497 Proposed Hospital [ 23 MARCH 1965] in M otherwe/1 49.g on this particular Committee should be HOUSE OF LORDS generailly known? THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Tuesday, 23rd March, 1965 Lords, the -Pr-ime Minister is solely respon sible for the advice which he chooses .to· The House met at half past two of g,ive to the Soverei,gn, and the Government the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the does not ,propose to depart from the pre Woolsack. cedent of its predecessors in declining to give ,information as to how he arrives at Prayers-Read by the Lord Bishop his opinion. of Liverpool
THE LATE SIR WINSTON PROPOSED HOSPITAL IN CHURCHILL: TRIBUTE FROM MOTHERWELL SENATE OF OREGON LORD FERRIER: My Lords, I beg THE LORD CHANOELLOR (LoRD leave to ask the Question which stands in GARDINER): My LO)'ds, I have to inform my name on the Order Paper. the House that I have received from the [The Question was as follows: President of rhe Senate of Oregon a Resolution adopted by the Senate on To ask Her Majesty's Government January 29, 1965, in tribute to the memory whether they are aware of the wide of the late Sir Winstou Churchill. I am spread anxiety among individuals and placing this Resolution in the Library, and local authorities in the Upper Ward of I propose, with yonr Lordships' permis Lanarkshire at the proposal to estab sion, to ex,press on your behalf the thanks lish a new general hospital in Mother of the House for the generous terms of well to take over the functions of the the Resolution. existing hospital at Law, involving a marked increase in the already great distances which patients and visitors THE MAECENAS COMMITTEE AND have to travel from a large area with HONOURS out adequate compensating advan tages; and, further, whether they are 2.37 ,p.m. satisfied that the proposed site, with its THE EARL OF ARRAN: My Lords, I already limited area, can provide suffi beg leave to ask the Question which stands cient parking space for duty, staff and in my name on the Order Pa·per. visitors' vehicles in terms of present [The Question was as follows: day and estimated future require To ask Her Majesty's Government ments.] .the membership and ,functions of the Committee commonly known as the THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY Maecenas Committee.] UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR SCOTLAND (LORD HUGHES): My THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, after considerable discussion with Lords, ,it has never been the practice to local interests, the previous Administra answer questions about the information tion approved the Regional Hospital which a Prime Minister takes into account Board's proposal that the new district in giv.ing -the Sovereign any advjce he general hospital at Motherwell should chooses to -give on the qnestion of honours. serve the Motherwell-Hamilton area and that, in addition to long-stay beds, TuE EARL OF ARRAN; My Lords, a number of acute beds in the major while thanking the noble and :learnedLord specialties should be retained at Law for his information, I ,would ask, is it not Hospital to serve the upper ward. My a fact that this Committee consists of, right honourable friend the Secretary of among others, intellectuals and represen State approves the course proposed. The tat,ives of the arts, and would Her 39-acre site at Motherwell is considered Majesty's Government not agree that since fully adequate for the intended purpose. such folk are not always eutirely objec tive in .their judgments of one another it LORD FERRIER: My Lords, while is desirable that the names of those sittfag thanking the noble Lord for his reply, Vol. 264 I Kalahari Desert 499 Bushmen of the [LORDS] 500 [Lord Fernier.] may I ask whether he is satisfied that the BUSHMEN OF THE KALAHARI authorities fully grasp the fact that, since DESERT that plan was decided, and indeed since 2.40 p.m. this Question was put down, new develop LORD ALPORT: My Lords, I beg ment plans for building in Lanarkshire leave to ask the Question wb�oh stands have been published which will alter the in my name ou the Order Paper. whole population pattern of the area so as to alter the premises upon which the [The Question was as follows : original plan was based? To ask Her Majesty's Government HUGHES whether ,they have considered t:he LORD : My Lords, I take it report of Mr. George Silberbauer on that the noble Lord is referring to the the future of tihe Bushmen of tihe proposed development at Carluke. In Kalabari, Desert and whose' responsi that case the effect of the development bility it will, be to implement its would be to increase slightly the number recommendations.] of beds required at Law. It will not affect in any way the fact that the con LORD SORENSEN: My L6rds, wiith venient centre for the densely populated permission, may I reply on beqa,l.f of my Hamilton-Motherwell area is Mother noble friend Lord Taylor, who is un well. able to be present to-day. Tfiis report, which was published in Bedmanaland LORD FERRIER: My Lords, while earlier this month, has not yet been for tb.anking the noble Lord, may I say that warded to Her Majesty's Government. the plans also include extension to build Responsibility for implemen�ing such up ,the population in Lanark, thereby recommendations ais may be accepted will increasing the number of people in the be that of the Government of �eohuana landward area of Lanarkshire, increasing land, to whom the report was submi.tted. the numbers who will have to travel larger distances than ever in order to LORD ALPORT: My Lords, in view visit patients at of the potential importance of this report receive attention or to of view of anthwpology, Motherwell? from the po�nt may I ask the Minister wihether i.t is to LORD HUGHES: My Lords, I think bt made available to the publfrc here in it is inevitable in the system of hospitals •the United Kingdom ; and, secondly, as we have them Ibat some people must whether ,the Minister will undertake that travel a certain distance to the most suit -the recommendations are acted upon able hospital. 'I1bat is a small price to before Beohuanaland becomes indepen pay for making available to them the dent? best possible medical treatment in con LORD SORENSEN: My Lords, as to venient centres, and my right honour the first part of the noble Lord's Ques able friend is satisfied that �he arrange tion, most certainly the reporit, when it ment, considered at great length by bis is received here and properly considered, predecessor and approved by him, is one will be made available ,to M�mbers of from which he wonld find difficulty in this Hause. Witll regard to the laHer departing. part of the question, I personally am unaware of whait the actual ,procedure will be, but I presume the res·po�bility in any case wiill be -tJhait ,of BecJmanaland itself and its Government, no doubt with every ·encoumgement from our Govern ment in ·this country. LORD ALPORT: My Lords, I am sorry to press t!his and I know the Minister cannot answer in the absence of Lord Taylor. But would he take this ,point to Lord Taylor, because I believe it to be of great dmporuance in th� interests of this vulnerable minority in the Bechuanaland Protectorate? 501 London Government (Public [ 23 MARCH 1965] General Acts) Order 1965 502 LORD SORENSEN: My Lords, I fully some appropriate journal, amplifying the appreciate wha,t rthe noble Lord thas said.· points that he has made? I ,am personally very interested in �his matter. I will certainly undertake to LORD SHACKLETON : My Lord1;, I convey to my noble friend Lord Taylor am much in sympathy with the noble whM :the noble Lord bas said. Lord's views. There was an article in the Scotsman on March 11, and there are available a number of documents, of which some have been published in the DEEP DIVING TECHNIQUES IN United States. The same point had ROYAL NAVY occurred to me as to the noble Lord, 2.42 p.m. that it would be a good idea if such a LoRD WAKEFIELD OF KENDAL: lecture or opportunity could be pro My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Ques vided ; and the possibility even of a tion which stands in my name on the visit to the establishment is being con Order Paper. sidered. But I take note of the noble Lord's observations, because this is one [The Question was as follows : of the most exciting and dramatic of To ask Her Majesty's Government fields, and it may be possible for a man whether they will now make a state to go down to much greater depths. ment on the progress of oxy-helium deep diving techniques by the Royal LORD WAKEFIELD OF KENDAL: Navy.] My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for that further reply, and for the THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE FOR sympathetic interest he is taking in this THE ROYAL AIR FORCE (LORD most important subject. SHACKLETON): My Lords, the decision was taken in 1962 to embark on a pro gramme of research into deep diving be. THE PALACE OF cause it had become increasingly apparent WESTMINSTER that there was a requirement for Navy divers to be able to operate in deep water LORD SHEPHERD: My Lords, at a for such tasks as the recovery of crashed suitable moment after 3.30 my noble aircraft and missiles, and, possibly, sub friend the Leader of the House will be marine escape and salvage. Since that making a Statement on the Palace of time, trials using an oxy-helium atmos Westminster. phere have been going on almost con tinuously, both in a compression chamber ashore and at sea, in which naval divers LONDON GOVERNMENT (PUBLIC have acted as subjects. So far there have GENERAL ACTS) ORDER 1965 been three main sea trial periods, the results of which have been encouraging, 2.46 p.m. Dives to a depth of 500 feet with a period THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRE of ten minutes at that depth have been TARY, MINISTRY OF LAND AND successfully carried out by ten different NATURAL RESOURCES (LORD men. It is planned to conduct further sea MITCHISON): My Lords, I beg to move trials later this year, aimed at increasing that this draft Order, which was laid depths and lengthening bottom times. before the House on March 10, be approved. This is an Order about which LORD WAKEFIELD OF KENDAL: the Special Orders Committee have enter My Lords, I thank the noble. Lord for tained some doubt on a point with which that most interesting and informative I will deal later. In other respects, Answer. In view of the great interest in however, the Committee consider that the progress of deep-diving techniques, the Order involves no important question not only for the purposes which he has of policy or principle, and therefore I described, by divers in the Royal Navy, will summarise its provisions shortly. but for many other reasons of a wide The Order gives to the new authorities spread nature, could he arrange either in Greater London certain minor powers for a lecture to be given by a suitable under Public General Acts. By Article 3 person, on an appropriate occasion, or the licensing of dealers in game is trans for a technical paper to be provided in ferred to the London borough councils. Vol. 264 12 503 London Government (Public [LORDS] General Acts) Order 1965 504 [Lord Mitcrnson.] the meaning assign°ed to it by Section By Article 4 the enforcement of provi 30(1) ; and Section 30(1), so far as sions about the grading and marketing relevant, reads as follows: I of agricultural produce is transferred in "The G:eater London Council, when acting Jnn�r London to the boroughs. By as aforesaid