. Steps have already been taken to improve the distribution of fish throughout the country by the equalisation of transport charges. A scheme to improve distribution still further and to economise in its transport is at present under consideration.
Bread (Calcium)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that some members of the public are not familiar with the nature of the element calcium, which it is proposed to add to the standard loaf; and whether he can give some further information with regard to this substance as applied to bread?
I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to the authoritative statement on the subject of calcium in bread which was published in "The Times" on I8th April by Sir Edward Mellanby, Secretary of the Medical Research Council, the body responsible for advising my Department to add calcium to flour.
Vegetables (Wastage, London)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he can make any statement on the decay and serious loss by wholesalers of large valuable supplies of vegetables at London wholesale fruit and vegetable markets?
During the week ended 18th April approximately 7,000 tons of greenstuffs arrived in Covent Garden market. Of this quantity 152 tons of broccoli were sold to pickle manufacturers, 492 tons were disposed of for stock-feed and 40 tons were destroyed. Most of the greenstuff that was sold otherwise than to retailers of fresh fruit and vegetables consisted of very inferior late winter produce which arrived in an unsaleable condition for human consumption.
While I thank my right hon. and gallant Friend for his information acknowledging that 40 tons of green vegetables were wasted, has he no evidence that at another market hundreds of sacks of vegetables were offered to retailers or wholesalers to be carted away free of charge so long as they did not disclose the arrangement?
I have not any of that information, but if my hon. Friend will let me have it, I will look into it. All the investigations that I have been able to make show that the loss in a very exceptional period of warm weather was about 1 per cent.
Has the Minister investigated the whole of the London markets?
I could not say without notice, but I will look into that point. The figures which I have given in reply to his Question show that out of 7,000 tons the loss was only about 1.per cent.
Milk (Producers' Prices)
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food what increase in milk prices has been made in order to cover the recent rise in agricultural wages?
As announced on 1st April, His Majesty's Government have decided that the increase in producers' guaranteed prices for milk, taking the year 1st April, 1942–31st March, 1943, as a whole, shall be at the rate of 2d. per gallon over the prices originally announced in February, 1941. I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend copies of the full announcements on this subject.
Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that the announcement also includes the ½d. which was supposed to cover the extra cost of production last summer?
Yes, I am aware that the 2d. is supposed to meet those extra charges and that the ½d. is for the same purpose; one goes into the other.
Was not the increase for agricultural wages 1½d.?
The 2d. was decided upon after very careful investigation and consultation, and the Government are satisfied that the 2d. per gallon met all the increased costs incurred since February, 1941, but the hon. and gallant Member will see that there is a proviso in the announcement that if evidence can be produced in the forthcoming year that other considerations have arisen, the position will be further considered.
Milk Marketing Board
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether it is the policy of his Department to take over any of the powers and duties of the Milk Marketing Board?
An Order was made on 25th September, 1940, entitled "The Milk Marketing Board (Modification of Functions) Order, 1940," under which my Noble Friend is empowered to give directions to the Milk Marketing Board. My Department have already taken over certain of the powers and functions of the Milk Marketing Board; for instance, the direction of milk to markets. As regards any alteration in the Board's functions in the future, I am not in a position to make a statement at present, but my Noble Friend hopes to make a statement on the subject of milk policy generally at an early date.
If powers are to be taken from the Milk Marketing Board, will the Minister arrange that this House should be given an opportunity to express an opinion on the matter?
That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, but if my hon. Friend will look at the Order I have mentioned, he will find that it has already been sanctioned by the House.
Questions
Laid-Up Motor-Cars (Tyre Requisitioning)
asked the Minister of Supply whether, in view of the advantages that would obtain not only in the securing of rubber at five tyres a car but also in the immobilising of cars in the event of invasion, he will consider the requisitioning of tyres from all cars laid up for the duration of the war?
Yes, Sir. This matter is receiving careful consideration.
In the event of invasion is it not a fact that private cars might be of the greatest use to the Government, and is it wise that they should be entirely deprived of their tyres and not be available if required?
These are all matters which have to be taken into account in reaching a decision.
Salvage Collection, Romford
asked the Minister of Supply whether he is aware that the Romford Council have organised an efficient collection of salvage, calling fortnightly at every household; that recently a firm called R. and S. Trading Company have started to collect rags, calling immediately before the council's collection; and whether he will take steps to prevent this duplication of labour?
I am aware that the Romford Borough Council provide an efficient fortnightly salvage collection. With regard to the second part of the Question, I am making inquiries and will communicate with the hon. Member.
Does not the Minister think it undesirable that some firm should come along and take advantage of the council's arrangements and duplicate the work of collection?
With regard to the second part of the Question, further investigation is necessary.
Is the Minister aware that the Borough of West Ham have improved upon the arrangement, because they collect once a week?
Bank for International Settlements
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what costs were borne on national funds, either directly or indirectly, in respect of the Bank for International Settlements during the last three years?
None, Sir.
Production (Industrial Division: Panel)
I am now in a position to make a further statement about the Production Division of my office.
After close consideration of this matter, the Minister of Labour and National Service, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the Minister of Supply, the Minister of Aircraft Production and I, have together decided to set up a Panel composed partly of leading industrialists and partly of labour experts, the latter nominated by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service. I have, with my colleagues' concurrence, appointed Mr. Robert Barlow of the Metal Box Company, as chairman of this Panel. The chairman of the Panel will work as part of the Division of my office which I referred to in my statement to the House on 24th March as the Production Division, which I have renamed the Industrial Division.
The functions of the Industrial Division are to assist the Supply Ministers and myself on questions affecting production in the factories themselves, such as defects in the organisation or lay-out of plant, difficulties arising from labour supply or the mis-use and under-employment of labour or machine tools, financial or administrative obstacles, and so forth. Points of this kind will be brought to the notice of the Division in a number of ways: first, by the Supply Departments themselves; secondly, from indications given by the statistics and planning sections of my office showing where production appears to be falling behind programme; and thirdly, from complaints and suggestions received from time to time.
As head of this Division I have appointed Mr. Ivan Spens, who has been released from the Ministry of Supply for this duty. He and Mr. Barlow will act in the closest association in the day to day work of the Division. The Panel will not function as a committee, but appropriate members will be selected from it, as necessary, for the purpose of giving advice or assistance on particular problems or of conducting any special investigations on the spot that may be necessary to get to the root of the trouble. Reports of such inquiries will be presented to me and the other Ministers concerned direct, so that any necessary action may be initiated at a high level.
It is not my intention that the Industrial Division or the Panel should assume responsibilities properly belonging to the Supply Departments, but the Panel is intended to assist us all. I shall make the names of the Panel known very shortly.
Do I take it that this is an alternative to giving more power to those responsible for the regional organisation?
No, Sir, that is an entirely different subject.
Will the Panel be purely advisory, or will it have executive powers?
It is purely advisory.
Will the Panel consist of one body only, in London, and will there be no sub-division in any locality? Will this body take every complaint from all over the country and investigate it, or will there be any sub-division of this labour?
The central body is intended to deal with central questions. Questions which can be settled in the regions will be dealt with by the regional and other bodies.
Is it proposed that questions shall be investigated on the spot and reported to the Minister? Will this body not be rather inaccessible in London?
The idea is that where matters cannot be resolved locally we should have available a body of industrialists, by no means all of them resident in London, to turn on to the particular problems.
In view of the right hon. Gentleman's answer to my previous Question and a further answer to another Question, may I ask whether it is his intention to devolve further responsibility upon those who are working in the regions and handling the factories and production generally?
Yes, Sir, that is my intention, and I hope to make a statement as soon as I have the report of the Citrine Committee.
Will there be a new staff of inspectors and production engineers to report on the lay-out of factories? What organisation is involved under the central organisation?
The idea is that one or two industrialists should be selected to look into a particular problem and then report, where any specialised advice is necessary, but the inspection of the work when it is done will still be carried out under the present system.
But is it not a fact that we have already got this type of man there, and all that is being done now is to superimpose someone else on the top, incurring more expense and creating another bottleneck up in London?
I cannot admit that in any way.
Could the right hon. Gentleman explain a little further? This new body is intended to deal with problems arising within individual factories. What sort of problems will be dealt with by the local regional boards, and what sort of problems will be dealt with by the London committee?
It is not a committee, it is a panel. The London Panel will deal with those matters which the regional organisation is unable to solve.
Can the right hon. Gentleman say what kind of machinery will be set up? In view of the fact that between 60,000 and 70,000 firms are to be considered, and that experience has shown that complaints have come from a large number of those firms and have had to be investigated very closely, what kind of machinery is there to be?
I think the hon. Member is now getting on to the subject of the regional organisation, which is a piece of machinery separate from that about which I have made my statement.
May I ask whether, in this new organisation dealing with labour supply, the right hon. Gentleman and his colleague will give serious consideration to the prosecutions of hundreds of workpeople and the sending of some of them to prison for trivial offences, when in fact they would be better employed on production than in gaol?
Will the Panel be composed of representatives of employers and trade unions, or will the right hon. Gentleman invite to this Panel men with a knowledge of modern factory management and scientific methods?
The answer to both questions is "Yes."
Government Borrowing (New Savings Bonds Issue)
I desire to make a statement on our borrowing programme and on the Fiduciary Issue.
At present, two war loans are on tap—2½ per cent. National War Bonds, 1949–51, and 3 per cent. Savings Bonds Series B, 1955–65. For the present I propose to continue the issue of National War Bonds. The total of 3 per cent. Savings Bonds, 1955–65, sold since their first issue in January, 1941, amounts to over£680,000,000—a figure which is a tribute to the popularity of this type of loan, but which makes it desirable now to consider the issue of a new loan with different maturity dates. I have decided that on and after 1st May the present issue shall be replaced by a new issue of 3 per cent. Savings Bonds to be on tap as hitherto The Bonds will be issued at par and will be repayable at par on 1st September, 1970, but the Treasury will have a right to redeem them at par, on giving the usual notice, on or after 1st September, 1960. The House will be glad to note that we are once more able to extend—this time by live years—the period for which we are able to borrow at the existing rate of interest. I am confident that I can rely on continued popular support for these Bonds: indeed I hope it will be increased. Interest on the new Bonds will be payable half-yearly on 1st March and 1st September. The minimum subscription to the new Bonds of the Bank of England issue will be £50 instead of £100 as hitherto and of the Post Office and Trustee Savings Banks issues £10 instead of £25. These reductions will also apply from 1st May to National War Bonds.
I take this opportunity of saying that I have had under consideration the rates of commission payable on our current issues in respect of applications bearing the stamps of bankers or stockbrokers. I have decided that while the rate of commission on the new issue of Savings Bonds shall continue at the rate of 2S. 6d. per cent., the rate payable on National War Bonds shall be reduced from 2s. 6d. to is. 3d. per cent. The reduction will apply, except in certain special cases arising out of the vesting of overseas securities, to all subscriptions the interest on which accrues from a date later than 30th April.
I should also like to make a statement about the Fiduciary Note Issue. A further increase has become necessary and, acting under the power conferred by Section 8 of the Currency and Bank Notes Act, 1928, as subsequently amended, the Treasury have authorised an increase in the amount of the Issue by £50,000,000 to £830,000,000 as from yesterday. The Treasury Minute will be laid before Parliament forthwith.
May I ask the Chancellor whether, in view of the nature of this transaction, which seems to consist in converting short-dated securities into long-dated securities, he will consider the whole of our financial policy, to see whether it is possible now that money rates are low to convert the large floating debt to low rates of interest and if possible further to cut down the commission paid to stockbrokers, which I think is entirely unnecessary, in view of the nature of the transaction, which will be merely changing the name of the holder from one security to another?
That raises a very large question, which I have no doubt we could discuss on the Second Reading of the Finance Bill.
Will the right hon. Gentleman consider increasing the maximum holding of Savings Certificates from the present level of 500 to some other figure?
I have from time to time answered that question in the House.
Is it proposed to push the sale of these bonds with the same disgraceful exhibition of propaganda as has been done in the past few months, in which admirals, vice-admirals and other officers have stood on platforms appealing for investments?
I cannot take that as a fair description of the really wonderful work that has been done.
But may I ask the right hon. Gentleman again. Is it proposed to push the sale of these bonds by these antiquated methods of propaganda, which have no relationship at all to modem finance?
I have already told my hon. Friend that I do not accept his description. I think the result has been quite a remarkable one and reflects great credit on the people concerned.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the view put by my hon. Friend behind me is held in more than one quarter of this House, and will he give serious consideration to the question as to whether stockbrokers' charges in these circumstances are not quite unnecessary and out of date?
My Noble Friend will see that I have made a reduction. So far as the other part of the question is concerned, I am, of course, anxious that subscriptions should be diverted to the longer issues.
Would the right hon. Gentleman consider taking over the Stock Exchange for the duration, and paying its members expenses and a small remuneration?
Am I right in saying that there are now no 2½ per cent. bonds on tap?
I trust my hon. Friend will look at my statement.
Would my right hon. Friend give consideration to the possibility of increasing the maximum holding of Savings Certificates, as people generally look upon these as a current means of saving?
I have given an explanation of the position in that connection on one or two occasions.
Message from the Lords
That they give leave to the Earl of Drogheda to attend in order to his being examined as a witness before the Committee of Public Accounts appointed by this House if his Lordship think fit.
That they have passed a Bill intituled "An Act to empower the Newcastle and Gateshead Water Company to construct new waterworks and to acquire lands and easements therefor; to authorise the Company to discontinue the use of certain existing waterworks and to dispose of the site thereof; and for other purposes" Newcastle and Gateshead Waterworks Bill [ Lords .]
NEWCASTLE AND GATESHEAD WATER-WORKS BILL [Lords.]
Read the First time, and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Business of the House
Ordered,
"That all the remaining stages of the National Loans Bill may be taken at this day's sitting, notwithstanding the practice of the House relating to the interval between the various stages of such a Bill, and that when the Bill has been read a Second time, it shall stand committed to a Committee of the Whole House and shall be considered in Committee forthwith."—[ Sir Stafford Cripps .]
Orders of the Day
Ways and Means
REPORT [14TH APRIL].
Resolutions reported;
Customs and Excise
Beer (Excise)
1. "That, on and after the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the duty of excise charged in respect of beer under Section one of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1939, shall be charged at the following increased rates:—
£ s. d. For every 36 gallons of worts of a specific gravity of 1,027 degrees or less 5 18 1½ For every 36 gallons of worts of a specific gravity exceeding 1,027 degrees— For the first 1,027 degrees 5 18 1½ For every additional degree in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½
and, in the case of beer in respect of which it is shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise that duty at the foregoing increased rates has been paid, the excise drawback allowed under that section shall be allowed at the following increased rates:—
£ s. d. For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of 1,027 degrees or less 5 18 3½ For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity exceeding 1,027 degrees—
£ s. d. For the first 1,027 degrees 5 18 3½ For every additional degree in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½
Provided that, as respects beer the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of less than 1,027 degrees, the amount of drawback allowable shall not exceed by more than twopence for every 36 gallons the amount of duty which is shown as aforesaid to have been paid.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Beer (Customs)
2. "That, on and after the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the duty of Customs charged in respect of beer under Section one of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1939, shall be charged at the following increased rates:—
£ s. d. For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of 1,027 degrees or less— In the case of beer being an Empire product 5 18 6½ In the case of beer not being an Empire product 6 18 6½ For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity exceeding 1, 027 degrees— In the case of beer being an Empire product— For the first 1,027 degrees 5 18 6½ For every additional degree in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½ In the case of beer not being an Empire product— For the first 1,027 degrees 6 18 6½ For every additional degree in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½
and, in the case of beer in respect of which it is shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise that duty at the foregoing increased rates has been paid, the customs drawback allowed under that section shall be allowed at the following increased rates;—
£ s. d. For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of 1,027 degrees or less— In the case of beer being an Empire product 5 18 3½
£ s. d. In the case of beer not being an Empire product 6 18 3½ For every 36 gallons the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity exceeding 1,027 degrees— In the case of beer being an Empire product— For the first 1,027 degrees 5 18 3½ For every additional degree in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½ In the case of beer not being an Empire product— For the first 1,027 degrees 6 18 3½ For every additional degrees in excess of 1,027 degrees 4 4½
and so in proportion for any less number or gallons:
Provided that, as respects beer the worts whereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of less than 1,027 degrees, the amount of drawback allowable shall not exceed the amount of duty which is shown as aforesaid to have been paid, less threepence for every 36 gallons.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Spirits (Excise)
3. "That as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the rate of the duty of Excise charged on spirits by Section three of the Finance Act, 1920, in addition to the duties specified in Part III of the First Schedule to that Act, shall be increased to six pounds, seventeen shillings and sixpence per gallon computed at proof.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Spirits (Customs)
4. "That, as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the duties of Customs charged on spirits of the descriptions set out in the first column of the following Table by Section three of the Finance Act, 1920, in addition to the duties specified in Part II of the First Schedule to that Act, shall—
( a ) in the case of spirits being Empire products, be charged at the increased rates shown in the second column of that Table; and
( b ) in the case of spirits not being Empire products, be charged at the increased rates shown in the third column of that Table.
1. 2. 3. Description of Spirits. Preferential Rates. Full Rates. In cask. In bottle. In cask. In bottle. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. For every gallon computed at proof of— Brandy or rum 6 17 10 6 18 10 7 0 4 7 1 4 Imitation rum or geneva 6 17 11 6 18 11 7 0 5 7 1 5 Unsweetened spirits other than those already enumerated 6 17 11 6 17 11 7 0 5 7 0 5 For every gallon of perfumed spirits 11 0 0 11 1 0 11 4 0 11 5 0 For every gallon of liqueurs, cordials, mixtures and other preparations in bottle entered in such manner as to indicate that the strength is not to be tested — 9 6 10 — 9 10 2 For every gallon computed at proof of spirits of any description not heretofore mentioned, including naphtha and methylic alcohol purified so as to be potable, and mixtures and preparations containing spirits 6 17 11 6 18 11 7 0 5 7 1 5
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Wines (Customs)
5. "That as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the Duties of Customs charged on wines under paragraph ( a ) and paragraph ( c ) of Sub-section (1) of Section three of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1939, shall respectively be charged at the increased rates set out in Part I and Part II of the following Table, and the duty charged under paragraph ( b ) of that Sub-section on wine not exceeding twenty-seven degrees of proof spirit and being an Empire product shall be increased accordingly.
Table
Part I
WINES NOT BEING EMPIRE PRODUCT Description of Wine .. Rate of duty per gallon .. £ s. d. Not exceeding 25 degrees proof spirit 14 0 Exceeding 25 degrees proof spirit and not exceeding 42 degrees proof spirit 1 8 0 For every degree or fraction of a degree above 42 degrees proof spirit, an additional duty 2 4 Sparkling, an additional duty 18 9 Still, in bottle, an additional duty 3 0
Part II
WINES NOT BEING EMPIRE PRODUCT Description of Wine .. Rate of duty per gallon .. £ s. d. Exceeding 27 degrees proof spirit and not exceeding 42 degrees proof spirit 1 4 0 For every degree or fraction of a degree above 42 degrees proof. spirit, an additional duty 2 0 Sparkling, an additional duty 12 6 Still, in bottle, an additional duty 2 0
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Sweets (Excise)
6. "That, as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the rate of the duly of Excise on sweets shall be increased from eleven shillings and sixpence to one pound, three shillings and ninepence per gallon in the case of sparkling sweets, and from five shillings and sixpence to eleven shillings and sixpence per gallon in the case of other sweets.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Tobacco (Customs)
7. "That, as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the full duties of Customs chargeable oh tobacco under Section four of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940, shall be charged at the increased rates set out in the following Table, and the period for which tobacco, being an Empire product, is, under Sub-section (1) of Section seven of the Finance Act, 1926, as amended by Section four of the Ottawa Agreements Act, 1932, to be charged at the full rate reduced by the amount mentioned in that Sub-section shall be extended until the end of April, nineteen hundred and forty-three, or such earlier date as Parliament may hereafter determine
Table
Description of Tobacco Rate of duty per pound .. £ s. d. Tobacco unmanufactured—containing 10 lbs. or more of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof—unstripped 1 9 6 stripped 1 9 6½
£ s. d. containing less than 10 lbs. of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof— unstripped 1 10 6 stripped 1 10 6½ Tobacco manufactured, viz.:— Cigars 1 18 1 Cigarettes 1 14 7 Cavendish or Negrohead 1 13 9 Cavendish or Negrohead manufactured in bond 1 12 0 Other manufactured tobacco 1 12 0 Snuff— containing more than 13 lbs. of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof 1 11 4 containing not more than 13 lbs. of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof 1 13 9
and so in proportion for any less quantity.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution. shall have statutory effect under the provision of the provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Tobacco (Excise)
8. "That, as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the duties of Excise chargeable on tobacco under Section four of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940, shall be charged at the increase rates set out in the following Table:
Table
Description of Tobacco Rate of duty per pound .. £ s. d. Tobacco unmanufactured—containing 10 lbs. or more of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof 1 7 3½ containing less than 10 lbs. of moisture in every 100 lbs. weight thereof 1 8 0⅞ Tobacco manufactured, viz.— Cavendish or Negrohead manufactured in bond 1 9 4⅞
and so in proportion for any less quantity.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Tobacco (Drawback)
9. "That, as respects tobacco, on which there have been paid duties of Customs or Excise at the increased rates for which provision is made by any Resolution of the Committee of Ways and Means together with this Resolution, drawback shall be allowed at the rates set out in the following Table instead of at the rates set out in Part III. of the Third Schedule to the Finance (No. 2).4ct, 1940:
TABLE Description of Tobacco Rate of duty per pound. In respect of tobacco on which full customs duty has been paid In respect of tobacco on which customs duty at a preferential rate or excise duty has been paid. £ s. d. £ s. d. Cigars 1 11 9 1 9 6½ Cigarettes 1 10 6 1 8 4½ Cut, roll, cake or other manufactured tobacco 1 10 3 1 8 2 Snuff (not being offal snuff) 1 10 0 1 7 11 Stalks, shorts or other refuse of tobacco, including offal snuff 1 9 9 1 7 8½
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Entertainments (Excise)
10. "That, as respects payments for admission to entertainments held on or after the tenth day of May, nineteen hundred and forty-two. Entertainments Duty shall be charged at double the rates heretofore chargeable, except where the amount of the payment, including the duty heretofore chargeable, does not exceed sevenpence.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Purchase Tax
11. "That—
( a ) Purchase Tax becoming due on or after the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, in respect of goods specified in the following Table shall be charged at a higher rate equal to two-thirds of the wholesale value of the goods;
( b ) the power of the Treasury to make Orders, subject to approval by this House, for rendering Purchase Tax chargeable in the case of goods other than goods on which it is for the time being chargeable, or for rendering it chargeable at the basic rate in lieu. of the reduced rate or vice versa, shall extend to rendering the tax chargeable in the case of such goods at the said higher rate, and to rendering it chargeable at any of the three rates in lieu of any other of them;
( c ) as from the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, Purchase Tax shall be charged at the basic rate in respect of account books and plain books (whether ruled or not).
Table
Garments or footwear made wholly or partly of fur skin (including any skin with fur, hair or wool attached) or silk (except silk used for the stitching of seams and buttonholes).
Headgear, ties, scarves, handkerchiefs, muffs, collars, cuffs and gloves, made wholly or partly of fur skin (including any skin with fur, hair or wool attached) or silk (except silk used for the stitching of seams and buttonholes).
Walking sticks and canes.
Fabrics (whether in the piece, shaped or partly made up) of the following descriptions, except corduroy, terry towelling, and floor coverings:—
Fabrics made wholly or partly of silk. Pile fabrics, Woven-figured fabrics.
Textile articles of a kind used for domestic purposes and soft furnishings, made wholly or partly of such fabrics.
Carpets, rugs and mats, hand-made, knotted. Rugs made of fur skin.
Fur skins (including any skin with fur, hair or wool attached), dressed.
Glassware of cut glass of a kind used for domestic purposes.
Glass mirrors (whether framed or not), not being optically worked or specially designed for use in connection with machinery, tools or instruments.
Hair waving and hair drying machines.
Electric dry shavers and dry shaver heads.
Garden furniture, garden ornaments.
Trunks, bags, wallets, jewel cases, pouches, purses, suitcases and similar receptacles of a kind used for personal or domestic purposes (whether fitted or not), being articles made of leather, hide or skin, but not including articles designed for use solely as equipment for service in the Armed Forces or in a Civil Defence Force.
Photographic cameras.
Photographic enlargers.
Projectors for sub-standard film or for slides.
Lenses and other parts of, and accessories to, such cameras, enlargers or projectors.
Unexposed sensitised photographic paper, cloth, plates and film, except sensitised document base paper, transparent tracing paper base and tracing cloth.
Musical instruments, including gramophones, player pianos and other similar instruments and accessories to, and parts of, musical instruments.
Gramophone records. Player piano records.
Radio gramophones.
Clocks and watches, cases for, and accessories to, clocks and watches, and watch chains, wristlet watch straps and similar articles, made wholly or partly of platinum, gold, silver, or gold plate.
Jewellery and imitation jewellery and other goldsmiths' and silversmiths' wares.
Articles of all kinds made wholly or partly of ivory, amber, jet, coral, mother of pearl, natural shells, or tortoiseshell, or of Jade, onyz, lapis lazuli or other semiprecious stones.
Fancy or ornamental articles of a kind suitable for personal or domestic use (including artificial flowers, photographic frames and paper weights).
Toilet requisites of all kinds, except the following not being articles supplied as part of a toilet set:—brushes, combs, scissors, razors and razor blades, sponges, face cloths and towels, and toilet paper.
Perfumery. Toilet preparations (whether medicated or not), including cosmetics but excluding the following: —soap (including soap shampoos); dentifrices; eye lotions; mouth washes and antiseptics; calamine lotion and similar alleviating toilet preparations; unperfumed.
Pictures, prints, engravings, photographs, figures, busts, reliefs, vases, and similar articles, if produced in quantity for general sale."
Income Tax
Charge of Tax
12. "That—
( a ) Income Tax for the year 1942–43 shall be charged at the standard rate of ten shillings in the pound, and, in the case of an individual whose total income exceeds one thousand five hundred pounds, at such higher rates in respect of the excess over one thousand five hundred pounds as Parliament may hereafter determine;
( b ) all such enactments as had effect with respect to the Income Tax charged for the year 1941–42, other than such enactments as by their terms relate only to tax for that year, shall have effect with respect to the Income Tax charged for the year 1942–43.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Higher Rates of Income Tax for 1941–42
13. "That Income Tax for the year 1941–42 shall be charged at rates exceeding the standard rate in the case of individuals whose total incomes exceed two thousand pounds, and those rates shall be rates in the pound which respectively exceed the standard rate for that year by the amounts specified in the second column of the Table in Sub-section (1) of Section seven of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Weekly Wage Earners
14. "That weekly wage earners may be assessed to income tax by reference to such periods as may be prescribed by regulations of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue instead of half-yearly."
FARMING, &c
15. "That—
( a ) section eleven of the Finance Act, 1941, shall be amended so as to reduce the scope of the exemption from compulsory assessment under Schedule D provided for by that section;
( b ) the assessable value of lands, tenements, hereditaments and heritages charged under Schedule B shall be trebled;
( c ) rule 5 of the Rules applicable to Schedule B (which gives farmers the right to elect to be assessed under Schedule D) shall be repealed."
Aboluion of Discount on Tax Paid in Advance
16. "That section one hundred and fifty-nine of the Income Tax Act, 1918 (which provides for an allowance of discount on tax paid in advance under Schedule D). shall be repealed as respects tax for the year 1942–43 or any subsequent year of assessment.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."
Miscellaneous
Continuation of the National Defence Contribution
17. "That the National Defence Contribution shall continue to be charged until such date as Parliament may hereafter determine."
Land Tax (Redemption)
18. "That, in the case of contracts for the redemption of land tax entered into on or after the fifteenth day of April, nineteen hundred and forty-two, the sum to be paid shall be computed by reference to the assessment for the year ending on the twenty-fourth day of March, nineteen hundred and forty."
Power to Borrow for Certain Financial Purposes
19. "That the whole or any part of the sums required for the current financial year for the purposes mentioned in paragraph ( a ) or paragraph ( b ) of subsection (4) of section twenty-three of the Finance Act, 1928, as amended by any subsequent enactment, may be provided out of money borrowed for the purpose under the National Loans Act, 1939, instead of out of the permanent annual charge for the National Debt."
First to Sixth Resolutions agreed to.
Tobacco (Customs)
Seventh Resolution read a Second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
Already, on the Committee stage of this Resolution, or rather on the omnibus Resolution which followed, we had certain things to say with regard to the effect of these additional duties on tobacco so far as the poorer section of the population is concerned. I wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has given any consideration to that point. There may, of course, be put forward various proposals for alleviating the burden on the poorest section of the population. There are the persons who are dependent on old age pensions, there are other persons dependent on another kind of pension also of very small amount, and other people with very small incomes who cannot get about. I do not knew whether any schemes which may be mentioned will be practicable. Perhaps the Chancellor will say a few words after the Debate and tell us whether he thinks any of these schemes may be practicable to relieve the burden on that particular class of person. If not, I hope, as I said, when this was under discussion before, that he will not shut his mind to finding other means of helping this section of the population who are near the absolute bottom limit to keep their heads above water, and to have one of the very few enjoyments which they are at present able to enjoy.
I understood from the Chancellor's Budget speech that the purpose of these new imposts on beer, tobacco and entertainment was not so much for the sake of the revenue which they would produce but was far more for the purpose of limiting consumption. For my part, I should have thought that a Government which had full powers to control production and consumption did not need a financial instrument to do so, and that where it had such full powers the financial or tax instrument was an inappropriate one to use. However that may be, I think that it would be generally conceded that the income of people living on the old age pension is so very small that there is not the slightest danger, even if the price of these little luxuries which are virtual necessities were not raised, that that particular portion of the community would consume too much. For a long time, both before the war and afterwards, there was, I think it fair to say, an all-party agitation in this House to get better conditions for those living on old age pensions. Pressure was brought to bear upon the Government from all sides, and in the end Acts were passed, and we were led to believe that the position of the old age pensioner was now fairly secure.
We gathered from a recent Debate on the subject that the average cost per old age pensioner to the Treasury of all the new allowances was 6d. per head. I think it fair to say that had the House understood at the time when it gave its consent to that legislation that it would mean an average of 6d. per head to old age pensioners in circumstances in which that increase was far more than swallowed up in the increased cost of living, the Act would have had an even stormier passage than in fact it had. Since it is clear that the real value of an old age pension is considerably less than it was before the war, since it is obvious that the cost of all these things has increased, since it follows that old age pensioners cannot consume an unfair proportion of these goods, it would seem to be proved that there is no case for applying these additional imposts to the tobacco consumed by old age pensioners. It cannot be beyond the ingenuity of the Treasury, or the Board of Trade, or whoever is concerned with it, to devise machinery which will relieve those people from this new and totally unjustified burden. It might be done, I suppose, in the way it was at one time done for soldiers. At one point the pay of soldiers was increased by a weekly 6d. in order to pay for the increase on tobacco. Something of that kind might be done for the old age pensioners.
The hon. Member must not discuss old age pensions on this Resolution.