as the local educatiop authority Article 5 the powers to provide playing for the said area shaJI, except for the purposes of any document of title, be known as the fields, swimming baths and the like ' inner London Education Authorit:,r' ... " which are available to certain local authorities, are given to the Greater I find no obscurity in this language, and London Council. It is in connection with I suggest that these words quite clearly this Article that the doubts of the Special define the Inner London Education Orders Committee have arisen. Article 6 Authority as the Greater London Coun deals with powers under the Road Traffic cil, known by another name when ful filling certain functions. That being so, Act, and _ _t\rticle 7 :Vith appointments to two trammg committees mentioned in I cannot think that the fact that, by the Article. Article 8 gives a general those functions and under that rame, the power to spend up to a penny rate in Inner London Education Autlj_ority has the interests of the inhabitants of the somewhat different personrlel need trouble us unduly. Greater London Council area. This power was given generally to local These legal persons are n9t merely authorities under the Local Government their members. This House, for instance, �Financial Provisions) Act, 1963, and it when sitting as a Judicial body has a 1s sometimes called the "free penny". smaller membership than when sitting as part of the Legislature ; and there are I turn to the doubt of the Special Order.s Committee. They point put instances fo local govemmeht where that under the subsection of the London additional members are added to a body Government Act which is taken to when it is carrying out certain functions. authorise this Order, an Order in Coun One such used to be the addition of cil may apply the general law, with parish councillors to the rural district necessary modifications, to the Greater council for the purpose of rating in a London Council, but that there is no rural area. The rural distriqt council, express power so to apply the general with . the parish councillorf added, law in relation to the Inner London remamed the rural district council. My Education Authority. Also, they point Lords, I beg to move. out that it is to the Inner London Educa Moved, That the Draft London tion Authority that -the Physical Train Government (Public General Acts) Order ing and Recreation Act, 1937, is applied 1965, laid before the House on 10th by Article 5, which they refer to as March, be approved.-(Lord Mitchison.) "Paragraph 5 ", so as to enable them to provide the playing fields and swim 2.50 p.m. ming baths I have mentioned. Accord LORD HASTINGS: My Lords, in the ingly, say the Special Orders Commit first place we should be grateful to the tee, the Order is ultra vires, unless the Special Orders Committee for ma.._l(.ing Inner London Education Authority is such a full and detailed Report on this the Greater London Council. rather abstruse problem. I b�lieve that it is the first time they have ever set With respect, the Special Orders Corn out in detail their reasons for reporting mitt�e h_ave 'be�n in some danger of that they have some doubts as to whether lapsmg mto Anan heresy and of mis a matter is intra vires or ultra vires. At taking an identity of substance for a the same time, I am grateful to the noble mere similarity. They have not, how Lord, the Joint Parliamentary Secretary, ever, done so because they have pro for introducing this Order, fdr explain nounced no opinion on the point. But ing it briefly, and for dealing with this I think it right, with the greatest respect difficult problem. Of course, we are not to the Committee, to tell your Lord anxious to hold up the Order, for it ships that I entertain no real doubt on implements many things which were the matter. necessary to be done under e powers Section 89 of the London Government of the London Government fect, 1963. Act, 1963, tell us that the rphrase "the That Act, of course, was pas ed by the previous Government, and it is in every Inner London Education Authority " has I 505 London Government(Public [ 23 MARCH 1965] General Acts) Order 1965 506 way an excellent, well-conceived and But we are now dealing with the Physica:l admirable Act, and one which will be Training and Recreation Act, not with of very great benefit to Greater London the Education Acts ; and there is no men in the future. tion in Section 4, ,m which this insertion In respect of this particular problem, of the Inner London Education Authority however, I do not think that we can is put, of education authorities. There is brush it aside quite so easily as the noble mention of county councils and local Lord, the Joint Parliamentary Secretary, authorities, but not of education has done. In the first place, it is a author-ities. matter of the dignity of Parliament that Later on, Section 30(1) of the London we must be quite sure that Orders going Government Act says : out from Parliament are valid and can ". . . the Greater London Council, when not be questioned. Secondly, we want to acting as aforesaid as the local education be sure that from the common sense authority for the said Area ... " point of view, the point of view of the and so on. But it seems to me that laym�n. these things cannot be held in under the Physical Training and Recrea doubt. Thirdly, we want to be sure that, tion Act the Greater London Council is when tested in the courts, the Order will not acting as the local education stand. authority: it is acting as a county council When it comes to the provision of or other local authority. Then, lower swimming baths, there is a good deal of down in Section 30, we find that the room for disagreement, as I know from constitution of the special committee of my experience in the Ministry of Housing the Inner London Education Authority and Loca� Government. In the Inner consists of councillors not only of the London Education A:uthor�ty area many Greater London Council but of one London boroughs will be involved, and if representative from each inner London a swimming bath is going to be built in borough council, who do not belong to one area a precept wm be made on the the Greater London Council at all, and whole area and the cost shared out be one Common Council representative, tween the various London bd'roughs. That who is not a member of the Greater gives reasons for objection by one London Council. Therefore, it is diffi borough ; and even individuals can cult to argue under both these heads object, on planning grounds and when that the Inner London Education they know they are going to be charged Authority is in this instance the same with rates for the ,provision of such baths. " personality " as the Greater London If there are to ,be objections, this sort Council. of Order is likely to be tested fo ,the courts, When it comes to the mention, in and if at the very first hurdle the Order Section 30(3), of precepting upon the is declared by the court to be invalid, it local authorities for the building of these will mean .that we have wasted every swimming baths, that is clearly the duty body',s time. I am sure your Lordships of the Greater London Council and can would not wish to allow ,that to happen. not be done by the Inner London Section 83 of the London Government Education Authority. They can merely Act, under which these powers are taken, give their advice. There is a good deal says that Her Majesty may make the of room for doubt, and the noble Lord appropriate modification " at any time ... would do well perhap s to take this back before or after 1st April, 1965 ". So my and look at it again very carefully to first point :is that there is no real urgency make sure that we are not making a or hurry aJbout this, and that we should mistake in passing this Order. do much tbetter to ta,ke our time and get it right. 3.8 p.m. LORD ROYLE: My Lords, I do not Now let me turn to Section 30, to which intend to go into the matter in the detail the noble Lord drew attention. He argued in which the noble Lord, Lord Hastings, that the reference to the " Inner London has done ; but, as a member of the Education Authority" meant the Greater Special Orders Committee, I accept the London Council ; but he will see that that section deals, in the first place, with mild criticism of my noble friend in "any reference in the Education Acts 1944 to regard to what we did and the doubts 1962 o in an other Act to the local education we expressed. I would only say that � �, authonty ... what the noble Lord, Lord Hastings, has Vol. 264 I3 507 Lo11do11 Government(Public [LORDS] General Acts) Order 1965 508 [Lord Royle.] the merits of the London Government said rather contradicts his idea that this Act. But whatever the merits or demerits is a perfect Act. It seems to me not of the London Government Act, that can only that this is just one of the faults not have the slightest bearing on the in the Act, but that the Act in itself was question whether or not this Order is a mistake from the very beginning. The ultra vires. That is the one matter with London County Council seemed to be which the House is concerned. I confess functioning quite well and there was that I only saw the Report of the Special never any reason for the Party repre Orders Committee since coming to the sented opposite to interfere with that House this afternoon, and I d0 not pro situation, except for political purposes. fess to have examined it with great care. HASTINGS: I listened to the speech of the noble LORD Has the noble Lord, Lord Mitchison, who like me is a Lord asked the Greater London Council lawyer but not the most emiu�nt in the whether they are of th� same opinion? House, and I wonder whether on this LORD ROYLE: Like the noble Lord, very important question-because I I form my own opinions on these imagine that the Special Orders Com-. matters, and I am quite convinced that mittee was also advised by lawyers that was the purpose of the Act. I would we might have an expression of view only say this to my noble friend wh en from the Woolsack. he talks about co-opted members. The Inner London Education Authority have VISCOUNT DILHORNE: My Lords, I their co-opted members ; the difficulty hope we shall get a further expression seems to arise from the fact that they of view. Like my noble friend I did are responsible to nobody. The analogy not see this Order until a pretty late hour of a local authority having co-opted and I do not claim to have made any members on its education committee is careful investigatiou of it. Bht I have not mine, but where co-opted members no doubt that the Special Orqers Com exist on education committees in local mittee, to whom I think the whble House authorities they are subject, in the end, should be grateful for this first instance to the approval and deci1>ions of the of what I think is the new 'procedure full council. It seems to me that the which they are adopting, took great care Inner London Education Authority are before saying that there wasj a doubt not subject to the approval of anybod , about it. I listened with great care to y the noble Lord, Lord Mitchison, and he and this is how the doubts arose in the went a long way to remove the doubts minds of the Special Orders Committee. that I felt, but they were completely Is this not a fault which could be revived, I may say, by the efforts made rectified by making any particular sec by the noble Lord, Lord Rayl�. to sup tion of the Greater London Council port him. After hearing Lord Royle I subject to its ultimate will