Perhaps I have gone a little far with that proposal, and I quite appreciate that it would be out of Order on this occasion, but it would, I think, subject to your ruling. Sir, be in Order to suggest that the tax should not be levied at all upon tobacco sold to old age pensioners, and to suggest that machinery might be devised, by the issue of a ration book or some kind of points scheme, to enable old age pensioners to purchase limited quantities free of tax. One might be tempted, if it were not too late, to put forward a manuscript Amendment at this stage and invite the feeling of the House upon it. No doubt that can be done when the Finance Bill is reached. I hope that the Chancellor will seriously reconsider this matter between now and the Finance Bill to see whether this very modest concession could not be made. In conclusion, I would say that everyone says he has very great sympathy with old age pensioners; everyone says he would like to do something for them. It is too often forgotten that old people cannot wait too long. They are at the end of their lives. Anything you are going to do for them had better be done quickly, or it may be too late. It is said of other forms of benevolence, "He who gives quickly gives twice." The Chancellor might bear that in mind and the fact that all the people of this country regard this matter not as a kind of benevolence, or charity, but as Simple justice.
May I raise one other point which has only lately been brought to notice? There was a letter in "The Times" the other day from a distinguished physician. Sir Maurice Cassidy, showing how serious is the injury which is being caused by excessive smoking in the Forces. If the object of this tax is to restrict consumption, is it right that it should not be applied also to the men and women in His Majesty's Services? This very important matter was brought to my notice, not only by the letter to which I have referred but by another independent and equally distinguished physician. Both these authorities agree that the most serious damage is being done by gastric troubles, which are a direct result of heavy cigarette-smoking among members of the Forces. I would be glad to know from the War Office to what extent this opinion is borne out by their own medical advisers. That in any case is the opinion of two well-known consultative physicians who have a definite interest in the subject, and it seems to show that there is a real danger in this respect. There is no evidence as regards heart trouble, but one can well imagine that excessive smoking may produce the most serious results as regards duodenal or gastric troubles. In his letter Sir Maurice Cassidy illustrated his point by mentioning that when a lecture was being given at some headquarters, directly the chairman said, "You may smoke," at once a cigarette went into every mouth, and the whole audience was smoking apparently not merely because it was legitimate to do so but because it was regarded as etiquette to do so. We all know how it is possible for a habit of this kind to get hold of people and the extent to which it has got hold of the young men and women of the Forces today is becoming a very serious matter. If, therefore, it is a question either of restricting consumption, or of getting additional money for the Exchequer it seems to me that the Services as well as other people should have to bear their share of the extra duty.
I support the plea which has been made by my right hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence). I assure the hon. Member for St. Albans (Sir F. Fremantle), who has referred to the serious effect of smoking on young soldiers, that the aged miners and old age pensioners for whom I speak are not affected in the way he has described, because they are as much immune from the attacks of tobacco as the pipes they smoke. Some of them are round about 84 or 85 years of age and therefore have not much longer to wait for any concession which may be made to them. I agree with the last speaker that the growth of smoking among women in recent years has probably produced serious results such as ulcerated stomachs, because women are more liable to suffer from excessive cigarette smoking, but I can assure hon. Members as regards old age pensioners and especially aged miners that there is no tobacco manufactured and no Chancellor who ever lived that could compel them to give up their pipes. As evidence of the feeling which exists in regard to this matter, I may mention that I addressed a women's conference at which this subject was raised but it was raised entirely on behalf of the old men who would suffer by being deprived of their smokes. The new tax represents a very heavy burden to such people. In the case of miners I would remind hon. Members that many of them who work in deep mines, begin at a very early age by chewing tobacco in places where they are not allowed to smoke. When they grow old the pipe is about the only comfort they have left and they feel very strongly indeed about it.
Some people may say that what we are suggesting here is a sort of charity but charity has many avenues and sometimes his old pipe is the most charitable friend that a man has left to him in his declining years. When he feels that his friends are all going, or are beginning to forget him, he turns for comfort to this little instrument, the pipe which comes to mean even more to him than food itself. Even those of us who are younger can appreciate the feelings of these old people. I would ask the Chancellor to consider the plea that we are making. We know that terrible smile of his which upsets everybody. I believe that if Lady Hamilton were put up alongside the statue of Nelson, the right hon. Gentleman could "vamp" her away, even from that statue. We know his method and he will probably tell me in the most kindly and Christian way that I am a sinner of the first order but I can assure him that this is no mere sentimental appeal. If he will go round our homes for aged miners and see the old men who are there, he will find that the only thing left to many of them is the consolation of the pipe. They are not asking for cigars or for expensive things but just for a very plain, solid, old-fashioned piece of tobacco. It is all very well to say "Cut it down; it is too expensive." I have tried to explain in my own way how joy sometimes comes from the very feeling of the stem of the pipe. I think these old folk ought to be considered. I do not know exactly how their case is to be met but the Chancellor is cute enough to do anything, in any direction, at any time, and I hope in this case he will try to meet us and concede what we ask.
I am sorry to disagree fundamentally with my hon. Friend the Member for St. Albans (Sir F. Fremantle), but I say, without hesitation, while giving all respect to superior medical knowledge, that the benefit to be derived from a reduction of smoking in the Forces would not in any way counterbalance the unhappiness which the men generally would feel if they were deprived of their cigarettes. I assure my hon. Friend that the troops who are now in this country waiting for battle are to a very large extent—and one cannot blame them for it— "browned off." They are separated from their homes and families, and if you limit the amount of tobacco and cigarettes which they are allowed, you will be, in my opinion, carrying austerity too far. I approach this subject from a different angle. Whether the Chancellor wishes to raise revenue or to limit consumption by this method, we have these proposals before us and no doubt because of certain over-riding facts we shall support this Resolution. But I would ask the Chancellor whether it would not be possible to eliminate waste in the use of tobacco? We are eliminating waste in many other respects. We are economis- ing in the use of soap, for example, and we use petrol to the last drop. Cannot we put a stop to the practice of throwing away cigarette ends? About one-tenth of every cigarette seems to be thrown away. Why should not some means be devised of preventing that waste? Could not the tobacco firms issue with their packets of cigarettes sufficient paper to enable the unconsumed portion of the tobacco to be rolled again? We see ash-trays filled with cigarette-ends littering tables. If all this waste could be stopped there would be a great deal more tobacco available for everyone to smoke. I hope my right hon. Friend will consider that method of dealing with the problem.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer wanted to know, what was the opinion of the country on his Financial Statement. I can assure him that his Statement has been fairly well received, but there are certain sections of people who ask that something should be done to meet the special hardships of their own cases. It is well-recognised that there are those who can well afford to bear the extra cost which is being imposed but there are sections of the community who are not getting any advance in income and who have to meet these additional costs out of small pittances. One such section is that of the old age pensioners. I have been asked by them to put their case to the Chancellor. Is there no means by which old age pensioners could be relieved of the extra tobacco tax? To many of them a smoke is one of the few joys left. They are not making any plea about the beer tax but they would like something to be done for them as regards the tobacco tax. I had a letter from one old age pensioner in which he writes:
"When we go to draw our pensions, could not we have a slip of paper given to us to show that we are entitled to an ounce of tobacco free of the latest taxation?"
That is a suggestion which I bring to the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If something of this kind were done, it would show the old age pensioners that there is some thought for them in the legislature. As the Chancellor knows, I am all for a flat-rate advance in pensions; at the moment I cannot deal with that, but I want some recognition for the old-age pensioners. The Chancellor ought to make some concession in matters like this. I cannot lay down a water-tight scheme, but I do not think it would be beyond his ability to devise a method of preventing this tax from falling on old-age pensioners. If he could do that, he would earn the gratitude of these old people. If he cannot do it now, would he be prepared to consider an Amendment on the Committee stage?
I want to support the eloquent argument of my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker). The Chancellor will recollect that on one occasion a Member, on rising to speak, pulled out, with his notes, a tobacco pouch, and that he at once got the entire sympathy of the House. My hon. Friend has put his case just as eloquently, although the other did it by a gesture and he has done it by word of mouth. The Chancellor has agreed to some discrimination, because he is not going to put the extra tax on supplies to the Forces through N.A.A.F.I. I do not know the cost of that concession, but I imagine that it is quite considerable. After that, I should say that he is bound to consider the suggestion which has been made on behalf of another deserving class, for whom the cost would not be so heavy. I do not know whether my hon. Friend the Member for St. Albans (Sir F. Fremantle) is aware of the facts about the Army and the Air Force; but I have a son in the Army, and he tells me that he is rationed to the extent of 30 cigarettes per week through N.A.A.F.I. I have reason to believe that that is more or less general throughout the country. Therefore, the dangers which my hon. Friend fears are not likely to arise in the Services. As to the medical aspect, I will not express an opinion; but we want to be very careful about singling out the members of the Forces, who have not the facilities that civilians have. In certain garrison towns, if members of the Forces go to tobacconists', they are told that supplies are limited to the tobacconists' customers, or that they have sold out.
Does the hon. Member realise that although civilians may go to a tobacconist and be unable to obtain supplies, members of the Forces can get them at their N.A.A.F.I. canteens?
Yes, but how can they be said to be smoking heavily if they are limited to 30 cigarettes a week? I have reason to believe that it is the civilians, and not the members of the Forces, who are smoking excessively. At any rate, the Forces are in no privileged position. I would like to congratulate the Chancellor on his wisdom in providing that the Services, in view of their limited emoluments, are not penalised. All I ask is that he will extend that concession to other deserving members of the community.
I hope my right hon. Friend is satisfied that the appeal which has been made on behalf of the old age pensioners is one that meets with general approval. The cheapest tobacco to-day costs 1s. 10½d. an oz. Tobacco is the one thing left to the old age pensioner to make life bearable; and it is practically impossible, in view of the taxation, for him to continue to obtain it. We all recognise that in war we have to make sacrifices, and the country is prepared to make them. The sacrifices we have to make under this Budget, great as they are, are not so great as those which people in other countries are making as a result of the war. But this suggestion gives point to a plea I have made in this House for the restoration of the cut made in rates of retired pay in 1935. If the Chancellor could restore that cut, at a cost of only £500,000 to the Treasury, it would be a great assistance to those people; and this Budget provides additional reason why he should do so.
I should like to associate myself with the remarks made by the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) and other hon. Members, with regard to the old age pensioners. The amount of tobacco at issue is very small, and the hardship is very real. The only- serious objection that I can see to such a proposal is one which I imagine the Chancellor will put before us, that if he once makes such a concession, he will be asked to make similar concessions for other sections. But in this Debate no other concession has been asked for. I should be very pleased if the Chancellor would tell us at least that he will consider the suggestion. A matter that has been troubling me in connection with tobacco and cigarettes sold through the canteens is the fact that there are, of course, in the Forces large numbers of people who do not smoke; and, no doubt, there has been a tendency for some of them to get cigarettes from the canteens, to which they are entitled by reason of their service, and to pass them on to friends who smoke.
Why not?
Surely that is a black market.
Is the hon. Member aware that when the troops were serving overseas every one of them got a free issue of tobacco, and that it was quite a common occurence for the non-smoker to pass his tobacco on to others who smoked? Why should he not do so?
I am aware of that; but what I have in mind is, not so much that sort of thing, as the temptation for him to sell to civilians. The higher the tax on tobacco, and the more expensive the tobacco becomes, the greater the temptation to sell it in such a way. It is not part of the purpose of this concession that anyone should be able to make such a profit. The problem is one of great difficulty. It is no doubt the root difficulty which has prevented the Government from rationing everybody. But I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer at any rate to consider whether any means could be devised for preventing, if it can be prevented, the purchase of cigarettes and tobaccos in the canteens by people who do not smoke for sale at a profit to others who do.
As far as the general question of the tax is concerned, I do not think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer can complain at the reception that it has had. It is a very remarkable thing to see a proposed increase of tax which in ordinary times would be so extremely unpopular so well received.
I would not have intervened but for the fact that I have received resolutions from my constituency asking me to use my endeavours where possible for the relief of this added taxation upon tobacco and also snuff. My constituents perhaps have a higher estimate of the value of tobacco than the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself. Tobacco, after all, is a great solace. It has become an essential necessity in the industrial age in which we live. It is a comfort and a relief in cases of misfortune and so forth. In spite of the deleterious effects which we were told by the hon. Member for St. Albans (Sir F. Fremantle) were a result of excessive smoking, apparently those who do smoke excessively and who suffer believe that tobacco smoking is well worth it. It is very interesting to note that the introducer of tobacco into this country, the great Sir Walter Raleigh, the chronicler tells us, was an English gentleman to the last and that prior to execution he took tobacco. How he took tobacco we are not quite sure. But I ask on behalf of the Durham pensioners and others on low incomes that the solace and enjoyment of what has become to them one of the essentials of their relatively short existence should be relieved, if the Chancellor of the Exchequer can see his way to do it, of the additional taxation.
I appreciate wholeheartedly the considerations that have been put before me, and I particularly single out for my respectful thanks my hon. Friend the Member for Durham (Mr. Ritson) for all that he said about this matter and about me. I am not unacquainted with the position and the lot of old age pensioners. I was for many years chairman of the largest old age pensions authority in the country, and I have some knowledge of what they think and desire. It is true that generally this heavy tax on tobacco, as one of my hon. Friends has intimated, has been well received. I believe that it has been well received because the great majority of the people in this country recognise that two things have to be done. The necessary money, which I outlined in my Budget, has to be obtained. We must consider consumption, bearing in mind all the consequences that would follow if that were not dealt with as well. It is because of that that the great majority of the people of this country have recognised this as a proper and fitting contribution that they can make towards victory without any real hardship. Everybody recognises that it is a very small contribution to make, having regard to what other people are suffering for their country to-day. It is true also, as has been said, that the effect of this tax falls more hardly upon certain sections of the community than upon others. I recognise that fact.
In endeavouring to make a special arrangement for the Forces, there were two considerations that I had in mind.
One was that the position of the Forces—not as regards the general remuneration that they receive, but the cash that they had in their pockets—is very different from that of other sections of the community. I had to have that in mind, and I had well in mind also the fact that I was able to put my hand upon certain machinery, which possibly may have certain defects and difficulties such as my hon. Friend has mentioned, like N.A.A.F.I. and other properly authorised canteens, by which a system of giving them consideration in respect of tobacco could be put into operation, as I am advised, fairly easily and at once. There may be some danger that under this scheme, tobacco may be received by people who do not smoke. I look to them to have regard to proper considerations, and I have no doubt that the great majority of them will do this. There was indeed some fear that some persons who were entitled to cigarettes at pre-Budget prices would misuse the concession for the benefit of their friends and in ways of that kind; but I hope that generally the Forces will recognise that they should treat this concession in the way that we expect them to treat it, and I have no doubt the great majority of them will do. I was able to deal with the position of the Forces for the particular reason that I had well at hand the machinery by which there would be little or no difficulty such as there is as regards other sections of the community.
I readily agree that to a very large number of old age pensioners a pipe of tobacco means very much indeed, and probably a number of them would perhaps sooner have their pipe of tobacco than a meal, and one can quite understand it. There is no need to condemn them or to say that it is unnecessary or that some particular sacrifice must be made in that direction at the present time. But I have to remember also, and so has this House, that there are other sections of the community—people with small incomes, and those outside the Income Tax limit altogether—who, if I made a direct concession such as has been suggested, could rightly and properly range themselves alongside the old age pensioners. All the arguments that have been addressed to me in the House in respect of the old age pensioner could equally be used on behalf of that particular section of the community. I doubt very much whether anyone would be able to set up such machinery as I have been able to utilise for the Forces. It is very difficult, and I invite my hon. Friends to remember that the sale of highly dutiable articles in the shops, at two prices, would create a position that would be almost impossible. Consider the position from the point of view of the slight apprehension of my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester (Mr. Lewis) of the creation of a black market among the Forces. Consider what would happen if you had two prices in the shops for the same article, and special prices for considerable sections of people, not merely for old age pensioners but for others as well. It would be almost impossible to prevent evasion and the creation of a black market.
Therefore, I turn, as I have already done, to a different way of dealing with this problem. It is true that it might not be possible to give a direct concession on the increased Tobacco Duties to old age pensioners and to people on the low income level, but there are other ways of assisting. These I had in mind in the course of my last two Budgets. I had in mind the position of people on the lower Income Tax limit when heavy direct taxation was put for the first time on certain sections of the community with the other imposts which I had to make in the Budget of a year ago. A matter which has not yet been fully realised is the remarkable social advance which has been made as a result of the price stabilisation policy which I then introduced, and by what I would call the stabilisation policy generally. That policy has been of greater benefit to the lower income level people than to any other sections of the community, and cost the nation £125,000,000 last year. It was of great assistance to the people about whom we are thinking to-day.
That applies to all classes.
I know, but I am emphasising the fact that it was of greater benefit to people on the lower income level. By means of that policy they received considerable assistance. In my present Budget there are two things I would put on the other side of the balance-sheet, because that is a fair way of assessing the position of the old age pensioners and other members of the community of whom we are thinking today. When I announced this policy for the first time last year I had a certain amount of hesitation and doubt about it, but, as I have stated, I am prepared to continue that policy of stabilisation, which will cost the nation more than it did last year. I hope it will be pointed out to the old age pensioners that I am in association with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade in intending to make a concession in regard to utility clothing and boots and shoes that will cost a considerable sum of money and which will be of benefit to them. If you put on the one side the cost of what so many pipes of tobacco would be to the old age pensioners, it is only fair to put on the other side the benefit they will receive at the end of this year, or in the financial year to come, from other concessions. That is the proper way in which to approach this matter. It is almost impossible to make a direct concession on tobacco to a large section of the community. I contend that we have had in mind the position of those people whom we all desire to assist, by helping them in other ways.
Would my right hon. Friend say what is his reaction to the medical suggestion I put forward?
I always hesitate to make any observation on medical opinion. I was Minister of Health for a good many years, and I was sometimes bewildered by the advice and opinions I received from medical authorities.
Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Eighth and Ninth Resolutions agreed to.
Entertainments (Excise)
Tenth Resolution read a Second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
I want to draw the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to one or two matters in connection with this tax. I am quite sure that the heavy impost which has had to be put upon entertainment businesses and theatres will not be begrudged so long as they are able to keep open and function, but there are one or two points I would like to put before the House. The first is that the additional tax imposed in no way fits in with the prices of the different seats. This is a matter which wants looking into. The different amounts added by this tax do not admit of suitable charges being made for the various seats in theatres. The second point to which I attach more importance is that in imposing heavy taxation on anything it is essential to see that it is just and equitable. There are a good many exemptions from this tax. In some indirect ways the Government are subsidising certain theatrical entertainments. I believe a good sum of British money is dispensed by the British Council. Then there are those concerns which are exempt from Income Tax because they are, I think, supposed to be mainly of educational value. I would not for one moment wish to interfere with that aspect of the matter, especially in the case of concerns like the Sadler's Wells ballet and the Old Vic, which give a high class of entertainment, but I think there has been a considerable amount of abuse. There has been laxity in giving exemption from this tax to theatrical concerns on the grounds that they are of educational or some other value.
I want to give the Chancellor one or two examples to which my attention has been called. So far as I can see, there is nothing to prevent a person from drawing a very good salary and saying that his entertainment business is a non-profit making concern—that is one reason why they receive exemption from tax--and asking for exemption from the tax. There is another case that is considerably worse. Certain people have a theatre; They have a limited company and they have also a society which has gained exemption from the tax. When a theatre manager has a theatre, he has to keep it going, but he has not always at his disposal a play which he can rely upon to be a success. In order to keep the theatre going, he puts on something about which he is not so confident, because he will lose far more money if the place is empty. This is what happens: When he has what he relies upon to be a success, it is produced by the company, which is a profit-making concern, and he takes a profit; but when he has not got another success with which to follow it, he puts on one of his stand-by plays, and that is put on by the society and is free of the tax, and presumably he gets a salary for managing the concern.
I hope my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will look into these matters. I suggest that probably the best remedy would be that all the concerns which are given exemption from the tax should have the exemption only on the basis of a yearly licence that would be renewable every year; if they had been conducting their affairs chiefly on the lines on which they were supposed to have the exemption, the licence would be renewed, but if there were any reason to suppose that that had not been the case, the licence would be refused. I think that these matters are of some importance, especially now chat the tax has been increased so heavily.
I am sure the House will back up any attempts which the Chancellor makes to stop tax evasion, but I do not entirely agree with the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesend (Sir I. Albery) that one method of doing this would be to grant an annual licence. The two conditions which a producer has to fulfil before it is possible to get a remission of the tax are, first, that the production must be of an educational nature, and secondly, that it must be non-profit-making. As to educational productions, I feel that there ought to be some relaxation in the matter of profit-making. Judging from the English stage, the really educational productions are not profit-making. For instance, as far as opera companies are concerned, England is the Cinderella of the world, for the simple reason that nowhere is opera produced at a profit. In practically every continental country, opera receives a very heavy subsidy from the State. Opera cannot be produced on a profit-making basis on an adequate scale. There have been, in the past, many attempts in this country to run opera companies, but very few of them have been successful. These companies have been theoretically profit-making concerns, although judging by the mortality among them, the profit has been more absent than present.
I suggest to the Chancellor that the non-profit-making basis, which involves a special form of constitution, ought to be modified where there are reasonable grounds for assuming that the type of production is desirable. At the present time we have in this country the Sadler's Wells and the Old Vic opera companies, and the provinces get an occasional visit from them. The old opera companies have practically gone. The difficulties of opera production, as of Shakespearian production, are so great from the box office point of view that it is almost impossible for an ordinary profit-making company to produce. I know it would be difficult to settle on what authors' and what composers' work should be free of the tax, but it ought to be possible to evolve some method by which there could be a remission of the tax in cases where, without any dispute, the production is of the sort that we want to have presented on the stage. Although the matter is a difficult one, it is serious and important. From the point of view of productions, the English stage is the most disgraceful stage in the world.
Who said so?
I say so, and I hope my hon. Friend will accept my authority. I speak from profound ignorance, and therefore, completely without bias. I think it is fairly true to say that this country in which Shakespeare was born sees fewer of his plays than any other country m the world.
I take it the hon. Gentleman is making this statement with the same exactitude as he made his last contribution in the House, when he said that a £1,000,000,000 wrong did not matter.
The matters are somewhat different. I think I am more accurate this time, although I admit that I had far more knowledge of the other subject than I have of this. However, although it is very difficult to administer taxation except by hard-and-fast rules, I submit to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor that the present case is one in which hard-and-fast rules are likely to bring serious results from the artistic point of view. We have in this country practically no opera or serious production of first-class plays, and I do not think we are likely to have them as long as the box-office difficulties are increased by the taxation which the Chancellor has imposed. The doubling of the tax will be a very serious matter. Art galleries are subsidised by almost every municipality in the country, but one might just as well put a poll tax on the people who go to the art galleries to see the pictures as put a tax on visits to the opera or to serious plays. I realise the great difficulties, but I hope that between now and the time when the Finance Bill is introduced my right hon. Friend will find a way of mitigating the effects of this very heavy tax on the type of productions that all of us want to see.
I should like the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give a little more information on a rather different point. I do not think that he has told us what is the loss to the Exchequer by exempting 7d. seats from the Entertainments Duty. I should be very sorry if it were thought that I wanted more taxation to press on the poor; my wishes are to the contrary. Can the Chancellor tell us how much the Exchequer would derive by adding Id. tax to 7d. seats? I imagine that it would make a pretty big difference. My second point relates to how far this exemption will help the people whom, presumably, it is intended to help, namely, those who can afford only the low-priced seats. I am rather ignorant of the entertainment business, and, therefore, I do not know which class of entertainment will be affected. I do know, however, that the prices of seats in news theatres, which are an admirable form of entertainment, are about 7d. These theatres show educational films, and a certain amount of "Mickey Mouse" films, and I should like to know whether I am right in thinking that the 7d. seats do not apply to the living stage but do apply in the case of these cinemas. Will not the result be that people who want cheap entertainment will go to the low-class cinemas where they can see Hollywood films, and, therefore, does not the proposal benefit the non-educational film as against the educational film? I should like to know a little more about why the Chancellor has exempted 7d. seats, how much he is losing, and whether he has estimated the class of entertainment which will benefit.
I have every sympathy with the proposal which is made annually to relieve living art from the Entertainments Duty, but I am afraid, interested as I am in the proposition, one can hardly expect the Chancellor to choose this of all moments in world history to effect a reform which he and his predecessors have resisted for so long in days when it might more easily have been afforded. I hope I shall not be thought frivolous or too ironic when I say that if at the moment we have a shortage of opera, at any rate we have a good deal of tragedy, which perhaps is more in people's minds. I rise to make the same point with regard to the increased Entertainments Duty as I tried to make with regard to the increased tax on tobacco. It is true, as was pointed out in the other Debate, that not all old aged pensioners smoke—certainly not all the women—and I suppose that for many of them, both those who smoke and those who do not, the cinema affords a relaxation and is almost their only way of escape. Here we are dealing with a class of people whose income is not merely derived from but is completely controlled by the State.
I listened with great interest to the argument of the Chancellor of the Exchequer about the Tobacco Duty, and I am afraid that I could not follow it. He said that we ought to cast up the balance-sheet accurately, and that when old age pensioners complained to us about the additional cost of the increased tax on tobacco and entertainments having to come out of their meagre incomes we ought to say to them, "Yes, that is so, but look how you are benefiting by public expenditure keeping prices down." The point is that everyone is benefiting by that, including people whose incomes are not controlled by the State. What does the argument mean? Are we to say, "It is very hard that you should pay more out of your very limited incomes, but you might be paying very much more, and, therefore, you ought to be grateful"? I do not think that argument will be very greatly appreciated. We are dealing with old age pensioners in receipt of supplementary allowances, not old age pensioners generally, and not pensioners generally.
I think the hon. Member will recollect that on this Resolution we can deal only with the Entertainments Duty. He is getting a long way away from that.
With respect, I think not. I cannot conceive that the Chancellor's argument against a proposal to exempt old age pensioners in receipt of supplementary allowances from the burden of the increased Entertainments Duty will be different from the argument which led him to resist relieving old age pensioners from the increased Tobacco Duty. I take it that if he resists one he will be bound to resist the other, and that the same argument will be in his mind. I am trying to meet that argument, and, no doubt, the Chancellor will put me right if I am wrong. I am pointing out that we are dealing with a class of people who are in receipt of supplementary allowances. These supplementary allowances are fixed on scales. There is an analysis of household means and personal means, and it is only when the income so calculated falls below a very low level that any supplementary allowance is paid. The supplementary allowance paid is meant to make up that small margin. Therefore, if there is a rise in prices, whether the rise is due to general market operations or to an additional tax, and we call upon people whose allowances are controlled by the State and we do not increase them to meet the rise, then we are asking that class of the community to make a greater sacrifice than any other. The class which you are asking to make this great sacrifice is precisely the class upon whom the least burden should be laid.
The hon. Member has already been called to Order for irrelevance on a previous Resolution, and he really must confine himself to the subject matter of this particular Resolution.
With great respect, I am trying to—
The hon. Member must recognise that it is for the Chair to decide what is relevant and what is not. I am afraid the hon. Member must accept my opinion on this.
I must certainly accept your opinion. The proposal I am making is that the Resolution before us shall not be applied to old age pensioners, and I have dealt with the argument which I anticipate the Chancellor will put forward. I leave it there; if the Chancellor finds it irrelevant, he will not deal with it.
With regard to the exemption of cheaper seats from the Entertainments Duty, it may be said that old age pensioners can escape the burden of the additional tax by going into the yd. seats. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not use that argument. There is no reason in the world why the old people should sit always in the worst seats, and, if their present income allows them to have a greater degree of comfort than that, the imposition of the tax ought not to prevent their having it. The other point made is that the yd. seats are confined almost entirely to news theatres. These, of course, are the places where old age pensioners will choose not to go. Very often they go to the pictures to get away from the news and not to have it driven home to them even more. I hope the Chancellor will consider whether in the case of the Tobacco Duty and this it is necessary to load this additional burden upon the weakest backs.
My hon. Friend the Member for Gravesend (Sir I. Albery) asked me whether I could not consider, when I come to apply the tax, some minor modifications which might be for the convenience of the entertainments industry as a whole. I shall, of course, be very glad indeed to meet any reasonable request. I hope when I introduce the Finance Bill I shall be able to insert a few minor modifications from the strict application of doubling the present duty. We have had some conversation with some of the people concerned, and I am satisfied that certain modifications are necessary for practical convenience in fixing and administering the new prices of admission, but they do not increase the duty above the standard mentioned in the Resolution, and they will not affect my estimate of the revenue. If I can do anything in the way of smoothing matters out, I will gladly do so.
I have a good deal of sympathy with what the hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benson) said. If I could decide solely in accordance with my own personal tastes, I should very much like to leave the living theatre, but, as most hon. Members who have spoken have said, that would in fact be quite inconsistent. I have been bound to include the living theatre. There is every evidence that it will not be particularly adversely affected. I shall be glad if my hon. Friend will send me particulars of any cases he has in mind, so that I can deal with them. Similarly, if the hon. Member for Chesterfield will send me any practical proposals, I shall be only too glad to consider them.
To turn to the question raised by the hon. Member for the Combined English Universities (Miss Rathbone), again, I do not share her general views and opinions, so far as I am able to judge them. I desire to give consideration to those people who are able to afford only the smaller sum. It is very interesting to see what the figures are. I doubt if the hon. Lady often goes to these places or knows much about them. It is not true that all these 7d. admissions are paid for news theatres. I am afraid the hon. Lady would not approve of what a lot of 7d.'s are paid for. I am perhaps a little more low brow than she is. In fact, about 16 per cent. of all admissions to dutiable entertainments are at and below 7d.; and the number of admissions in a year amounts to about 250,000,000. Therefore, it includes a very large section of the community. I do not think we need be too apprehensive about the point that a number of old age pensioners would take umbrage at sitting in the 7d. seats. That is not my view of them at all, and if they were assisting their country in so doing, or in paying for higher priced seats if they could afford it, I have no doubt that they would do so. The cost of not raising the duty on these seats is something like £750,000. I might have said that the duty should be raised in the same way on the yd. seats as for the others, but 'I did not take that view. I cannot say what sort of films are shown in these places or whether they can or cannot be described as low-class cinemas. It is not a matter on which I care to pass judgment, but it is a fact that about 250,000,000 people use these seats in that way.
I feel that, among all sections of the community, many people could very well afford to give up going to one entertainment in a week. Many of them go to a considerable number, and I do not think it is much to ask people, if they cannot afford it, to reduce their cinema entertainments from one a week to one a fortnight or from three or four times a week to once. I am very glad to say that I have had no representations to the effect that this is going to bring about great hardship. I welcome the support that has been given me throughout the country in the matter.
Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Purchase Tax
Eleventh Resolution read a Second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
The proposals with regard to Purchase Tax are elaborated in this Resolution under three heads ( a ), ( b ) and ( c ), and the operative part of ( a ) is a Table which also forms part of the Resolution. The effect of paragraph ( a ) and the Table is to subject all the articles mentioned in the Table to a greater duty than they are paying at present. The effect of ( b ) is to enable the Treasury to make orders, subject to the approval of the House, for transferring into this higher range of tax articles hitherto in the lower range. The object of ( c ), on the other hand, is to introduce a fresh category of articles into the realm of the tax.