and decision? thought there were even mote doubts Is this not a case where amendments than the Special Orders Committee had might be sought to improve the Act in said. I hope that we may have the this way? If that were done, I feel advantage of the views of the noble and that the problem which we are now learned Lord the Lord Chancellor on posing would not arise. Could my noble this matter, because I am sun: that the friend look at it in that way? last thing this House, or either House, LORD MAcANDREW: My Lords, wants to do is to pass an Order which first of all I should like to congratulate is doubtfully good and which, even if it the noble Lord, Lord Mitchison, on his is doubtfully good, may lead to some birthday. But as regards what he said litigation. about the Special Orders Committee, LORD MITCHISON: My Lords, the may I say that under the Standing Order last thing I wanted to do-and I am we went only as far as we were asked sorry if I gave any impression that I was to go. We were not asked to express an doing it--was to suggest that l am not opinion; only to express doubt in cases sincerely grateful to the Speciltl Orders of doubt. Committee for what, I gather, is their first LORD CONESFORD: My Lords, I venture in this particular swimming listened with great interest to the speech pool. I did not take their I criticism made by the noble Lord, Lord Royle, on lightly. One noble Lord invited me to 509 London Government(Public [ 23 MARCH 1965] General Acts) Order 1965 510 go back and have a look at this point. could, and we think should, be done. I have had a look at it, oddly enough. I do not know what more I can do. I have read through an enormous brief I entirely agree with the noble and -far longer than anything which I learned Viscount, Lord Dilhorne, when thought right to inflict on your Lordships he says that it is our duty to be clear -and I am afraid I felt no doubt what about things when we pass an Order. I ever, either about the conclusion or about thought he put our duty a trifle high. the reasons I gave for it. They are quite I have known instances in which Orders short. have been upset by the court, and nobody There is one question posed by the shot either the noble and learned Lord Special Orders Committee, and one ques the Lord Chancellor or Mr. Speaker in tion only, and that is whether these two another place because they had not got bodies are identical, or whether one it right. But clearly we must do our best, should treat the I.LE.A., as I believe it and if there is any doubt we ought to is called, as a committee or something consider whether the wording can be put else in some way or another different in some other form. I find the Order like in substance but not the same. I quite clear, quite unambiguous, and I think that the passage I read out is per should like to add my thanks to the fectly clear. What it says is that the Special Orders Committee for what they Greater London Council, when acting for did and for putting the question so certain purposes, shall be known as the clearly. They simply said: If these two I.LE.A. If, conversely, the I.LE.A. is bodies are the same the Order is all not the Greater London Council acting right ; if they are not, it is not. I am for certain purposes, should I be exceed prepared on that to take their opinion. ing all the Rules of Order in the House That seems to me to be the question. if I asked: what the devil is it?-because I quite agree that there are a number it appears in Section 30(1) for the first of Statutes involved. One can get one's time. feet nice aud muddy by wandering about among them. But I think there is a plain We are referred by the definition sec and simple path delineated for us by tion not merely to that section but to the exertions of the Special Orders Com that particular subsection, and I can mittee, and one which we might reason assure your Lordships that I read out, in ably follow. It is, of course, perfectly what seems to me tolerably plain English true that it is not the business of the for an Act of Parliament, the relevant Special Orders Committee to express an part of the section. That being so, I opinion one way or another. I hope they must say that I feel bound to give your did not mind being told that they had Lordships my own opinion-it is the been in danger of lapsing into Arian opinion of those who advise me and is my heresy. Arius is long since dead and own, too-that there really is no doubt there is no harm in that kind of thing about this. These two bodies are iden nowadays. So I would urge the House, tical in my opinion. They are not always with great respect, to do what I identical, because the Greater London believe is the sensible thing and to pass Council has other functions to perform the Order, relying on what I think is which have nothing whatever to do with the perfectly clear language of the the I.LE.A. But when it is concerned Statute. with these particular matters it is known as the I.LE.A. I am aware of the point of the noble Lord, Lord Hastings. Perhaps I can This is not a case for taking back an answer it most shortly by saying to him Order and thinking about it again. If, that I have adopted on this matter, as the in fact, these are two separate bodies, question that reaHy concerns us, the ques then the deficiency is in the language of tion that concerned the Special Orders the Statute in which your Lordships Committee themselves. I will not take opposite took such pride, and it is not up t:he time of the House in trying to give in the form of the Order. It is not a reasons for it, but I think one might follow matter that can be put right by recti them. They have obviously taken great fying an Order. You just cannot do care about it. They have given us two what it is desired to do, and what I think, alternatives : one, they are the same ; two, with respect, the Act obviously intended they are not the same-in the first case Vol. 264 I4 511 Licensing (Scotland) [LORDS] Bill [H.L.] 512 [Lord Mitchison.] Moved, That the Bill be now read 30,_ valid ; in the second case inva>lid. Then -(Lord Stonham.) you look at the Act and you find-I hope On Question, Bill read 3�, anti passed. it is not disrespectful to say-unusually plain Eng1ish for a complicated Statute. Why not follow it? INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT LORD HASTINGS: My Lords, before SOCIETIES BILL [H.L.] the noble Lord sits down, may I ask him Read 3" (according 1:o Orqer), and why it would not clarify the whole situa passed, and sent to the Comm0ns. tion if, quite simply, instead of putting " Inner London Education Authority " we put "Greater London Counoil "? They SOLICITORS BILL [H.L.] have these ,powers, they are charged with them, and -surely there would not be any Read 3"' (according to Order), and complication at all. passed, and sent to the Commons. LORD MITCHISON: No, my Lords. That is not quite ·so, with respect to the EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL noble Lord. This body is-differently con stituted for different purposes., That is Read 3a. (according to Order), and quite ,right. I gave another ,instance, quite passed. a minor one, and it is now out o.f date, a,bout .the rural district council which had parish reipresentatives added to it for pur LICENSING (SCOTLAND) BILL poses of rural rating. I have another one [H.L.] here. I hope I did not sound too 3.13 p.ID. I abrupt; but I have a high regard for Order of the Day for ,the Secohd Read the time of the House, and we have quite ing read. a lot of Business before •US to-day. On Question, Motion agreed to. THE EARL OF CROMARTIE: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. To borrow a phra•se used recently by a noble Lady LAW COMMISSIONS BILL on the Benches opposite, this is a little Brought from the Commons ; read 1 ', Bill. But, however little it mar be, this and to be ,printed. in no way detracts from its ments, which I hope to prove are obvious. One of them is -to do away with a purposeless NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS monopoly that benefits no one ; and it (AMENDMENT) BILL would allow all would-be licensees to apply in the usual manner to the local 3.11 p.m. licensing courts. Order -of rthe Day for the Third Read There are two counties in Scotland, ing read. Ross ,and Cromarty and Dumfries-shire, THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My which still have certain areas where the Lords, I have iit in command from Her sale of exciseable liquor ollherwise than Majesty the Queen to ,acquaint the House by the Secretary of State for Scotland is �hat Her Majesty, having been informed prohibited. Your Lordships inay well of tlie purport of the Nuclear Installa ask why this should be so. Of course, tions (Amendment) Bill, has consented it should not be so ; but it is a hangover to place her interest, so far as it is con from 1916, when the Defencb of the cerned on behalf of ,the Crown, at the Realm Act sought to control the sale and disposal of Parliament for the purposes consumption of alcoholic drink. In those of The Bill. far-off days, the Cromarty Firth was the base for a large part of the Grand Fleet, THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY while the Burgh of Invergord@n was a UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, dockyard employing hundreds/ of dock HOME OFFICE (LoRo STONHAM): My workers imported from Liverpoq,l. This Lord,s, I beg to move rt.hat this Bill be now was the reason for an Act which em read ,a third time. braced the Cromarty Firtih areal ,together 513 Licensing (Scotlana) [ 23 MARCH 1965] Bill [H.L.) 514 with t;he county town of Dingwall. In (a firm supporter of the Party to which Dumfries-shire, too, itihe reason for this noble Lords opposite belong) desperately situation was LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL Annan and of Dingwall, and the OF LONGFORD): My Lords, with the licensing courts of the respective land permission of the House I will make a ward districts, have the same powers Statement about the Palace of West over licensing as in any other part of minster similar to one which my right the country? The particular needs of honourable friend the Prime Minister is the First WorJd War 50 years ago can making in another place. no longer be put forward as an adequate reason for discriminating Her Majesty, having graciously against these districts in a agreed -tha-t the contrdl, use aIJ,d occu way that they find distasteful. pation of the Palace of Westminster And if the Government challenge my and its precincts shall be permanently assertion �hat they find it distasteful, then enjoyed by the Houses of Parliament, let them put it to the test, and let the saving always Her Majesty's Robing inhabitants of these two districts have an Room, the staircase and ante-room opportunity of deciding for themselves. thereto adjoining, and the Royal Gallery, which are to remain under the _The inhabi.tants do not particularly control of the Lord Great Chamberlain nund the Secretary of State's selling whose hereditary functions on Royal liquor and running licensed hotels and occasions shall also be maintained, the pubs in these districts. Some think Government have decided that: that the Secretary of State should be subject to the licensing system, like any 1. The Minister of Public Building other body ; but, in my view, they are a and Works shall continne to be minority. But that is is not the practical responsible to Parliament for the question. The Secretary of State can fabric of the Palace and subject to carry