I propose to deal first with ( c ). It is the opinion of those who are associated with me in this matter that whatever may have been the justice of the Purchase Tax at the beginning, its justification so far as articles of some necessity are concerned is not nearly so great at the present time. In fact, in many cases we go further than that and say that there is no need to have the Purchase Tax at all on certain articles and that the real objects in which the nation is interested are already being served in other ways. I mean that where the Board have made, or are likely in the early future to make, orders preventing the enlargement of expenditure and cutting down of the number of articles of a particular kind that can be bought there is no reason why the Purchase Tax should continue to exist. Without enlarging on that point, which does not arise to any great extent on this Resolution, I bring it down to the particular articles which are referred to as "account books and plain books (whether ruled or not)." I do not suppose that anybody in any case goes and lays up for his own pleasure and edification a large number of account books to be utilised in future. I do not suppose that anybody wants to keep more accounts than are necessary. Therefore, I cannot imagine that the imposition of the Purchase Tax on account books will seriously alter the quantity of account books that are bought. It will simply mean that those who have to buy account books will have to pay a higher price than they would otherwise do. If it be the fact that people are using account books unnecessarily and the Chancellor by including them in the Purchase Tax will deter them from buying account books, I should have thought that the deterrent was so small that it would be much better to deal with it through orders of the Board of Trade. Therefore, if it be the object of the Chancellor to stop people buying account books to the extent that they are unnecessarily and extravagantly buying them at the present time, I cannot think that the means he proposes to adopt will be really effective. If he is merely doing it to aid the Revenue, I cannot help thinking that it is a means of doing so which will put an unnecessary, even though a small, drag upon business.
As to "plain books (whether ruled or not)," I am not fully seized of the precise category to which that refers. I should be glad if the Chancellor would explain that item in further detail because there are a great many organisations—and some of my hon. Friends behind me are connected with some of them—which have to use a number of cards and forms, and they do not see why those cards and forms which are necessary for the purposes of their businesses should be subjected to this additional burden. We feel, broadly speaking, that it would have been much better if the Chancellor had left these items alone. I know that there was some difficulty in drawing a line between these items and those which are already subject to tax, but we had hoped that this difficulty, so far as it existed, would have been met by the Chancellor relieving some of those things which were on the doubtful line from the tax rather than bringing in these new categories for which we do not see any adequate reason. Therefore, broadly speaking, we are inclined to think that paragraph ( c ) of the Resolution does not achieve any really useful purpose and would be much better omitted.
With regard to ( b ), it will be agreed that the Treasury have not taken advantage improperly of the power of being to a large extent tax legislators, and I do not imagine that any special exception is taken to that, provided the Treasury continue, as in the past, to observe the spirit of the understanding that in effect Parliament is the legislating machinery for taxation and that a certain amount of play must be given to the administration of the tax. The fact that it is all ultimately subject to approval by this House saves it from anything like arbitrary enforcement.
With regard to Paragraph ( a ) of the Resolution, with which goes the Table, I may say that in principle, apart from any dislike of the Purchase Tax as a whole, there is no objection to the heavy burdens placed upon luxuries provided they really are luxuries. We have to be very sure that in this extensive list there are no articles which, although classed as luxuries for the purpose of the doubling of their burden, are really, if not necessities, at any rate articles which are used by people of humble means and which come into the ordinary purposes of their lives. There are only two categories which it has been suggested to me are liable to abuse. There is under "fabrics" the category "fabrics made wholly or partly of silk." I am not clear whether the silk is natural silk only or whether it includes artificial silk. In either case, a point arises on the word "partly." If it is only natural silk, I am prepared to agree that fabrics made wholly of silk may be referred to as luxuries. I am not so sure if they are made wholly of artificial silk, and I am still less sure if they are partly of natural silk when the silk content is very small.
It is only natural silk.
Even so, I think that the Chancellor in framing the regulations about fabrics made partly of silk should bear in mind that that would cover a very small proportion of silk and that would not necessarily bring the article into the category of a luxury. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will consider that because I am sure that the point is a reasonable one and not an attempt to make trouble where no trouble exists.
Then there is "woven-figured fabrics." I am not clear what "woven-figured" means. It would appear off-hand as if some articles would get into that category which are not strictly luxuries. Perhaps the Chancellor will also look into it and see whether there is something in that argument. Then the Table refers to "Textile articles of a kind used for domestic purposes and soft furnishings, made wholly or partly of such fabrics." Any exception taken to the description of fabrics in the preceding sub-divisions will apply equally to the articles which come under those that are made of these fabrics. There may be others later on, and there is further the danger that the Treasury, in extending this list, as it has power to do under paragraph ( b ) of the Resolution, might include other articles which are not luxuries in the strict sense of the word. I can only say that I hope the Chancellor will watch that point very carefully in order to make sure that he has not misled the House, which I am sure he would not wish to do at a time when he is putting on a very heavy duty of 66⅔ per cent., which can only be justifiable if the articles to which it is applied are really luxuries.
Will the Chancellor be good enough to explain what it is exactly that we are to understand by "carpets, rugs and mats, hand-made"? As the Chancellor and the Financial Secretary are aware, there are in the country a number of institutes for the blind in many of which these handmade rugs are produced. I hope the Chancellor will have no hesitation in excluding the products of the unfortunate people in these institutes from this taxation. Incidentally, in the localities where these institutes exist it has always been a very hard struggle to keep them going, and it would be a very real contribution to them if their handiwork, made under these painfully unfortunate circumstances, were excluded from this increase in the Purchase Tax. I hope we shall have a sympathetic answer on this point, and I feel that I need not elaborate it. Further, are we to understand that "photographic cameras" will include X-ray cameras? If so, I hope again that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will exclude them from this doublé Purchase Tax. These X-ray cameras are used by our hospitals and the cost of them is extremely high in these days.
The small point which I wish to raise concerns the Purchase Tax on "account books and plain books (whether ruled or not)." There is a more technical matter here than some people might think. What is actually meant by an "account book"? Friendly societies, trade unions and approved societies will probably use as much paper for account book purposes as any institution in the land. At their central offices they will have account books, but every week they receive tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of forms from their branches and lodges. They are not account books, but they are ruled and are set out for accounts in pounds, shillings and pence. I should like the Financial Secretary to tell us whether these forms are to be regarded as account books for the purposes of the Purchase Tax, or whether the tax will apply only to the account books at headquarters. I am sure that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will have consulted his staff on this point, because a large number of forms printed in this way will be used for Government purposes. Indeed, I have been wondering whether ration books will be called "account books." Perhaps the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will say whether "account books" is a sufficiently clear enough definition for the purpose in view.
I am afraid I am unique in this discussion, as being the only Member who seems to want increases rather than decreases in taxation. I deeply regret that the Chancellor has left out of his luxury taxes what seems to me the clearest case for luxury taxation, and one in which the tax could be most simply applied. I refer to a tax on meals above a certain price in hotels and restaurants. When I mentioned this point in a Parliamentary Question the reply was that the Chancellor had considered it, but that it was dealt with through the machinery of the Ministry of Food, which refers, of course, to a proposed limit upon the maximum cost of meals.
I cannot allow the hon. Lady to discuss that matter upon this Resolution.
For my guidance, may I ask whether that is because I may not discuss anything which would be in the nature of an addition to proposed taxation, or is it because a meal cannot be described as a purchase? I should have said that it was a purchase, being something which you buy on the spot and take away inside you instead of by hand.
My view is that the Purchase Tax, by its very nature, does not apply to a purchase of a meal in a restaurant, any more than it applies to the purchase of the opinion of a doctor.
But in purchasing a meal one is purchasing a commodity, a commodity which is bought on the spot by the individual consumer and actually carried away by him, the only difference being that instead of carrying it away in a bag he carries it away in the receptacle provided by nature for the purpose. Without trespassing against your ruling, may I make my point in a single word? I submit that here the Chancellor is provided with a unique opportunity for cutting down one of the most undesirable and one of the most wasteful forms of purchase, and that is the purchase of food in quantities far greater than are necessary for health or well-being. We are not going to deal with that question merely by putting a limit of 7s. 6d., or 6s. or 5s.—the lowest figure which I have heard suggested—upon the cost of meals. In every restaurant and hotel in the country of a high-class character people are buying meals at 3s. 6d., or 3s., or even 2s. 6d., which are far more expensive meals than are really necessary for health.
I must adhere to my original opinion and cannot allow the hon. Lady to go on.
I want to ask a question which has a bearing upon the foolish proposition made by the hon. Lady the Member for the Combined English Universities (Miss Rathbone). The one thing that we can always do here is to ask questions. That is a very great privilege that we have here. I have asked many questions, and I always live in hope that some day I shall get an answer. There never was an institution in which so many questions were put and so few answers given as in this House. On one occasion the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the day was coming when shabbiness would be a sign of patriotism. The other week the Financial Secretary to the Treasury took up that remark and passed it on to an assembled multitude. He is not himself showing in that way very much evidence of patriotism. I want to deal with one particular item of the Purchase Tax. We were told by the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he presented the proposed new increases in the tax that it would not apply to utility clothing. Are the Chancellor and the Financial Secretary to the Treasury making certain by this heavy Purchase Tax that the best type of clothing will be reserved for those who have the most money, as the best food would be reserved in the restaurants under the suggestion made by the hon. Lady?
We cannot discuss the principle of the Purchase Tax, but only the proposed increases.
I am dealing with the proposed increases, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, and I am asking whether the tax is to be increased in order to ensure that the masses of the workers will not be able to buy any of the better types of clothing, but will be condemned to be the shabby patriots.
Perhaps I might now answer some of the questions which have been put. The hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) seems to think it doubtful whether any will be answered but I will try to do my best with some of them. On the question of the quality of utility clothing, the hon. Member must consult the President of the Board of Trade. The Treasury does a great many things, but it has not yet gone into the clothing business. I cannot make any statement about that because it is not within my competence. [An HON. MEMBER: "Are any suits made yet?"] I do not know whether any have been made yet. I am looking forward to having one, if I have any coupons left. There is now a coupon currency in addition to a money currency.
Perhaps I might make a general observation upon the framework of the Purchase Tax which might satisfy the hon. Lady the Member for the Combined English Universities (Miss Rathbone) and other Members who asked questions on that subject. The Purchase Tax as we passed it in this House is a tax on chargeable goods at what may roughly be called the wholesale stage. Food is exempt from the tax. None of the suggestions which the hon. Lady was discussing could arise. The hon. Member for Merthyr Tydfil (Mr. S. O. Davies) asked about knotted rugs; that is rather a technical point, but I will look into it. Many of the phrases used in the Purchase Tax schedules are very technical in character and do not always mean what they might appear to the hon. Member and to me to mean, because they are trade terms. He asked whether X-rays came under the increase, like cameras; they are not chargeable goods at present and they are exempt.
That leaves me with the question which was raised on the subject of account books. Again, this is a very technical matter. I think I can best explain it by saying that the Resolution provides for the abolition of the present exemption in favour of
I will give one or two examples of the kind of anomaly which arose, because they show the difficulties. Ruled foolscap was taxable, but account ruled paper was not taxable, under the exemption. Everybody can see that that is an almost impossible proposition from the point of view of the printers. Ordinary address labels were taxable but price tickets, laundry tag labels, work progress tickets, which are very much the same sort of thing but which are used in factories, because it could be alleged that they, somehow, came into the accounting of the firm, became exempt. Those examples show that we had to find some way of dealing with this matter. The result has been, in consequence of all these anomalies and uncertainties, that everybody concerned agreed that there were only two alternatives. One was to exempt the lot and the other was to tax the lot, and thus to do away with all those fine distinctions.
It will not be very difficult for the House to guess what the answer was to be. If you exempted the lot the cost would have been between £2,000,000 and £3,000,000. One cannot be certain about these things, but such a course might have led to some extravagance in the use of paper. People would not have been so careful to see that they used the smallest sizes and chose the most economical way of doing things. There might have been wasteful use, fancy printing and all the rest of it. Therefore, rather than do that, and in view of the amount of revenue which was involved, we decided to propose to the House to abolish the exemption altogether and tax all forms of stationery at the basic rate. Anybody who consults the printers' organisations will discover that this matter has been a regular bugbear to them and that the best way is to abolish all the anomalies which arose from the uncertainty, in the way proposed. I hope I have made this matter clear and that I have satisfied the inquirers.
May I ask whether the proposal' includes blank account books, unruled?
It covers the words in the Resolution, which are
"account books and plain books, whether ruled or not."
They are to be taxed instead of being exempted. A further point was made which I will answer in reference to paragraph ( b ) of the Resolution. I can only say that it is proposed in the Finance Bill to provide for the extension of those powers to include the making of orders for the charge of tax at any one of the three rates in lieu of any other, and that such change will be the subject, as is now the case, of an affirmative Resolution of the House.
May I say that the hon. and gallant Gentleman, in dealing with the question of account books, has not addressed himself to the point which has been made, that much of the need these days for account books is due to accounting caused by Government action. Records have to be kept in respect of rationed customers and the like in shops, and the action that is being taken now shows that the Government are placing a responsibility for the purchase of account books upon traders and, in addition to compelling them to incur an additional expense for the purchase of the books, are now taxing them heavily on that additional expenditure. Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman address himself to that consideration and to the need for such forms of account books being exempted?
I am sorry I did not make it clear. They were all exempted before, but then we had all these borderline cases raising the question as to what was or what was not an account book, and it is to get away from all these anomalies and difficulties that this proposal is made. It is a matter for regret that a good deal of accounting is necessary in these days, but that is part of our general troubles. I am sure that my hon. Friend will see, on reflection, that this clean-cut way of dealing with the problem is the only way. We did try to exempt them, but it did not work.
Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Income Tax
Twelfth Resolution read a Second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
I do not want to deal with the tax as a whole, but to put one point to the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I think he is familiar with the case; I have raised it in Questions to the Treasury on more than one occasion. Some months after the outbreak of the war, the Government decided to appoint an Observer Corps, and I received a communication from a member of the corps asking me about the 1s 3d. per hour paid for serving in it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer at that time gave me an answer on the Floor of the House to the effect that the 1s 3d. per hour paid to members of the Observer Corps was to be regarded as out-of-pocket expenses.
I am afraid the hon. Member is out of Order in raising the matter on this Resolution, and I am not sure that he can raise it on any of the others. I will consider that when we come to it, but this is merely a question of the charge of Income Tax.
I was trying to get a definition from the hon. and gallant Gentleman of what is income. We have had a definition of account books, ruled books and plain books. Will he tell me now whether the 1s 3d. per hour paid to members of the Observer Corps by way of out-of-pocket expenses is regarded by the Treasury as income for the purpose of assessing Income Tax?
The hon. Member's ingenuity is well known, but I am afraid I cannot allow him to raise that point now.
Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Higher Rates of Income Tax for 1941–42
Thirteenth Resolution read a Second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
May I try again on this Resolution?
Hardly on this one, as it concerns Surtax. I think the hon. Member will agree that that is hardly appropriate.
It refers to higher rates of Income Tax for 1941–42. May I put it this way? The people to whom I have referred, and a goodly number of whom have written to me, are now receiving larger incomes because they are in the Observer Corps—
To such an extent that they have to pay Surtax? I think the hon. Member must try again later on.
Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Remaining Resolutions agreed to.
Report [16th April]
Postponed Resolution:
Amendment of Law
"That it is expedient to amend the law relating to the National Debt and the Public Revenue, and to make further provision in connection with Finance."
Considered, and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Captain Crookshank.
Finance Bill,
"to grant certain Duties, to alter other Duties and to amend the law relating to the Public Revenue and the National Debt, and to make further provision in connection with Finance "; presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time upon the next Sitting day, and to be printed. [Bill 24.]
National Loans Bill
Order for Second Reading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."—[ Captain McEwen .]
I wish to speak only for a few moments on this Bill, which authorises the raising of loans. I note a considerable increase as compared with the similar Measure passed last year. This question of loans really raises two points of interest. One is that the loan must be raised in the manner which causes as little inflation as possible, and secondly, that it should be raised in the manner which imposes as small a burden as possible of interest on the future. As regards the effect of these loans, we have the guidance given to us by Lord Simon when he introduced the first war Budget in September, 1939. He used certain words which we should constantly bear in mind because they contain a warning as to the method of raising these loans. The words he used, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, were:
I think all of us feel that we are financing this war, as regards the rate of interest, at a much more satisfactory level than the last war. We must not, however, be blind to the fact, that the loans which this Bill authorises keep piling up at a far faster rate than the loans during the last war. Even though the interest is 2½ or 3 per cent. as against 5½ per cent. in the last war, if we are raising double the amount per year the total burden on the future will be the same. I wonder whether, even now, it might not be possible not only to reduce the average rate of interest now, but, as the Chancellor mentioned in his Budget speech, to keep the rate reduced after the war. The value of the lower rate of interest as an instrument of national financial policy has not, I think, ever been fully realised in this country, or in this House until quite recently. But it was pointed out recently by the new school of economists that a low rate of interest is of enormous benefit in stimulating capital into the risks of production. That is the latest discovery of our modern economists. That discovery is at least 700 years old. I notice that some 700 years ago—I think it was somewhere about 1240, Pope Innocent IV said the following: moments to refer to a scheme which I think is workable. It is dealt with in a remarkably able booklet entitled "The Twentieth Century Economic System." The system is as follows: pass legislation making it a statutory obligation on the joint stock banks to hold 10 per cent. of cash, and securities equal to cash, of all their deposits—
The hon. Member is going right outside the scope of the Second Reading of this Bill.
I bow to your Ruling, Sir, and I would only say in general terms that I will defer to another occasion what I think is a quite reasonable and practical proposal. I feel that with the enormous figures of expenditure rising almost day by day, with the deficiency between expenditure and receipts from loans and taxation, we shall have to consider seriously some improvements in the technique of our finance to reduce the burden of interest on future generations in this country.
The hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Loftus) has put before us a number of considerations which are of the greatest importance. I agree with him that we have to be careful of two things: first, that there should not be any inflationary gap—or, at any rate, any larger gap than is absolutely necessary—and, secondly, that the smaller the liability which is left on the country for the repayment of loan, the better. If we were to fail in our duty on either of those two points the country would, after the war, be in a very grave position. We have finished, so far as the Resolutions before the House are concerned, the consideration of the taxation proposals; we are now on the loan proposals. But it must be clear that we shall only relieve the country of liability in future in so far as we reduce the loans, as far as may be, through the extension of the tax revenue, and do not engage on an inflationary course, which I know the Chancellor of the Exchequer is endeavouring to avoid. It must be clear to the Chancellor, and to the whole House, that the burdens which are falling on the country in the form of taxation are very severe, and that, after the war, if we are to have a period of prosperity, it will not be an easy matter for the citizens of this country to bear burdens of the magnitude of those that they are bearing at present. The very high rates of taxation that are being imposed carry with them the obligation of seeing that they are equitable and that they are made in a form as easy for the taxpayer to shoulder as possible. No doubt, we shall be reverting to these matters again at a comparatively early date. I do not see that we need to have that delay, which it has been the practice in previous years to have, between the different stages of these various finance measures; and it may be to the advantage of the Chancellor if some of us who have views as to the modification of the situation put them before him in a written form, which he can consider at his leisure, before the further stages of these finance measures come before the House.
I want to elaborate, very briefly, a question which I put to the Chancellor to-day, and which he indicated might be dealt with on this occasion: namely, the method of raising money, of which this Bill is partly the instrument. At present we have a very heavy floating debt, and we have a certain amount of debt of short date, which the Chancellor proposes to convert into longer-dated debt, and on which he proposes to pay a little more in the way of interest.
No.
I gathered that the Chancellor was proposing to convert 2½per cent. loan into 3 per cent. loan.
No. In fact, the terms are better from the taxpayer's point of view.
Then I understand that the Chancellor's point is that he is converting a short-dated debt into a longer-dated debt on better terms. If so, he is proceeding in the direction in which I want him to go. But I suggest that, instead of dealing with our debt in this piecemeal, and time-honoured, manner, of limited issues, he should proceed to deal with our floating debt and short-term debt on a different basis from that which he and his advisers have hitherto accepted. Every time a new issue is made there are charges. I do not know how far the better terms take into account the cost of commission and other charges, but I suspect that much of this debt is being funded, or converted, in order to provide some work for issuing houses, which are having a lean time at present. If the Chancellor is going to deal comprehensively with our heavy burden of floating debt, as he must do at some time, he should do it on less orthodox lines than those adopted in the past. It would be quite easy to fund a lot of that debt now if the Chancellor was prepared to pay the price of a high rate of interest. I think the Chancellor would agree that we should fund as much of our floating debt as we can on economical lines, because that floating debt is always a serious danger to our country. That will have an inflationary effect; and it seems to me that, after the war probably, the Chancellor will have to deal with that matter. If he acts in the conventional way, of going to the money market, he will have to pay more in interest, and perhaps in Stock Exchange charges.
My second point was the commission paid to stockbrokers. This type of business is considered very easy money in the stock markets. A rate of 2s. 6d. per cent. does not sound a lot; but it is a lot when you are issuing hundreds of millions of pounds worth of stock. The Chancellor was able to announce to-day that he had been able, by arrangement with the appropriate parties, to reduce that charge to 1s. 3d. per cent.; but I believe that he could still further reduce those charges; and I believe that he ought to do so. The staffs of stockbrokers have been considerably reduced through the war; the stockbrokers' overhead charges cannot be so heavy as in the past; and, at any rate, in raising these vast sums for national purposes, he should follow the principle which operates in the making of munitions of war. It is an accepted principle to-day that there should be no profit made out of war. I suggest that in the money market there are still considerable profits, which ought to be taxed; and the way to do it is to ask for even lower stockbrokers' charges than those which the Chancellor has announced to-day. It seems strange that the Chancellor has come to the conclusion, or has been advised, that a charge of 2s. 6d. per cent. is excessive only now, after the war has been going on for more than two years. I expect this was just a little jam for us, as is so often given when new legislation is brought in. The hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Loftus) has attempted to introduce features with which many Members will be in great sympathy. I hope that the occasion will soon arise when we can tackle the Chancellor on this subject. We are creating a large burden of debt, and there seems to be no way out of our difficulties. We seem to be getting more and more into a morass. If we are to get out of it, we have to adopt different methods from those advocated in this Bill.
I have very little to say in reply to my hon. Friends who have put certain considerations to me. I have noted what has been said by my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Loftus), and would be glad to receive from my right hon. Friend the proposals that I understand he is going to send to me before we come to the Finance Bill. I was glad to hear what he said as to there being no necessity for a prolonged delay between the various stages. As I informed the House on the last occasion when I spoke, I hope in view of the desirability of getting certain of the proposals confirmed by Parliament, to bring in the Finance Bill at an early date. It will be obvious to the House that there is good reason why I should expedite these proceedings. I have noted what my hon. Friend the Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Bellenger) has just said, and I will examine his proposals carefully.
As no doubt it was rather difficult to follow the statement I read to the House I would like to make it plain that on and after 1st May the present issue of three per cent. Savings Bonds should be replaced by a new issue of three per cent. Savings Bonds to be on tap as hitherto. I was encouraged to make that announcement because of the success of the previous issue which reached the very considerable sum of £680,000,00. There are three changes between the terms of the present issue of savings bonds and those of the new issue, namely, in the length of the bond, in the interest dates, and in the minimum subscriptions. On the existing bonds the interest dates are 15th February and 15th August. They have been changed to 1st March and 1st September in order to spread the charge to the Exchequer.
A point that has occasionally been raised here by hon. Members in all parts of the House has been in regard to the minimum subscription, and it has been suggested that £100- for the bank issue is too high, especially for subscribers who already hold some of the bonds. Obviously, some minimum is necessary in order to avoid the administrative expense of small subscriptions, and, therefore, I decided that it was reasonable that the Post Office register of savings bonds and defence bonds should be available for such subscriptions. Therefore, I have made a limit. The minimum subscription to the new bonds of the Bank of England issue will be £50 instead of £100, as hitherto, and to Post Office and Trustee Savings Bonds £10 instead of £25. I have also noted what my hon. Friend has said about the rates of commission. I have, as he observed, decided to retain the half-a-crown per cent. for the longer Savings Bonds while reducing it to 1s. 3d. per cent. for the shorter National War Bonds. That preserves the relation between the rates of commission payable on purchases of similar Government stocks on the market, the later rates of which are generally ⅛ per cent. for long stock and 1/16 per cent. for shorts. My hon. Friend will also see that I had some object in view, because I particularly want to give greater encouragement to subscriptions to the longer issues. As I have said, I am indebted to hon. Friends in all parts of the House for the consideration they have given to these particular Resolutions. We shall be able to consider these matters further when we reach the Finance Bill, which I hope to be able to introduce at an early date.
Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time," put, and agreed to.
Bill read a Second time; committed to a Committee of the whole House, and immediately considered in Committee, pursuant to the Order of the House this day; reported, without Amendment; read the Third time, and passed.
Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms (House of Commons)
Ordered,
"That Sir James Edmondson be discharged from the Select Committee on Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms (House of Commons) and that Mr. Arthur Young be added to the Committee."—[ Captain McEwen .]
National Expenditure
Ordered,
"That Mr. Higgs be discharged from the Select Committee on National Expenditure, and that Mr. Culverwell be added to the Committee."—[ Captain McEwen .]
The remaining Orders were read, and postponed .
Invasion Committees
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[ Captain McEwen .]
I and one or two of my hon. Friends desire to direct the attention of the House for a short time to the problem of invasion committees, which was the subject of a statement to the House by the Lord President of the Council on 24th March last. The subject, even in the strictly and carefully moderated language of the Lord President, is an important one—I should have said a very important one—affecting, should invasion actually take place, the lives and property of, maybe, every citizen in this country. Already, as we have heard from the Home Secretary, some thousands of these invasion committees have been, or are being, set up, and a great many more thousands of British citizens are now devoting careful thought to the matter. I would add that even more thousands are paying no attention to it whatever, which is rather a disturbing reflection at this time. Therefore, it is a matter worthy of being brought to the notice of the House and worthy of a short, but reasonable Debate, and I am grateful to the hon. Lady the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Home Security and her Department for having come to meet us to-day.
I know that the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, though he is absent, I understand, on important official business, nevertheless welcomes the opportunity of a discussion on this matter. I wish to put to the hon. Lady a number of questions, and I hope that before the Debate closes she will be able to give us an answer to most of them, The questions are important and I am certain that it will serve the interest of her Department immensely if she is able to produce satisfactory replies. The first question I would put to her is. How urgent is the creation of these invasion committees: or, to put it in another way. Is invasion regarded as likely or imminent or inevitable? We have had some discussion of that already. The Home Secretary said in this House the other day that the House had not been told that invasion was imminent, that the House had been told that invasion was always possible, and that we should be prepared for it. There is some discrepancy in Government opinion upon this point because it is only a few months ago that a Member of the War Cabinet stated that, at any rate in his view, the situation was much more serious. I will quote his words: committees," then the response will be very different indeed.
That is the first question. Here is the second question. Is the Minister of Home Security satisfied with the means taken to create these invasion committees? Of course, no one doubts their need or the wisdom of setting up these committees, but I should have thought that the first requisite would be to ensure that in inaugurating what may be a vital organisation throughout the country, these committees shall at the start have the confidence and the co-operation of the people. An important element in winning that confidence is, obviously, the method of creating these committees. What has been the method adopted for creating these committees? The Lord President told us on 24th March: of which I represent in this House, it is true to say that no consultation whatever has taken place with the county council prior to the establishment of some 37 or 38 defence committees in that county. I asked the Home Secretary on 15th April about that and his reply was:
The county, acting upon the instructions contained in the hon. Lady's Circular No. 144 of 1939 divided its area into seven sub-areas. Each of them was a separate unit and each had a sub-controller in charge, assisted by representatives of all the various services, those very services which the hon. Lady and the Regional Commissioner are now indicating as the services which should be represented on the invasion committees. The county council created those seven separate sub-areas, each quite self-sufficient, each with its own sub-controller, to do almost precisely what the new invasion committees are now intended to do. In fact, there was in existence in Fife a series of seven large invasion committees covering the whole county, and not just parts of it, as is now the case. They were manned by the elected representatives of the people, or by their nominees, and they fitted in harmoniously with the scheme already in operation for the general civil and military defence of the area. For all those reasons, therefore, they enjoyed the confidence and warm support of the civilian population.
I ask the hon. Lady—bearing these peculiar facts in mind, bearing in mind the energy and enterprise of the county, which were recognised by the authorities, who complimented the county—is it surprising that the imposition by an outside authority, namely, the Regional Commissioner, without any previous warning or any kind of consultation, of an entirely new scheme, which appeared, and I am bound to say, in many respects, still appears, to be merely a duplication of the present scheme and thereby caused confusion of effort and upset the full and well-considered plans already in operation, has caused immediate and intense resentment among the local authority representatives? My hon. Friends and I were present at a conference in Cupar the other day, at which representatives of all political parties attended. The hon. Lady's own party were most resentful of all, because they felt that the democratic system was being overrun by certain authorities from outside. Why was this new, undemocratic, tactless method adopted? I ask the hen. Lady—and I hope she will take note of this specific question—whether the Regional Commissioner for Scotland was instructed by her Department to write to the county council, as he did on 5th February in these words: The Regional Commissioner is apparently amazed that the democratically-elected local authority should have any interest in these invasion committees, committees which were set up, according to the Lord President of the Council, to protect the lives and homes of the civilian population, committees which, the Lord President insisted, should have as chairman a civilian and not a soldier. The Regional Commissioner, apparently acting on instructions from the Department, expressed amazement that the county council should want to know about these committees. The suggestion of the Regional Commissioner was contrary to the assurance given by the Lord President of the Council on 24th March, when he said:
I want to ask one further question. Is it wise to confine these invasion committees to only certain towns and villages in the country? I am sure the hon. Lady will appreciate that this question gets very much to the root of the whole problem. The Lord President indicated that the importance or vulnerability of any particular town or area was to be the chief condition in the mind of the Regional Commissioner in deciding whether or not to set up an invasion committee. If it was important or vulnerable, there was to be an invasion committee; if it was not one or the other, there was to be no invasion committee. It follows, accordingly, that only certain places are to have invasion committees. The Regional Commissioner for Scotland has gone a good bit further, because in his Circular he said that only certain places are to be defended. So there is the extraordinary situation that, in effect, you are telling the people of some towns that they must be up and doing and prepared to ward off the invaders, whereas to others you are saying: "Do not bother because we are not going to defend your village in any case." In effect, that is what is said. Is that wise or prudent from any point of view? [An HON. MEMBER: "Or true?"] That is for the hon. Lady to explain. But every circular that has appeared, every interview that we have had, has led all of us to precisely that conclusion, that you are saying publicly that you will defend some areas and that some you will not defend. In some areas you create invasion committees and in some areas you do not, and you do not because you are not going to defend them.
I want to ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is right in saying that these statements have been made publicly? The question is in my mind whether some of the statements that are being made by the hon. Gentleman are suitable statements to be made in a Public Session. That consideration is very much in my mind as I hear him proceeding with the case he is making. However, the hon. Gentleman has as much responsibility from that point of view as I have. I simply put it to him that I think it desirable that he should have that point in mind.
This matter is not a point of Order, but any hon. Member must be responsible for what he says. I should think that some things the hon. Member is saying might be of great interest to the enemy.
That may well be, but everything that I am saying was contained, plainly or by implication, in the statement that was made by the Lord President of the Council. If there is anything left, it was contained in the statement issued to the local authorities in Scotland by the Regional Commissioner.