on retailing liquor if he likes, but Parliament for its upkeep a11d any he should not have a right to prevent extension and alteration thereof and anyone else from doing so. The ordin the provision of furnishing, fuel and ary law of the land should apply to the light therefor. Gretna and Cromarty districts as else 2. Subject to the resetvations where. May I remind your Lordships, specifically made herein to the Lord in conclusion, of the ordinary law of Great Chamberlain as representing The the land? Section 32 of the 1959 Act Queen and the Minister of Public says: Building and Works, the control of "Subject to the provisions of this Act a the accommodation and services in licensing court may, at any general h�lf- that part of the Palace and its 525 The Palace [ 23 MARCH 1965] of Westminster 526 precincts now occupied by or on behalf It is intended that .these arrange of the House of Lords shall be vested ments shall become effective on April in the Lord Chancellor as Speaker of 26 next. the House of Lords on behalf of that My Lords, that concludes the brief House. Subject as aforesaid, the statement. These arrangements have been control of the accolillilodation and discussed with the Opposition Parties services in that part of the Palace and through the usual channels. I hope and its precincts now occupied by or on believe •thait they are likely to commend behalf of the House of Commons shall themselves to the House as a whole. I be vested in Mr. Speaker on behalf of should like it:o express my thanks to all that House. who have played their part---,most of all The said parts are shown on plans to the Lord Chancellor. There are a which have been deposited in the number of detailed points to be worked Library. out. It will no doubt be necessary for 3. The control of Westminster Hall the administrative implications of the and the Crypt Chapel shall be vested new arrangements to be considered by the jointly in the Lord Great Chamberlain Offices Committee. and in the two Speakers, on behalf of The House will have noticed that the the two Houses. Subject thereto, the new arrangements involve the .transfer to Minister of Public Building and Works other authorities of a number of the shall be responsible for the day-to-day powers and responsibilities of ,the Lord management of Westminster Hall and Great Chamberlain. I -am sure that it the Crypt Chapel. would be your Lordships' wish that I 4. The Minister of Public Building should not sit down wit:hout expressing and Works shall be responsible, subject to ,the noble Marquess, Lord to the arrangements made under the Cholmondeley, the sincere thanks of the next succeeding paragraph, to both House for all the care aud trouble that Houses for the provision of such he has taken over our affairs for many custodians and guides as may be years past. I am sure we are ail.l glad that necessary for the Palace. be is going to retain ithe ceremonial func tions in which he -has so muoh experience It is recognised that the powers vested and skill. He has been a servant of Her as aforesaid in the Lord Chancellor Majesty ,the Queen and of the House now and Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the for close on fi.Jiteen years, and he has House of Lords and House of Com never spar•ed 1himself in the service of the mons respectively, may be delegated by House, or, indeed, of Parliament as a each House to ,such Committee or other whole. We all owe him a great debt authority as it may choose, and any of grati-tude and affection. such Committee or authority may use such �gents for such purposes con 3.55 p.m. nected wi1ib. the exercise of the said LORD CARRINGTON: My Lords, I powers as �t may think fit. am sure that we are all grateful to the lit will be for the Speakers of the Leader of the House, not only for making two Houses to make arrangements for the Statement but also for the fact that the provision of suoh police as may be he and his colleagues have consulted necessary for the Palace. the Opposition Parties both frankly and fully during these negotiations. We are The co-heirs in whom the hereditary very glad that he has done so. If it Office of Lord Great Chamberlain is was necessary to make a change-and a,t present vested, that is to say, the I make no judgment on that-I do not Marquess of Cholmondeley, the Earl of think we could have reached a more Ancaster and the descendants of the satisfactory settlement than the one late Charles Robert Marquess of before us to-day. The House remains Lincolnshire, who have inherited bis in control of its own accommodation and rights of co-heirsbip, desire to record of its own affairs, which is as it should their humble obedience it:o Her be and as it must be. We congratulate Majesty's commands with respect to the the noble Earl the Leader of the House, future control. use and occupation of the noble and learned Lord on the Wool the Palace of Westminster. sack and, indeed, the Minister of Public [LORDS] 527 The Palace of Westminster 528 [Lord Oarmng,ton.] . . most distinguished and handsome Building and Works o� hav1?-g ach1ev�d fashion-for many years to come. this result, which I thmk will be satis factory to everyone. 3.58 p.m. THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUT}-J:WARK: I should like to join in the tribute My Lords, I am sure your Lordships which the Leader of the House has paid will appreciate that in normal circum to the noble Marquess, Lord stances whoever spoke from the Bishops' Cholmondeley. I think all your Lord Benches would do so after consultation ships know that my noble f�iend has with the most reverend Primate the Lord worked long hours, and with great Archbishop of Canterbury. But, as your energy, on behalf of the House as a Lordships know, the most revere�d whole. He resisted, stoutly, successfully Primate is at present abroad, and while and alone, the invasions and raids of a in normal circumstances it might have number of predators from another place. been possible for us to consult him, you He has been responsible for greatly will have learned from what bas appeared embellishiocr the rooms and passages of in the papers that bis Grace is in a this Hous; with pictures and with moment of personal sadness, owing to the tapestries. He has �et in motion-I m�st illness of bis wife, and we have therefore • admit not before 1t was due-the air not been in touch with him. In so far conditioning of this Chamber. He has as I have been able to have consultations greatly increased the facilities for the with other Members on this Bench, and public in the House, and he has done in so far as any one of us can express many other things of which your Lord an opinion, I should like to say on behalf ships will be aware. We are glad to of the Bishops, that we wholeheartedly think, as the Leader of the House has endorse what has been said by other said, that the noble Marquess will retain Members of this House this afternoon. a large number of his important func We have every hope for the future, and tions. We are very grateful to him for we are also most grateful for what the what he has done, and we hope that Lord Great Chamberlain has done in he realises the warm affection with which the past for us and for other Members we all regard him. of this House. 1 LORD OGMORE: My Lords, on 4.Q p.m. I behalf of my noble friend Lord Rea, THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My who is indisposed, and on behalf of Lords, perhaps as a very old Member of my noble friends on the Liberal Benches, this House (I have been a Member for I should like to thank the noble Earl nearly 25 years), I may say one word. the Leader of the House, and the noble I am by nature a Conservative-not only and learned Lord on the Woolsack, for with a big " C " but I think partly with the great care they have taken in a a small " c " as well. I do not like matter which is rather difficult and deli change for its own sake. But I must cate, and for the pains they have taken say that, if a change had to be made, I to associate the other Parties in dealing do not think the arrangements 9ould be with this problem. On behalf of my better than those which are contained in noble friends and myself, I welcome the the Stntement of the noble Earl the arrangements recorded in the Statement Leader of the House. They seem to me and I, too, should like to be a�sociated to have one immense merit: that they with the tribute that has been paid by the keep control of our own affairs in our noble Earl the Leader of the House and own hands-actually, in the very capable the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, to the hands of the Lord Chancellor, woo, I am Lord Great Chamberlain. We all very sure, will conduct his duties with assiduity much appreciate-and I think we should and ability. He is our "watchdog", and like it known that we appreciate-the I am sure that he will bark and even deep personal interest that he has taken if necessary, bite. in the House and in the comfort of noble The only other thing I wish to say Lords for many years past. We are is to join in the tributes which have_ been grateful to him, and we look forward to paid to the Lord Great Chamberlam. I seeing him on ceremonial occasions do not rthink he could possibly have done those occasions which he graces in a his job better EARL OF LONGFORD: Yes, my Bill his blessing, because he is so far Lords. I do not think there is any doubt .round the circle from myself that I about that. thought he would almost meet me in condemning the Bill from the opposite pole. But he has worked, as have other LICENSING(SCOTLAND) BILL of your Lordships, on the basis that [H.L] " half a loaf is better than no bread ". 4.3 p.m. I must admit that I do not think that Debate resumed. either my right honourable friend the Secretary of State or any of my Parlia THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY mentary colleagues expected for one UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE moment that any one would think that FOR SCOTLAND (LORD HUGHES): My the first dividend to come from the High Lords, perhaps we might now turn from land Development Board should be the the vesting of control of this House in opening up of these areas to the private the noble and learned Lord the Lord enterprise of public-houses ; and while Chancellor, ,to the proposal to transfer it is a useful debating point, I do not public-houses from •the Secretary of State believe for one minute that the noble to private individuals. I should like at Lord, Lord Craigton, supposed that that the start to congratulate the noble Earl, was the reason the Highland Develop Lord Cromartie, on the clear way in ment Board was being introduced. which be was ventured into this field of placing a Bill before your Lordships' The noble Lord referred to the fact, House. I should have liked to be able as I think did one other noble Lord, to go all the way with him, because l that just before the last Election the feel that the method of presentation of previous Administration decided to make the Bill certainly deserves a better it their Party policy that if they were response than he ,is going to get from returned they would abolish the present me. Fortunately for the noble Lord, I system. I think I might be forgiven, as believe that the advice which I •am about a comparatively new Minister, for saying to give-at least if the expressions of to your Lordships that in a few months opinion which have already appeared are of Office I have not been impressed by any indication-is not WEARL OF IDDESLEIGH: My Lordships of the merits of the present Lords, -I should like to support the noble system, because, for one reason or Lord, Lord Hawke. I have b�en even another, noble Lords on the opposite longer in this House and I !1alve never side have persuaded themselves that it heard such an argument used. There are does not have any merits. It would be some oif us, a not inconsiderabJ.eJnumber, just as much a waste of time on my who do not belong to Parties but who part to attempt to persuade my col come and listen to arguments and make leagues that it has no merits, because up ,our minds according to the arguments they would not believe that either. We adduced. I hope the noble Lord, Lord had one intervention from this side of the Hughes, will be so good as to change his House, but, of course, from the Bishops' mind and offer some arguments to help Benches. 