I would remind the hon. Gentleman that he has been quoting from a secret document.
With great respect, it was not a secret or confidential document. The document was sent to the local authorities and in the Fife newspapers, for the past three weeks, these matters have been publicly referred to in reports of the public sessions of the local authority.
May I point out that the hon. Gentleman has been saying almost the exact opposite to what was in the circular? Paragraph 3 of the circular, dated 25th March, reads:
"While the absence of an invasion committee from any particular small burgh or village does not imply that the place will not be defended against enemy attack.…"
That is the exact opposite of what the hon. Member has said.
I know that statement, but let the hon. Lady read a little further. I assure her that the impression conveyed upon the local people is precisely the opposite; we shall welcome a reply from her if that is not so. I wish to repeat what I was saying. Who is to know whether one area is more vulnerable than another? Has Hitler at any time done the thing which the military authorities expected? Who is to say that the centre of Yorkshire or Perthshire is any less vulnerable than Fife? Is it wise, from any point of view, to say to certain areas, "We think you are less vulnerable than other areas, and therefore we shall not bother about your area"? I am keen to help these committees, and I will do everything I can to help set them up, but I am raising this matter to get rid of misunderstanding. Would it not be infinitely wiser and more sensible to say that the whole country is vulnerable, which, of course, everyone recognises to be the case, and set up invasion committees to cover the whole area? I have not the slightest doubt that that will happen in the end. We have seen it happen in other cases. First of all, there was no compulsion in the Home Guard, then there was compulsion in certain areas, and lastly, after pressure, compulsion was extended to all areas. The same thing will happen here. Why do the Government wait to be pushed and bullied to do the sensible thing? Why do they not do this plain piece of common sense now, regarding the whole of the country as vulnerable, and establishing invasion committees everywhere? I say to them: For heaven's sake take into the closest consultation the local authorities which are elected by the people to do this very job.
I want to endorse what has been said by the hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart). I say that as the Member for West Fife, which shows that East and West can meet with advantage. The Fife Members are with the council on this question. After going over all the documents, and hearing all the reports, we are quite satisfied that there have been no consultations with the Fife County Council regarding the setting up of these invasion committees. After the meeting of the Fife County Council I went to see the Regional Commissioner at Edinburgh, and he told me that a letter marked "Secret" represented consultation with the Fife County Council. I want to ask the representative of the Home Office whether it is the decision of the Ministry of Home Security that a letter marked "Secret" and sent to an official can be relayed to a public body, and whether that applies to all letters marked "Secret."
The hon. Member is asking a question which is partly addressed to me. He asks whether a document addressed to a public official and marked "Secret" is to be considered secret only to that official. I say "No." The contents of the document which are to be kept secret must be considered secret by the people who are interested and are dealing with it, and should not be regarded as a personal matter for the official himself.
I should be satisfied if the Ministry of Home Security endorsed the hon. Member's statement, because it means that a document marked "Secret" is not secret. Once it is relayed to a public body it ceases to be secret. We are to have a Secret Session very shortly, and I would advise the Prime Minister, in no circumstances to give away any secrets. Even though it is decided that the document should be relayed to a public body, it does not represent consultation. I object to a public official being put in a position of receiving a letter marked "Secret," and then being challenged because he did not relay its contents to a public body. If he had relayed its contents to a public body and then had been challenged, he might have found himself in prison.
My talk with the Regional Commissioner and his assistant was very interesting. This document, to which the hon. Member for East Fife referred, is one of the most amazing documents I have ever read. It confounds not only the Member for East Fife and the Minister for Home Security, but also those responsible for its production. I would draw the attention of the hon. Lady to the fact that the first sentence reads:
I am afraid that the hon. Member has forgotten a precedent in this matter. On the last occasion when this country was invaded, that is, in 1725, by the Scots, my native Manchester's defences were in the hands of the local authority, and history relates that the town of Manchester was taken by one sergeant and a drummer-boy.
When there is an invasion from Scotland it is quite clear that everyone here would be incapable of doing his job, especially when my hon. Friend represents the type of defender we should have to face. We are not suggesting that the local authority should be responsible for defence. The military authority is responsible for defence, but the local authority should have consultation and have a measure of responsibility for maintaining the morale of the civil population.
To come to the document, paragraph 6 reads: that meeting of the Fife County Council by the Labour members. They realised, what the hon. Lady should realise, that this attempt to impose committees of this character from above can never in any circumstances win the confidence of the people who are to be affected by anything that the committees do, and therefore can never help to carry out the concluding sentence—encouraging the population to stand firm in an emergency. We want to see the population standing firm, and the men and women who could ensure that are those who are in contact with them and in whom they have confidence, and they should be selected in the setting-up of the committees.
The County of Fife, or the Kingdom of Fife, as it is sometimes called, has a grand tradition of independence, and it is running true to that tradition to-day, because in all broad Scotland Fife is the only county which is finding any real difficulty in the matter. The sketch that we have been given by the hon. Member for West Fyfe (Mr. Gallacher) of how the Fife committees are setting about their work, if it is accurate, fills me with some perturbation. I have some experience of the work of raising these committees in the West of Scotland, because at the headquarters on which I am a member of the staff we are, in concert "with the District Commissioner, responsible for raising these committees in II counties. The procedure which the hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart) has outlined has not, in fact, given rise to any trouble or misapprehension there, but it is not for me to defend that procedure, but for the hon. Lady who will reply for the Government. It came in the form of a letter marked "Secret" to the county clerk, and he regarded it as a confidential document to lay before his Committee. The general experience has been in these 11 counties in the West that some are slower than others to take it up but that the pivot has been the chairman selected on the advice of the local authority. The military member is not the chairman in any case. He is there to advise the committee on military matters and help them in their preparations. The chairman is the key man in the committee and as I say in most cases he is the nominee of the county council, or in the case of a small burgh of the town council.
About 150 of these committees have been set up in Scotland and about the same number are in process of being set up. My hon. Friend mentioned that in Fife there were about 35. The position is, I think, that about one-half of these have been set up and that the other half are in process of being set up. My hon. Friend the Member for East Fife said that Fife had set up a good organisation before this project was put forward and had already got some seven committees in being. It is a great credit to them that they have done that work, but he will admit, I think, that these committees covered too large areas to carry 6ut the functions with which the present committees are intended to deal. The fact that Fife is now proposing to have 35 or more committees shows that it would have been necessary to come down to much smaller areas. The point raised by my hon. Friend as regards defence was really answered by the hon. Lady when she rose to point out the reference in the circular to the fact that if a committee is not formed that must not be taken to mean that a place will not be defended against the enemy. That would be quite a wrong conclusion. The question whether a committee is formed or not may be dictated by other reasons, some of which are mentioned in the circular.
In my experience there is some demand for the formation of more of these committees, and we are from time to time getting requests from quite small places to be included in the list. While I cannot commit the Government in this matter, I believe that the enlargement of the list as suitable places are put forward is under consideration. The functions of the committee are consultative and not executive, but none the less they can be extremely valuable. If we are invaded the risk of confusion—and one of the enemy's prime objectives will be to cause the maximum amount of confusion—will be very great, and the preparatory work which can be done now in explaining to the people in simple language how they can guard against confusion and assist the military in the defence of the locality is extremely important. My hon. Friends have not denied the value of the work; their complaint was about the method by which the committees were set up. Contrary to the experience in other counties, there has I know been some trouble in this county, but I hope that it will be possible to overcome the initial difficulties and secure the most complete co-operation.
My hon. Friend the Member for East Fife said that it would help the enthusiasm of the people if the Government could make a statement as to the likelihood of invasion. That is a matter about which it is difficult to make any prophecy, but I would say that all military opinion points to the fact that Germany has not given up her intention of invading this country, and the operation, if carried out by Germany successfully, would of course be decisive as far as the United Kingdom is concerned. It is, therefore, an operation that we must regard as the greatest danger of all to guard against, and we leave nothing to chance in making every preparation against it. We cannot speak too firmly or clearly to our constituents on that risk. I, therefore, hope there will be no doubt in the minds of my hon. Friends who approach their constituents on this subject about encouraging the formation of these committees. In spite of local difficulties in Fife, the work is proceeding generally in Scotland satisfactorily. There are bound to be certain initial troubles, but I believe that these can be overcome in the Kingdom of Fife, while it maintains its old tradition of independence and prepares for a resistance which will be as fierce as or fiercer than that in any other part of Scotland, if the enemy does land. I hope that the representatives of Fife will have regard to the story of the old lady who, watching a regiment go past, said proudly:
It is not often that all the Members for Fife agree upon matters in this House. From our county comes a greater variety of political colour than comes from any county in Great Britain, but on the issue before the House now, the county and its representatives are united because we do not consider that the local authority has had a square deal or a proper say in the setting up of invasion committees. It may be that it is not a matter that concerns the local authorities, but if that is so, there was no need to consult them. It is because they are supposed to have been consulted and because we have been told in the House that county councils had been consulted that the matter is being raised to-day. I agree with my two hon. Friends that there has been no consultation with the local authority of our county. I am not committing myself to statements that have been made by some of the preceding speakers about the value of these committees. There may be a case for them, but if there is, it is because the Civil Defence committees have not been organised in such a way as to make the invasion committees unnecessary. If the Civil Defence committees had been capable of doing the work that they are supposed to do, there would have been no need for invasion committees. I have yet to be convinced that they are necessary.
When we were discussing this matter with the Regional Commissioner in Edinburgh we were told that the committees were merely consultative and were to be brought in at the last moment when the Civil Defence committees could no longer operate. My contention is that if the Civil Defence committees cannot function at the last moment the invasion committees will not be able to. I am in a peculiar position because my constituency is partly in a large burgh and partly in the county area. I have three burghs that are in the county area and one which is a large burgh. There is no interference with the large burgh by the Ministry of Home Security. It is allowed to carry on as it has been doing in the past. The Civil Defence committee there will carry on all the duties of the invasion committees that are being set up in the county area. It is only in the county area which includes a small burgh that invasion committees are being set up. I have yet to be convinced that it would not be possible for the committees which have been set up in the seven districts of that county to carry through all the functions that an invasion committee can possibly fulfil as efficiently as they will be discharged in the large burgh in my constituency which is untouched so far as invasion committee regulations are concerned.
My hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart) went into this matter in such detail that it is unnecessary for me to elaborate the different points. I quite agree with my hon. Friend the Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) that when we come to consider this document, which was supposed to be secret and which we discussed with the Regional Commissioner, we are in a difficulty. We are enjoined to preserve secrecy and not to give away information, but, at the same time, we are also urged to give information. We are to let it be known that the invasion committees have been set up in the various areas, and to broadcast the names of the members of those committees. So far as the county council is concerned, the complaint there is that the county clerk was asked in secret by the district commissioner for the names of those who should become members of the invasion committees in the various parts of the county. Perhaps the hon. Lady who is to reply will enlighten us on where the functions of the Civil Defence committees end and those of the invasion committees begin. I understand the invasion committees are supposed to begin work now and to have meetings and to discuss the various problems concerned with a possible invasion. I understood that all that was covered by the functions of the Civil Defence committees. At any rate another piece of maclinery has been created, and I am certain there will be overlapping and confusion in the duties carried through by the Civil Defence committees, which are still being preserved, and the invasion committees which are being set up.
When we examined the list of places in our county given to us by the Regional Commissioner I drew attention to the fact that a very large area in the county was to be without invasion committees. It may be that that area is regarded as free from the danger of invasion. Why it should be so regarded I do not know. It is not only the composition of the committees to which objection can be taken; there is the way in which they have been set up, and, most important of all, the functions they are to fulfil between now and the time of a possible invasion and the duties which are to be carried through by the machinery already set up under the Civil Defence Regulations. The case has been fully stated by the hon. Member for East Fife and I hope that as a result of this discussion our county may be placed in the same position as other counties.
I understand there have been consultations between local authorities and others who are responsible for the setting up of these committees. Why it did not take place in Fife is more than I can understand, because we pride ourselves as be- ing among the most advanced of the counties in Scotland. We have claimed that for many years. We are anxious that as a result of this discussion there shall be a re-examination of the position, and perhaps consultations, even at this late hour and despite the fact that many of the committees have been set up and that others are in process of being set up. More ought to be set up if invasion committees are to be in existence at all the points which are likely to be vulnerable if ever the County of Fife is invaded.
I hope there will be consultation not only about the committees to be set up but about the whole position in Fife, because I feel that from beginning to end this matter has been mishandled. Perhaps there have been some misunderstandings and nothing more than that. Perhaps the county clerk misunderstood the secret circular. Perhaps he ought to have consulted the convener of the county, but even if he did, that was not consulting the county council, and it was not satisfactory to the county. The matter was raised at the last meeting of the county council and there was strong feeling among the members, including some who had been appointed chairmen of these invasion committees, about the manner in which they had been set up in Fife. I hope the hon. Lady will be able to assure us that at least there will be a reconsideration of the situation in Fife, because if these invasion committees start in the atmosphere which is at present brooding over Fife they will find it a very unpleasant atmosphere, and instead of getting co-operation in their work they may encounter a considerable amount of hostility. I hope it will be possible to get a reasonable and satisfactory settlement of the difficulty which has arisen in the county.
We are very glad that this question has been raised, because it will make it possible for us, I hope, to clear up what are, clearly, misunderstandings. May I get one thing clear first, in reply to the hon. Member for Dunfermline (Mr. Watson). Fife has had no treatment different from that of any other county area. It still remains true, as an hon. Friend behind me has said, that there has been no complaint of any kind from any of the other county areas. I think my hon. Friends opposite will admit that at least some parts of Scotland are as advanced politically and democratically as the Kingdom of Fife, and those parts have raised no complaint about the methods we have adopted. I merely say that to show that I think there has been a certain misunderstanding on the part of the county council of Fife and necessarily, therefore, of their representatives. Therefore, I think it will be better for me to say a few words about the duties of these invasion committees and so put the whole thing into proper perspective. These invasion committees are quite different from what the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) has in mind. They are really conferences between the military authorities and the various civil authorities responsible, at the local level, for civil preparations against invasion. The military authorities receive instructions on the measures they are likely to have to take to defeat the enemy, and the civilian authorities, likewise, receive their general instructions. In the case of the Civil Defence services and the local authority services, these general instructions go down through the local authorities to their representatives in every small area or village. The business of the invasion committees is to dovetail together the various preparations being made, in order to ensure that they form a coherent whole locally. Let me give an example. The military commander may make a plan, but he may have drawn his defence line in a way that leaves out, say, an important first-aid post or an important water supply—important that is, locally. This is the kind of point that can be picked up only at the local level between the services concerned.
I do not want to get involved with the hon. Lady in a lot of unessentials in this discussion, but will she tell me what she is now saying has to do with paragraph 11, and with the invasion committee arranging for the removal, when necessary, of persons living near road blocks to previously selected accommodation of a safer character?
If the hon. Gentleman will allow me to finish I will deal in turn with all the points that he has raised. I am trying to explain to him how the thing works. I think he has the idea that the local committees are to organise separate defences, but all things in the circulars are dealt with on the basis which I have explained. They are conferences of exactly the bodies dealing with local services on the local level. All these points in the circular are included. I was merely giving this illustration. If he wishes, I can take the exact illustrations that are given in the Civil Defence circular, but that would be only duplicating—
Please look at the circular.
Every one of these things is included. Will the hon. Member please understand that they are all included in the bodies and the local conferences of local services taking place at the local level? I really cannot make it clearer than that. [ Interruption .] I am sorry, but I can only tell the hon. Gentleman as plainly as I can. While we have given these conferences necessarily a formal character by describing them as invasion committees, they would, in the ordinary way, have been held quite often by the members of these services as a matter of course, in order to get their joint plans into shape. As in all these questions of invasion and of getting the country ready as a whole, the process has been a gradual one. We have been feeling our way. For example, in the first instance, it was decided between the Regional Commissioner—or, in Scotland, the District Commissioner—and the appropriate military authority that these committees should be formally set up in places of military importance. I want hon. Members, especially from Scottish constituencies, to be clear about this matter. Most of the matters to which the hon. Gentleman has referred, are matters of history rather than of the present. In the early stages, the places where committees should be set up were decided upon having regard to the military importance of the places in question and there was, necessarily, some element of secrecy about the arrangements.