1 am sorry that the right those of us who have not made up our reverend Prelate has left, because I minds. heard him more in sorrow than in LORD HUGHES: My Lords, I doubt anger. All I would wish to say to his very much whether I can add anything to comment is that I doubt very much the information already ,given to the whether he has hastened the day when House. The noble Lords oppoJite have we shall have Bishops in the Church ex-plained the merits of the present system of Scotland. and ,pointed out that they ,were not com I cannot commend this Bill to your plaining about the way in which the State Lordship's House. In asking your Lord management distrJcts premises were ships, not entirely with hope, to reject operated. Tbey stated that they did not the Bill, I would not wish in any way to complain rubout the quality of the service depart from what 1 said at the beginning, or of the products ; in fact, at �east one when I congratulated the noble Earl on noble Lord, if not two, went so far as the way in which he has presented it. If to eX!press regret that certain products did this is a sample of what he can do, then not come in larger quantity North of the I look forward to a second effort in a Border. Having said alJ that, they then proceeded, having stated that it I was not more worthy cause. a pol,itical argument, really to come down LORD HAWKE: My Lords, before on the doctrinaire basis that State the noble Lord sits down, could he tell management is not a good t�og, that 533 Licensing (Scotland) [ 23 MARCH 1965] Bill [H.L.] 534 private enter•prise is a good thing, and that on any given subject. I have no doubt for this r•eason 1:here ought -to be com- at all that there are people in these areas petition between privately-owned public who would very much welcome the pro houses, restaurants and hotels and those posal put forward by the noble Earl. operated by the Secretary of State. Whether that is the opinion of all of the people or even a majority of the people that I thought I stated quite clearly living in th0se areas I have no way of there was merit in continuing the present knowing. I would, however, reiterate the system of disinterested management. fact that one of the people who put Probably an equally strong argument forward this proposal as part of his could be put forward for going over to Election address lost his seat. the other system of having the trade in private hands, as it is in all other parts LORD STRATHCLYDE: My Lords, of the country. I could see no merits in would the noble Lord really expect those attempting, as this Bill does, to marry the public authorities in the Invergordon area two systems together. It seemed to me who have come forward against the con that to say other than that would merely tinuation of this system to do that if be wasting your Lordships' time. I can they were not assured that they had the assure your Lordships I have no inten- majority of their constituents behind tion of being disrespectful to the House, them? but one thing which has been impressed THE p ARLIAMENT ARY SECRE upon me in the short time I have been TARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT here is that yonr Lordships are nearly (LORD LINDGREN): Why did that candi always more impressed by brevity than date not win the Election? by long-windedness. LORD HUGHES: The noble Lord LORD HAWKE: My Lords, will the must have his tongue fairly firmly in his noble Lord deal with what is to me the cheek in making that point, because he main argument? It is alleged that the was for a sufficiently long time a member present system is leading to a lack of of Her Majesty's Government to know new facilities, hotels for tourists, which that not all proposals which came for for Scotland, I understand, is a very im- ward from local authorities were accep portant industry. This is an important ted by the Government of which he was argument and the noble Lord never men- a member. tioned it. Will the State system give the THE DUKE OF ATHOLL: My Lords, tourist accommodation or will it not? is the noble Lord aware that the Scot LORD HUGHES: My Lords, it must tish Tourist Board receive many requests inevitably be a matter of opinion whether and letters on the subject of the inade any particular level of supply of hotel or quacy of hotels in these areas?-although licensed accommodation is adequate for I agree this may not have permeated the purpose. May I put it this way? through to the noble Lord. There is no evidence that the increase in LORD HUGHES : That, I may suggest, tourists coming into these districts is any is criticism of the fact that the previous less than it is in other parts of Scotland. Administration did little over 13 years to meet requests for improving it. It is LORD STRATHCLYDE: My Lords, an argument, if I may say so, for I wonder whether the noble Lord could improving the hotels, not for the aban help me and those others who have not donment of the Secretary of State's made up their minds which way to vote monopoly. if this matter goes to a Division. It has been stated by several noble Lords that VISCOUNT ECCLES: My Lords, I am those who reside in these two areas are confused about the noble Lord's own very much against the continuation of argument. Either he thinks the hotel pro this system. Could the noble Lord tel1 vision in these areas is adequate or he us whether he confirms those statements thinks it is inadequate. If he thinks that or not? it is inadequate, then it seems to me there is a clear case for allowing somebody LORD HUGHES: My Lords, it is very else to come in and raise the level. I difficult, unless one takes a referendum rather gather that he thinks it is ade on a particular point, to say with accuracy quate. In fact, I do not see on what what people in any particular area feel other grounds he can refuse my noble 535 Licensing (Scotland) [ LORDS ] Bill [H.L.] 536 [Viscount Eccles.] an admission that more acco14modation friend's Bill. If he thinks that the hotel is necessary means acceptance of the accommodation is already adequate, what proposition that it must be pr6vide<;l by difference does it make to grant other a completely different authority from the people the right to come in? If there is present one. no need for them, at least they will have a sense of justice. THE EARL OF CROMARTIE: My Lords, I think I am allowed tp answer. LORD HUGHES: I am afraid the I am not going to make any further noble Viscount rather over-simplifies the speech, other than to thank those who position. It does not follow that if I have supported me. But I would say to think the accommodation is inadequate the noble Lord the Minister op�osite that I must agree to an alteration in the the Election really had very lif.tle to do system. As the noble Earl stated in his with it, because our present Member is opening remarks, there have been many a Liberal and strongly support� this Bill, requests for the provision of more facili as the noble Lord will find if i.t goes to ties, particularly at the National Hotel another place. I would thank him for his in Dingwall. The noble Lord, Lord very kind remarks, but I still disagree, Craigton, referred to the inadequacy of and I ask your Lordships now to give accommodation for large functions, and the Bill a Second Reading. proposals have been made from time to time in the past without previous 4.21 p.m. occupants of my right honourable friend's On Question, Whether the Bill shall be position being able to agree to the now read za? necessary expenditure. Such a proposal is before my right honourable friend at Their Lordships divided: Contents, the present time. It does not follow that 69 ; Not-Contents, 36. CONTENTS Aberdeen and Temair, M. Ebbisham, L. Mabane, L. Alport, L. Eccles, V. MacAndrew, L. Ampthill, L Elliot ,of Harwood, Bs. Mar and Kellie, E. Athol!, D. Erroll of Hale, L. Margadale, L. Baden-Powell, L. Falkland, V. Massereene and Fer ard, V. Balemo, L. Ferrers, E. Milverton, L. Belhaven and Stenton, L. Ferrier, L. [Teller.] Morrison, L. Cawley, L. Fottescue, E. Newton, L. Chesham, L. Goschen, V. Perth, E. Colwyn, L. Grenfell, L. St. Aldwyn, E. Conesford, L. Grimston of Westbury, L. St. Oswald, L. Oottesloe, L. Hastings, L. Selkirk, E. Craigton, L. Hawke, L. Simon, V. Cromartie, E. [Telfer.] Horsbrugh, Bs. Somers, L. Daventry, V. Howard of Glossop, L. Southwark, L. Bp. Denham, L. Hurd, L. Spens, L. Derwent, L. Iddesleigh, E. Strange of Knokin, Bs. Devonshire, D. Ironside, L. Strathclyde, L. Dilhome, V. Jellicoe, E. Stuart of Findhom, IV. Drumalbyn, L. Jessel, L. Tenby, V. Dudley, L. Lambert, V. Thurlow, L. Dundee, E. Long, V. Wolverton, L. Dundonald, E. Luke, L. Woolton, E. NOT-CONTENTS Addison, V. Faringdon, L. Longford, E. (L. Privy Seal.) Archibald, L. Francis-Williams, L. Mitchlson, L. Arwyn, l.. Gaitskell, Bs. Phillips, Bs. Attlee, E. Gardiner, L. (L. Chancellor.) St. Davids, V. Blyton, L. Hobson, L. [Teller.] Shepherd, L. Brockway, L. Hughes, L. Silkin, L. , Brown, L. Inglewood, L. Sorensen, L. [Teller.] Burden, L. Kennet, L. Stonham, L. Champion, L. Latham, L. Summerskill, Bs. Chorley, L. Leatherland, L. Walston, L. Chuter-Ede, L. Lindgren, L. Williams, L. Citrine, L. Listowel, E. Williamson, L Resolved in the affirmative. Bill read mittee of the Whole House. 2a accordingly, and committed to a Com- 537 Rivers (Prevention of [ 23 MARCH 1965] Pollution) (Seal/and) Bill 538 Amendment moved- RIVERS (PREVENTION OF After Clause 3, insert the said new clause. POLLUTION) (SCOTLAND) BILL (Lord Craigton.) 4.30 p.m. LORD HUGHES: My Lords, as I think Report of Amendments received I made clear to �he CommiNee at the last (according to Order). stage of the Bill, I was very sympathetic to what lay behind this proposal ; and if LORD CRAIGTON moved, after it could have rbeen done then I should have Clause 3, to insert the following new been happy to have s·omething inserted in clause the Bill. The noble Lord, Lord Craigton, does not foink thait the Amendment he Control of seepage moved is the full answer to the proposal, " .-(!) Where any trade or sewage effluent, the volume of which in any day exceeds 5,000 and, as he has been good enough to say, gallons, is discharged into any well, borehole, he has put it down in order that some pipe, shaft or quarry the river purification thing more could be said on the subject. authority shall have power but shall not be bound to add substances or liquids to such This pollution from an old coal mine discharges for the purpose of ascertaining vent near Motherwell is a very clear illus whether such discharge is causing an offence tration of the difficu1ties with which we under this Act. are faced. It is obvious to anybody that (2) Where in relation to such discharge the the river is being polllllted by this oil river purification authority are of the opinion that seepage of such discharged effluent into coming into it. What is not at all ob a stream may give rise to an offence under this vious-in fact whait has not been deter Act or that an offence has been committed, mined-is where it is coming from. they shall require the person making the dis Alithough it is stated that it is coming charge to apply for consent (within a period specified by them) and the provisions of this from an old coal mine venrt near Mother Act and of the principal Act shall apply and well, nobody in fact knows where it is the river purification authority may grant being plllt in, or when it was put in. It or refuse consent or grant consent subject to may •be that it was put in many years such conditions." ago, and is only now finding its way out. The noble Lord said: My Lords, when This points to a possible future danger. I put down this Amendment the intention Such deposits may in the past have been was simply to give the noble Lord an put down disused quarries in many dif opportunity to explain why he himself, ferent parts of the country and may not after considering all we said in Com yet have found their way ,to any river. mittee, could not put down an Amend 11hey may find their way cto a river in the ment to control effluents discharged into future. holes in the ground. But since then The difficulty which faces Her there has occurred an example which Majesty's Government in this matter is has converted our theoretical fears into that this is a Bill for the prevention of a reality. As we speak now, great quan tities of oil from an old coal mine vent pollution of rivers, and it would not by are pouring into the River Clyde at any :stretch of imagination fall within the Motherwell, and I understand that the Long TiHe of the Bin to give power to National Coal Board are attempting to control the dumping of effluent down any trace the source of the discharge. I told hole anywhere in the country just because the noble Lord's officials at St. Andrews' it happened to fall within ,the area of a House about this matter yesterday, and river purification board. There is no they appreciate that an offence is being indication at all at present •that the dump committed under the Bill. But the ing of ,such effluent in any particular place will ever result in its running into any damage has been done ; and I believe It that we ought to do something about river at any ,time. would be ex,tremely this now. I think that the noble Lord bad Iaw ito proceed, from one known case, will agree with me that there may be to place upon industry rt,hroughout the no opportunity for some time, other whole of the country a burden of seeking than the next stage of this Bill, to act to comply with the terms of this Amend in this matter. Therefore, I move the ment. Amendment formally in order to give the The Clyde River Purification Board, noble Lord a chance to answer the points quite naturally and properly, are very I have raised. interested in this problem and have since 539 Rivers (Prevention of [LORDS] Pollution) (Scotland) Bill 5140 {Lord Hughes.] it could be identified. There are two had another " go " by putting forward ways in which this could be done, another Amendment which it was sug involving two broad categories of gested might be moved at the next stage material. One was to put in dye. As I of the Bill in your Lordships' House. indicated on the last occasion, the This Amendment approaches the matter quantities are so enormous that in order from an entirely different point of view to serve any useful purpose ohe would altogether. Perhaps it would be easier have had to tip the dye in by the barrel if I read the suggestion to show the com load if it were not to be diluted out of pletely different approach, though one all semblance of useful purpos� whatso that remains equally unworkable. The ever. From that point of view, dyes proposed Amendment would be : were inevitably ruled out. The other " Where any person intends to discharge any way was to put in tracer elements of trade or sewage effluent into any borehole, radioactive substances. But here again disused mine, pit or quarry he shall, not later the quantities would have had to be than fourteen days before commencing any appreciable. such discharge, give notice to the river puri fication authority in whose area such borehole, We came reluctantly to the conclusion disused mine, pit or quarry is situate stating: that, by allowing river purification (a) the nature and composition of the boards to do this, we could be creating effluent; a greater danger and a greater hazard to (b) the maximum volume of the effluent which he intends so to discharge on any one health by allowing fairly s1,1bstantial day; and quantities of radioactive materials to be (c) the highest rate at which it is proposed put in for purposes of tracing. But there to discharge the effluent." is an even. greaiter disadvantage. In fact we should be conferring by Statute a Your Lordships will note that all the right on the river purification boards to suggested alternative Amendment requires pollute their own rivers in a way which is that any such proposed future dis they were seeking to prevent everybody charge should be notified. There is no else from doing. The only defence which penalty provided for lack of notification. they would have would be that they Even if there were a penalty, it would were being allowed to pollute the rivers not necessarily help the situation at all, for the purpose of proving tqat some. because once the authority have received body else had polluted them first. That a notification they are no further forward, does not seem to be either common unless at some time in the future a par sense or good law. ticular discharge comes into our rivers which they control and can be definitely Where, therefore, do we J,'ind our identified as coming from one source and selves? Fortunately, the exi�ting law one source only. Let us assume that in is not completely defective on the sub the area of a particular river three ject. There is a variety of Acts distilleries put effluent down different presently on the Statute Book under disused pits. In due course, something which authorities can act. Thffe is the which can be identified as distillery Public Health Act, 1897. Tnere is a effluent finds its way into the river. variety of sections in that Act whereby Where do the board stand? They cannot an offence could be created by dumping prosecute any one of the three because in quarries or pits, even although the they cannot prove which of the three, if substance did not reach the river at all. any, has caused the effluent to reach the There is the Water (Scotland) 4-ct, 1946, river. under which a possible offence could be taking place ; and there is, df course, The Amendment put forward by the the possibility of an offence at! Common noble Lord, Lord Craigton, contained Law. I must admit, however, that it a suggestion which Her Majesty's is quite possible that circumstances Government have considered very care could arise in which something I was hap fully, because it appeared to offer a way pening which was not in e public of solving the difficulty of relating the � interest, and which could not1 in fact, arrival of the effluent from a par be dealt with under any pa�t of the ticular deposit by giving authority to the board to add materials law as it exists at present. of some kind or another to the pit, so We are, therefore, placed iIJ- the un that if, in due course, it arrived at a river fortunate position that there is no basis 541 Rivers (Prevention of [ 23 MARCH 1965] Pollution) (Scotland) Bill 542 of pollution presently known to exist should be examined from every possible which would justify us, at this late stage angle. in the consideration of the Bill, so to LORD CRAIGTON: My Lords, I am widen it as to make it a Bill very grateful to the noble Lord. I feel that different from the form in which it this Amendment has done some good and reached your Lordships' House. I am, I believe that the Clyde River Purifica therefore, able to offer only this fact to tion Board will be satisfied, as I am, your Lordships. There is at present a with the noble Lord's careful review of standing official committee appointed the objections to the Amendment which by the Minister of Health and the Secre they thought might go down, and of the tary of State, to consider present objections to my Amendment. We are methods of disposal of solid and semi grateful for the review of the noble solid toxic wastes from chemical and Lord's existing powers. I am satisfied allied industries and so on. I shall not with 1:he assurance that the noble Lord read all the remits. It could perhaps has given, that he will take executive be going a little beyond the remit to action under his powers, and with his require them to examine this proposal, obvious preparedness to embark on com because your Lordships will notice that prehensive legislation should this prove the reference is to " solid and semi-solid to be essential. With those words, I beg toxic wastes ". On whether, for in leave to withdraw this Amendment. stance, distillery effluent is sufficiently Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. solid to reach the stage of being re garded as semi-solid, I would not wish Clause 9 [Penalties and proceedings to venture an opinion. for certain offences]: However, I doubt very much whether 4.46 p.m. anyone, either in your Lordships' Lano DRUMALBYN: moved to leave House or elsewhere, would quarrel out subsection (2) and to insert instead: with Her Majesty's Government if they " ( ) In the case of any offence under section took the opportunity of having this com I of this Act, or, after the commencement mittee examine this particular aspect of this Act, of any offence punishable under of alternative ways of dealing with trade paragraph (a) of subsection (I) of section 22 of the principal Act it shall be a defence for effluent, and recommending whether a person charged in respect of the discharge anything requires to be done. It may into a stream of trade or sewage effluent well be that Parliament will have to or of matter which is poisonous, noxious or consider other legislation to deal with polluting to prove that- this subject. That may be next year, (a) by reason of the events which caused it ma be in ten years' time, it may be the discharge to be made it was not reason y ably practicable for him to seek the consent never at all. I suggest to your Lord of the river purification authority before ships that it would not be consistent making the discharge ; and with our purposes first to make our (b) it was not reasonably practicable for rivers clean, and secondly to do so with hjm to dispose of the effluent or matter out unnecessary interference with the otherwise than by discharging it (directly or indirectly) into that or some other stream ; day-to-day life of the country, if we and extended the powers of the Bill into this (c) he took all reasonably practicable steps very wide field without the clearest to prevent the discharge or, as the case evidence that it is absolutely necessary. may be, to prevent that matter from being poisonous, noxious or polluting." I suggest to your Lordships that, while the activities of the Clyde Board have The noble Lord said: My Lords, may I undoubtedly pointed to the evidence that move this Amendment on behalf of my there is one particular case, and that noble friend