As hon. Members have said, the position in the case of Fife was that the Regional Commissioner explained to the District Commissioner at Dundee, in a letter dated 24th November, the policy to be followed in setting up these committees. He asked him to make the necessary appointments, after consulta- tion with the area planner, as to the places in which the committees were to be formed. The District Commissioner explained the essential features of the scheme to the county clerk of Fife, in a letter, as hon. Members have said, marked "Secret." That letter was dated 12th December. The District Commissioner asked the county clerk to submit the names and other necessary particulars of senior local Civil Defence officers, who would act on the committee, in each of the selected small towns and villages in the county. The county clerk sent these particulars in a letter dated 19th December, which was also marked "Secret." The county clerk asked whether any similar precautions were necessary in other towns and villages in that area.
A great deal has been made out of the marking of these letters "Secret." What, in fact, was meant? The county clerk's letter was marked "Secret" in exactly the same way as the letters sent to other county clerks. He was given full information in regard to the Government proposals when he was asked to furnish the names of Civil Defence representatives. What did we mean when we said "Secret "? Obviously, we meant that such a letter should not be read out in full council meeting, with Press representatives present, but it did not debar him, any more than it debarred other county clerks, from consulting his convenor and, if necessary, his Civil Defence committee. The Civil Defence committees, as everybody knows who is in any way connected with them, receive information of a secret character which we intend should be kept secret, and which is not read out in full council meeting. I ask the three hon. Members, and particularly- the hon. Member for West Fife, who has raised this matter so strongly, to remember that we are dealing with military matters and questions of invasion. However desirable it may be, it is not possible to organise resistance to invasion after you have had a public debate about it and passed resolutions. A great deal of the work which has to be done has to be kept secret. No one knows that better than certain Friends of the hon. Gentleman. Therefore, these matters have to be communicated as matters of precaution to those responsible for the Civil Defence arrangements.
I do not intend to make the expected remark to what the hon. Lady has just said. No doubt the hon. Lady is speaking from inside knowledge. When a letter is sent out marked "Secret," who is responsible for deciding to whom the contents of that letter will be conveyed? Is it the official who is responsible for sending out the letter, or the recipient of the letter? Who is responsible for making that decision?
I want the hon. Gentleman to realise that this letter sent to the County Clerk of Fife, which has raised so much controversy, is not something quite separate and apart. It is the sort of letter which is sent out by every post to responsible officials, who receive from various Government Departments letters that are marked "Secret." It is a thoroughly well-understood practice. It may not have been at the very beginning, but we are now dealing with December, 1941, and by that time there was a general understanding as to what the word "Secret" meant.
Maybe there is by now, but not then.
Yes, by that time. There are all kinds of similar things. There is "Secret," "Most secret," and "Very secret"—and, I have no doubt, "Definitely very secret," but all those are very well understood gradations and the County Clerk is perfectly accustomed to receiving letters of that kind. No other County Clerk in Scotland, and no other County Council in Scotland, except Fife, which is different in many ways as the hon. Gentleman would admit—
No,' they are much more sensible in many ways.
The point is that this was a well understood procedure. In any case, it is understood that the Civil Defence committee, or at any rate its convener, could be informed and consulted by the County Clerk. I would, however, put to the hon. Gentleman another point to show that it was never intended that the existence and location of invasion committees should be concealed from the county councils. For example, the arrangements made for dealing with the expenses of invasion committees were that, within the very limited field in which ex- penditure might be incurred, the committees could put in their claims to the county council. Obviously, in order to deal with those claims, it was necessary for the county council to know in confidence where the committees were situated. It was not until February, 1942, that the County Clerk wrote to the Regional Commissioner protesting, on behalf of the Civil Defence committee, that the arrangements for setting up invasion committees should not be conducted by secret instructions. In the course of his reply on 5th February, the Regional Commissioner indicated that he saw no reason why the Civil Defence committee should not be made aware of the steps which were being taken to appoint committees in the county, but explained that those committees were in no sense committees of the local authority. The reason why invasion committees at this stage were being treated as secret in character was precisely because they were being set up in areas of military importance. I am dealing now with this first stage, where first things had to come first, and I can imagine no information that would have been more welcome to Mr. Hitler than a list of those areas regarded as of such primary importance for invasion purposes that the first committees to be set up were set up in those areas. Any widespread disclosure might have communicated those facts to the enemy.
In later correspondence, the County Clerk developed the point that the new organisation was likely to cut across the organisation which exists for the purpose of Civil Defence, and this point has been raised again in this House to-day by the hon. Member for Dumfermline (Mr. Watson). Fife, for Civil Defence purposes, is divided up into seven areas, and the view of the Regional Commissioner, which has the entire approval of my Minister, is that it would be impossible to organise invasion preparations in Fife on the basis of such large areas as are represented by these seven divisions. It would be against all the purpose of what I have tried to explain that these invasion committees should cover wide areas like that. In that case they would overlap Civil Defence, and it is because they are not to overlap Civil Defence, and because they are in essence committees for small areas, that it was impossible to agree to the locations suggested by the Fife County Council.
These committees necessarily have to proceed on the basis that relatively small communities may be cut off and may need to become self-sufficient. That is why I say they are not overlapping the work of general Civil Defence. The whole object of the invasion committee organisation is to secure self-sufficiency in the small towns, villages and rural areas. The organisation for invasion at that level—and I want to underline that—is quite different from that which is suitable for Civil Defence, where one may assume that communications will remain open and the organisation can cover a fairly wide area. That is the real answer to the hon. Member for Dunfermline when he suggests that large burghs are left to go their own way without interference and that it is only the small places which have to have invasion committees. That is not some kind of class distinction, it is part of the general plan for these small areas where invasion committees are set up and may become of primary importance in time of invasion. That is why the invasion committees have no executive powers the exercise of which would embarrass the local authority administration. If any executive action is taken, it is taken by the individual members of the committee in the exercise of the powers of their respective posts, with direct responsibility not to the invasion committee but to the higher authorities of their services, including, in respect of local authority services, the local authority. May I just get this clear, because I think this is really what is troubling hon. Members.
it is meaningless.
It may be meaningless to the hon. Member, but if he will allow me to explain it in simpler terms, perhaps he will find that so long as communications remain open the local authority retains complete control of Civil Defence and local authority services, even during an invasion itself, which is the part the hon. Member is missing altogether. If he will now go back to what I said at the beginning, here you have these small invasion committees which are in fact local conferences on the spot, but local conferences not in the sense of being a debating society but in the sense of being responsible officers of the various Government Departments. There will be one officer representing the Ministry of Health, another representing the Ministry of Food, another representing the Ministry of Home Security, another the Ministry of Transport, and so on. They all have their instructions, and those instructions are not worked out at the local level but at the highest possible level of the Civil Defence executive. At that level all these Ministers are represented, and I can assure the hon. Member that there is no muddle, confusion or overlapping there. These problems are put on the table where the responsible Ministers attend. We meet weekly, sometimes bi-weekly, we discuss these things in detail and have a plan, so that what the local committee has to do is not to make a plan but to carry out the plan which has been arranged, and which is then worked out through the various rungs of the ladder so that the man in the local area knows what he has to do. I think the hon. Member for West Fife would understand that if all that had to be done by the local committee having a debate on the subject and coming to their own conclusions, Fife, as has already been proved by this Debate, would be different from the other parts of Scotland. Then we should have the very muddle, confusion and overlapping which he suggests that the present careful plan brings about.
If these committees are composed of officers whose duty is precisely and entirely defined by the orders they receive from the county council, and if therefore these committees are as it were the servants all the time of the local authority, why was not the local authority taken into consultation?
I am so sorry. I would just like to explain that that is precisely what does not happen.
Why not?
Because these people are not all the servants of the council.
You have just said that they are.
No, I have not. The point surely is that these people are the servants of their respective Departments, not necessarily the servants of the county council. That is really where the trouble arises to some extent because there is no real necessity, if I may so put it, for these local committees to be in touch with the county council except in so far as the various Civil Defence preparations are concerned.
The hon. Lady is asking us to understand. May I invite her to understand? We understand precisely what she is saying. We are asking, since there is in Fife a county civil defence committee, an organisation representative of all the Departments, already in existence, and as it is already doing some part of the work, why was that body not consulted? That is the trouble.
Because, as I have tried to explain, they could only be consulted on one point, that is, the question of personnel. The plans to be carried out were not made at county council level. They were made at Government level. That is the shortest way I can put it. You have got now these local invasion committees.
There is a fog over them.
I am sorry. I have tried to make them as clear as I possibly can. I can only say that, with a lot of interruptions, I am trying to put before hon. Members exactly the work these invasion committees have to do. If the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) will forgive me, a good deal of the misunderstanding that has arisen in his mind is because he imagines that what these committees are to do is something entirely different from what their functions in fact will be. That is why he has made such play with his statement, "Don't worry boys; you will only have to do this when invasion takes place." It has already been said by the Lord President, and it has been made clear in all the documents, that the ordinary Civil Defence arrangements held good until communication has actually broken down, but that we are forming the invasion committees now, not that they will take executive authority, indeed they cannot, as that would create confusion and overlapping but in order that they may know what their job will in fact be if communications do break down at a time of invasion.
To a considerable extent the complaint made by the Fife county council really relates to the past, to the setting up of these original committees where the all important thing was that lists of the locations there were regarded as important from the point of view of invasion should not be separated from the rest of Scotland and be provided as very valuable information to the enemy's intelligence service. The position now has considerably changed because in fact we have extended enormously, as we always intended to do, the number of these committees. When the original committees were started, these being the most important, secrecy was absolutely essential. Then, as we got these committees going and invasion did not come, we were able to extend our preparations. We then extended considerably the number of those places in Scotland that were to have these invasion committees. Of course, the greater the number of places the less the question of secrecy arises because it is giving no particular information to the enemy that there is this large number of places concerned. We are continually hearing on the wireless that a large number of unnamed places have just been taken by the Russians and it is not regarded as being any information to the enemy, but a small number of important places are regarded as important information.
The hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart) has raised the question of the statement made by the Lord President in the House on 24th March. The official statement made by the Lord President has enabled full information about invasion committees to be provided. This was given in that circular issued by the Regional Commissioner on 25th March from which I have quoted and from which the hon. Member has quoted. Invasion committees are now regarded and accepted as a necessary piece of organisation and for the reasons I have stated the Regional Commissioner in Scotland will, in future, be able to consult the county council quite openly about the membership of these committees. Therefore, this problem, as I have said, relates very largely to the past. But while there is not the same necessity for secrecy as regards names, secrecy must be retained in one important respect. The meetings of the invasion committees must, of course, be held in private. These private meetings are necessary because the individual members, in the course of co-ordinating invasion preparations have of necessity to exchange secret information with regard to the proposals relating to their respective duties in an emergency, and to make these proposals public would be presenting the enemy with a gift of information which I do not believe that any Member of this House would allow for a moment.
I understand that the hon. Member for Dunfermline (Mr. Watson) raised at the meeting which the Regional Commissioner had with Members of Parliament, and to some extent has raised it here again, the point that it was inconsistent to use Civil Defence committees in large burghs as a nucleus of a local invasion committee. But, as I have explained, that would really be an overlapping that we want to avoid. To sum up the argument, invasion committees are essentially a local conception. That is why it is necessary to keep it clear that these separate invasion committees are for individual small towns and villages. I think I have covered the points except one or two raised by the hon. Member for East Fife. He asked me whether I could say how urgent is the creation of these invasion committees, and whether invasion is regarded as imminent, and he quoted two or three sentences from two speeches that were made. With all respect I do suggest that those two speeches were complementary and not in any sense contradictory. I cannot, I greatly regret, give the House what the precise dates of the invasion of this country by Germany will be. I do not think anyone is going to do that, but on the other hand what would be the position if we accepted the suggestion of the hon. Member, and if responsible Members of the War Cabinet and Ministers of Cabinet rank went about saying "Look here boys, you will have invasion next week; get on with the job as quickly as possible"? The crying of "wolf," as we all know, is a very double-edged sort of weapon.
Will the hon. Lady tell that to her colleagues?
I will not only tell my colleagues, but I tell my hon. Friend when he wants us to do that, that we should adopt the attitude taken by the Home Secretary. After all, the people of this country are not children. They are told, in responsible words, both by the Lord President of the Council and by the Home Secretary, that invasion is always a possibility. We shall not get notice of it; but, while the military authorities would not, and could not, admit that anybody can be given more than the very shortest amount of warning, we always have to base our plans on the assumption that "because invasion is possible, it is therefore probable "—that is the military phrase that is used frequently. It is always a possibility, and no one would he more indignant than the Members of this House if we did not make what preparations were possible. But is it not better to make these preparations, as has been done, quietly, without too much fuss, without too much publicity, and, if I may-say so, without too much consultation with people who are not immediately concerned—because there has always been consultation with the people who were immediately concerned? If the clerk to the council of Fife has had a misunderstanding, as the hon. Member for Dumfermline very reasonably said, there cannot be any misunderstanding now. But we cannot run an invasion scheme by a public debating society. There must be careful preparation for resistance, with the greatest amount of secrecy that is consistent with the largest amount of efficiency. I submit that that is what the Ministry of Home Security have tried to do, and I think their success is shown by the fact that we have had no complaint from any part of Scotland except Fife.
Will the Department try to create a better feeling and get a better understanding, because it the invasion committees are to start with a great amount of public hostility, it is a bad outlook for the scheme?
I can only say that I have tried, in the speech I have just made, to remove misunderstandings. If, however, the four Members for Fife who are present can think of any way in which I personally—as I happen to be concerned with this section of the Ministry of Home Security—or the Home -Secretary can remove any further misunderstanding, believe me, we shall be only too glad to do so. We cannot make any more public statement than I have made here to-day, which I have no doubt will appear in the Scottish Press.
Will there be consultation?
I have explained that you could not have had, in the earlier stages of the committees, any more con- sultation than there was. With regard to the present position, you can have as much consultation as you like, within the limits of the necessary secrecy; but if you ask me to go down to Fife and hold public debates on invasion, I am very sorry, but it is not in the public interest that I should do so.
Allow me to bring the Debate South of the Border. It is no secret that the Lord President of the Council has broadcast and that he has also announced the plans. South of the Border, in Yorkshire, there has been a close liaison between the Commissioner and the local authorities and Members of Parliament. We found that even in the smallest townships these invasion committees have been brought into being and know their duties. I agree that they have been appointed by nomination. Someone has asked whether the local vicar was on. Yes, and quite properly, because he knows most of the local people. I want to stress this point for the attention of the hon. Lady. In the smaller townships, the vicar can go around and inform the inhabitants immediately, without a lot of fuss, that there is going to be an invasion. With regard to the larger communities, I want to point out to the hon. Lady one difficulty which there will be in the matter of acquainting the local inhabitants with the fact that they must definitely be prepared for an invasion. I know of one invasion committee—and I am sure there are others—which is somewhat dissatisfied because in the great towns and cities there is no system—except to run around and spread the news—whereby the people can be told to get ready for invasion. I raise this point so that the hon. Lady may be able to bring it to the notice of the proper quarters. I do not raise the matter in any spirit of complaint. As I have said, in Yorkshire there is a close liaison between the Regional Commissioner, the emergency committees. Members of Parliament, and so on, but there is this one small hiatus with regard to the invasion committees. How are they to tell the people, say, 300,000 or 400,000 inhabitants, to get ready for an invasion?
Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.