Lord Colville of Culross, there may well in the future be more who regrets very much that he is unable cases, that falls very far short of what to be present-though perhaps not so is necessary to require us to widen the much as I regret that he is unable to be scope of the Bill to this extent at the present. I apologise in advance if I present time. Therefore, I must ask your have not correctly understood my noble Lordships not to accept this Amend friend's Amendment, but I will do my ment, although I am still of the opinion best on it. that it was an effort which must have My noble friend feels very strongly been made in order that the question (and I agree with him) that provision 543 Rivers (Prevention of [ LORDS] Pollution) (Scotland) B/ll 544 [Lord Drumalbyn.] the principal Act were to remain in ought to be made for the Bill specifically force, it would seem to provide a pos to exclude what he describes as the sible defence for a continuing discharge, "once-in-a-while accident". He does as well as for one which arose out of the not think it right to leave the Bill in kind of unforeseen circumst<1nces that such a way that a person from whose my noble friend had in mind, in cases premises a discharge is made, in apparent where the discharge was not repeated, contravention of a prohibition, or of or, at any rate, was put righ1t as soon conditions laid down by the river puri as possible. As noble Lords will see, fication authority, should have no defence it is not my noble friend's intention to at all if the discharge is made in circum make the defence too easy, ot to make stanes where the person could not have it a general defence. avoided it. He thinks it is wrong to rely solely on the procurator fl.seal's normal If the noble Lord and the Gbvernment unwillingness to prosecute in such cir are of the opinion that it is something cumstances, for as the clause stands, if that should be dealt with as my noble the procurator fiscal believes that there friend thinks, perhaps the heft way to has been a discharge which it was reason deal with the matter would be to leave ably practicable to prevent-whether or subsection (2) of Clause 9 as it is but not he is right in that opinion-he pro to add a proviso along the lines of the secutes, and then the person is guilty even words that my noble friend wishes to although, in fact or in truth, it was not insert. At any rate, I hope that the reasonably practicable to prevent the dis noble Lord will at least take the point charge. He is guilty simply because the that where a person is, so to speak, an Bill provides no defence for such circum innocent discharger, he should have a stances. defence written into the Bill, and should That is a situation which, surely, should not be entirely dependent on the pro not be ,allowed to arise, and I therefore curator fiscal's discerning that he is an hope, that the noble Lord will accept innocent discharger. I beg t� move. the Amendment, at least in spirit. It is Amendment moved- meant to cover not only pre-1951 dis Page 10, line 22, leave out su�section (2) charges under Clause 1 of the Bill, but and insert the said new subsection.-(Lord also post-1951 discharges, under Section Drumalbyn.) 22 of the 1951 Act. I understand that Seotion 28 can be enforced by a charge LORD HUGHES: My Lor:ds, I am under Section 22 of the Act, and, also, grateful to the noble Lord, Lord that it is intended to cover plain dis Drumalbyn, for the way in which he charges of noxious matter under Section has proposed the Amendment and has 22(1)(a). I have probably said enough admitted the defect that it contains. I to make clear my noble friend's inten must admit that I was a little surprised tion, which is reasonably clear on the that the noble Viscount, Lord Colville face of the Amendment. There has to of Culross, put this Amendment down be an event, and it has to be an event again, because I wrote to him on March which makes it not reasonably practicable 10, following on what I said at the for the person in charge of the premises last stage ; and I do not thlnk I can to seek the consent of the river purifica do better than tell your Lordships what tion officer. and not reasonably practic I wrote to the noble Viscomit on that able, either, for him to dispose of the occasion. I said : effluent elsewhere. He has also to show "You were concerned in case removal of that he took all reasonable practicable the defence in Section 22(3) should penalise steps to prevent the discharge, or to pre a person for accidents or mistakes wl)ich were outwith his control. My advice is that vent the matter from being poisonous, this subsection does not, however, confer a noxious or polluting. I think that is rea defence against accident, and that the pro sonably clear. visions of the Bill will thus not affect the liability of a polluter to prosec4tion under I may tell the noble Lord, as I am Section 22(1)(a) of the 1951 Act. ';rhe offence sure he is aware, that I do not intend under the latter subsection, of causing or to press the Amendment, because he knowingly permitting poisonous, noxious or realtses, as my noble friend did, that it polluting matter to enter any stream, is not amended by the Bill. If there I have been has a defect, in that it goes further accidents or mistakes for which jhe has no than his intention. If Section 22(3) of responsibility, a discharger will accordingly 545 Rivers (Prevenllon of [ 23 MARCH 1965] Po/lutio11) (Scotland) Bill 546 be in no worse position when Section 22(3) is tried to avoid that construction by the deleted". words he put in-namely. There is then more, but that, I think, is " by reason of the events which caused the the important point. discharge to be made ... ". Now the effect of the Amendment as He has tried to avoid the very risk that proposed would be really to nullify all the noble Lord has been describing. that we are attempting to do in the Bill, in so far as it was anybody's desire to LORD HUGHES: That may be so in evade the provisions of the measure. paragraph (a), but then we come on to paragraph (b), which says: LORD DRUMALBYN: The noble " it was not reasonably practicable for him to Lord, when he says, "as proposed", dispose of the effluent or matter otherwise than means "as drafted", rather than as I by discharging it ( directly or i��rectly) into that proposed it. or some other stream ; ... The second paragraph, I think, is subject LoRo HUGHES: Yes; as drafted. to even greater objection than the first, The average person does not seek to becanse what is "reasonably practic evade a law which is obviously in the able"? A man may say, "It is not public interest ; so, even if this Amend reasonably practicable for me to do so ment were included, the average in because I cannot afford to devote that dividual would do his best to comply part of my resources to dealing with the both with the spirit and with the letter problem". We do not accept that _a of the law. But in this particular case we thing is practicable or reasonable only 1f cannot guarantee that we shall always a man decides that it is not going to cost have to deal only with average reasonable more money than he is prepared to spend individuals. We shall have to deal with on it. anyone who may be polluting the river ; and if we were to permit this, we should To return to the language of paragraph be giving a discharger a defence by (a), it says: enabling him to prove that it was not " by reason of the events which caused the reasonably practicable for him to seek discharge . . ." to apply for consent. It would permit By itself, that does not confine the him to make or to continue to make a Amendment or the terms of this measure discharge without applying for consent, to one particular set of discharges. If leaving it to him to take a chance that a man wishes to evade the law, he can the discharge will not be found out, and, found any such discharge into the river if it is found out, to show that it was on this. At the worst, he is in the posi not reasonably practicable for him to tion that the court decides that he has in apply for consent. fact not had reasonable excuse to con The effect of this would be to take the tinue to do so, and finds him guilty of an matter out of the hands of the river offence. He may consider it is a risk purification board and out of the bands worth taking if be can get away with it of the Secretary of State for Scotland. for a year, two years or three years before It would allow a man who wished to it reaches the stage of prosecution. take the risk of breaking the law to go The proposed limitation, I suggest to on breaking the faw and polluting a river your Lordships, is not necessary. The until he was found out. Then, when it advice which I have been given is that was drawn to his attention, he could the Bill as it stands places the person who plead that it was not reasonably practic has accidentally made a discharge into able for him to do otherwise ; and he the river without consent in no worse a must be prosecuted. Right up to that position than he is at the present time. point, until the court had decided against The present law has operated for twelve him, he could continue to pollute the years. There has been no complaint at river. all during that time that any of the boards have acted unreasonably towards those LORD DRUMALBYN: My Lorcls, may people to whom the present measure I intervene again? I am grateful tq the applies, and I have no reason to believe noble Lord for giving way. I know that that, just because there is a new measure, was not ,the intention of my noble friend they are suddenly going to start inter -and I am sure he has had legal advice preting the law in a different way alto on the point But my noble friend gether. The fact is (as I have said, not 547 Rivers (Prevention of (LORDS] Pollution) (Scotland) Bill 548 [Lord Hug!bes.] The noble Lord said: My Lords, when once, not twice but now this will be for we last considered this clause doubts were the third if not the fourth time) that the expressed by the noble Viscount, Lord success of this measure at the end of the Simon, and the noble Lord, Lord Geddes, day must depend upon the degree of co as to whether we should be discharging operation which the boards receive from our international obligations properly if the community. That co-operation, up we continued to make it possible for to the present, has been good. We have offenders to be prosecuted under two tried to word the Bill in such a way as different Acts of Parliament instead of to ensure that in future we are likely to prosecution being confined to the Act receive the maximum degree of which flowed from our adherence to co-operation. the International Convention. I1was sym The people who have most to lose by pathetic to the points of view which were being unreasonable or non-co-operative expressed, without necessarily committing are the boards themselves, and I think myself to anything about it, because, that is the best safeguard for individual frankly, I could not see, nor had I up dischargers. The present position, un to that stage found, any case where prose changed as it is in law, will continue to cution would take place under this mea be unchanged :in practice. I think there sure rather than under the 1955 Act. On fore that the noble Viscount, Lord Col further inquiry, however, I found that ville of Culross. has feared something the desire to have the Bill as it was which in fact has not taken place and arose not because there was any inten which, I suggest, will not take place. I tion that the prosecution should take cannot think of any form of Amend place under the 1965 Act, as it will be, ment which would be acceptable, because rather than under the 1955 Act, but in it would be weakening the main and order to ensure that the river purification essential purpose of the Bill. I would board had a standing in the matter. If be prepared to accept a certain limited we had done what was suggested there weakening if I thought it was necessary would be many occasions when in fact in order to protect innocent people from pollution could take place without its prosecution. I am satisfied beyond any being anybody's business really to prose shadow of doubt that the accidental dis cute, other than a harbour authority. charger or the innocent discharger has no The noble Viscount, Lord' Simon, more to fear now than he had previously. pointed ourt that his authority, 'l!he Port Therefore, I feel no sense of guilt at of London Authority, were also a pollu all in asking your Lordships not to accept tion authority and that they found no this Amendment. difficulty in combining both tunctions. That, of course, is perfectly true ; but, LORD DRUMALBYN: My Lords, I with respect to rthe noble Viscount, I am grateful to the noble Lord for the would poiut out that what a powerful explanation that he has given. He will authority like rthe Port of London understand that I am in a little difficulty Authority could do with impunity might over this myself because it is not my take on a different aspect in some small Amendment. In the circumstances, I hope harbour in the north of Scotland where he will not mind if I allow the Amend they proposed to take action, because the ment to be negatived. harbour authority might then consider tha;t if they were rto -take action foreign On Question, Amendment negatived. shipowners would avoid the harbour in future because they had at one ttme been 5.2 p.m. prosecuted and fined there. Therefore, LORD HUGHES moved to add to the there is no comparison ; but it is desir clause: able '�hat there should be no confusion " ( ) Without prejudke to the exercise of on the part of the possible offenders as the functions of a river purification authority to ,the Iaw with which they have to in relation to any discharge of an effluent comply. from a vessel, in a case where the provisions of the Oil in Navigable Waters Acts 1955 and The Amendment in the form which I 1963 apply to restrict such a discharge no now propose makes it quite clear that the proceedings for an offence against this Act or against the principal Act shall lie in prosecution will take place undet the Oil respect of that discharge." in Navigable Waters Acts, 1955 and 1963, 549 Registration of Births, [ 23 MARCH 1965] Deaths & Marriages Bill 550 but at the same time makes it quite clear We send this Bill to another place with thait tihe disoharge of the functions of only one point still unresolved : the river purification boards includes super desiraibility of .taking in it at ieast the first vision of these matters also. I think this steps in redprocal arrangements for the will meet in its entirety the point which registration in the Border areas as Scottish noble Lords raised and at .the same time of children of Scottish parents born across leave the river purification boards happy the Border in England and the similar that ,they have authority over the whole registration as English of children born field of pollution in the waters for which of English •parents on the Scottish side of they are responsible. the Border. The noble Lord told me that he has asked the Registrar General to Amendment moved- take up this matter with his opposite Page 10, line 25, at end insert the said new number in England. We both realise that subsection.--{Lord Hughes.) it EARL JELLICOE: My Lords, I am main questions to the noble Lord. First, grateful to the noble Lord, Lord can he ,assure us that the construction Mitchison, for the very acceptable way rate for married quarters is really ade in which he has presented this Bill to quate to meet the future need? I should the House this afternoon and for the welcome, if possible, an explanation kind but, I am afraid, untrue things about a point which was made in another which he has said about my few words place and which, so far as I know, was in advance. I realise, of course, that not satisfactorily answered there. A year this is a Money Bill, so that your Lord ago, the then Minister of Public Building ships must tiptoe around it with a certain and Works said that for next year (that circumspection. Nevertheless, there are is, the Budget year 1965-66) a sum of a number of points that I wish to explore £16 million had been agreed, and for a little. the year thereafter (the Budget year Before going any further, I would 1966-67) a. further sum of £18 million. make it clear to your Lordships that I The noble Lord in his opening remarks warmly welcome this Bill on my own referred to the marked increase con behalf and also, I trust, on behalf of my templated in ,the Government's pro noble friends. I do so the more willingly, gramme. I am not making a political having pressed the noble Lord to use poinit here, but I should like to remind his influence with his colleagues to secure your Lordships that this marked increase a Bill of this sort. I need not dwell long, was equally contemplated by the previous any more than the noble Lord has done, Government, as the figures I have just on the cardinal importance, if we are quoted show. But the programme en to secure adequate, efficient and there visaged for these two years called for, fore contented Armed Forces, of doing as I remember, the sum of £34 million. 555 Armed Forces [ LORDS} (Housing Loans) Bill 556 [Bad Jellicoe.] not be less, and the £45 million will cover We understand from the noble Lord. this, then I shall be quite haP;PY· Lord Mitchison, that the Government are now discussing the rate for the third year, While I am on the question of the year 1966-67, and I assume-and I adequacy, may I refer to the fact that am certain I am right in assuming this the then Parliamentary Secretary to the -that they plan to build married quarters Ministry of Public Building and Works at a rate not lower than that contem said in another place that at le11-st_ 40,000 plated a year ago. But if this is so. will more married quarters were required by they not need another £18 million or the Armed Forces in this country. I £19 million for the year 1966-67 ; not the suspect that this was a conservative (w_ith £45 million provided in this Bill, bu-t at a small "c ") estimate, and I should like least £52 million or £53 million? There to know a little more about it. Miss Lee rnay be a quite simple explanation for said I think with some exaggeration this which has escaped me. I did not but 'r would not quarrel about this-that see it satisfactorily answered in another far too many of the existing quarters were place, and I should be grateful for any pre-war slums. If these so_-call�d pr�-war explanation which the noble Lord can slums have been included m this estrmate of 40,000 new quarters requi�ed, h�ve th_e give. Government allowed in roakmg this esti LORD MITCHISON: Would it be con mate for the fact that we have a dis venient for me to give it now? proportionately large proportion of our Armed Forces abroad at the present EARL JELLICOE: Certainly. time? If more are brought back, then more married quarters will be required LORD MITCHISON : I am obliged to in this country. the noble Earl. The explanation is that Finally, what criteria aBout !he the figures he has given, which are quite eligibility of a Service man for a marned correct, cover more than the housing con quarter underly this estimate of 40,000? templated in this Bill. This is simply in It would be quite wrong for me to beat Great Britain, and it is in the terms of the drum for any particular Se vice, but the original Armed Forces (Housing let me say that I am certain ttiat7 in the Loans) Act, which has been carried on longer term we must make it much easier and repeated in this Bill. The other certainly for men in the Navy, and pos figure is a comprehensive figure that sibly for men in the other two Services, covers, for instance, Northern Ireland, to qualify for married quarters. Too and covers types of accommodation in often at present, as I know to well, we Great Britain that are not intended to have the heartrending position. that be covered by these figures. It is there when a rating is, for example, poste_d to fore only a part of the total £52 million the Far East, his wife may find m a which the noble Lord took, I think cor short space of time t at she and er rectly-I did not follow the third figure, _ � � but, at any rate, the total-of what was family are no longer ehg1ble for a mamed quarter. This is not a by-prod\1ct of called in another place the " rolling pro inhumanity ; it is merely a reflection of gramme". A "rolling programme" shortage. But can the noble Lord tell sounds very formidable : I think it means us anything about this? Are the present making provision three years ahead and Government intending, as I hope. to keeping it up to date year by year. liberalise the eligibility requirements? EARL JELLICOE: I am grateful for By the same token (and this is my that explanation, which I think removes second question) can the noble Lord tell my uncertainty in this respect. It . ce� us anything more about the reasons the tainly would completely remove 1t if Government have for prolonging the the noble Lord could assure me that for period of the present Act by only three the year 1967-68-1 know that the Gov years? I listened careful�y to. what the ernment's views on the precise pro noble Lord said about this pomt, but I gramme are not yet formed-there will was not entirely satisfied. We all know be as many completions and_ as many �ew only too well bow long it ta�es fro:n the starts in that year as m the previous moment a button is pressed m 'i\'h1tehall year. If I am right in thinking that t�e to the moment when a married! quarter. tempo of completions and new starts will or for that matter anything else, is . I 557 Armed Forces [ 23 MARCH 1965] (Housing Loans) Bill 558 ready. We all know, with regard to disadvantages. I do not think I need housing, the time taken up in land recite them now, but can the noble acquisition, planning, and all the rest of Lord tell us whether he, for one, is it. In view of this, is the noble Lord satisfied with the present arrangement, quite happy about the fact that the and whether it is satisfactory to the Ser renewal period has been cut from five vice departments and to the Ministry of to three years? Defence. My third question to the Minister Those are my four main questions ,to concerns the security and stability of the the noble Lords. May I, in conclusion, whole programme. It has always been put three supplementaries, as it were, to my belief that the loan procedure him? envisaged by the 1949 Act gave greater security to the housing programme for LORD MITCHISON: My Lords, can the Services. I know that the sums. have the noble Earl summarise his four main to be voted annually and are included in questions again? the Service Estimates, the Defence EARL JELLICOE: The four main Estimates or in the Estimates of the Ministry of Public Building and Works. questions are the adequacy of the pro Nevertheless, the mere f ct that Parlia gramme ; the degree to which this pro a cedure insula:tes this programme from ment has approved specific sums for possible Treasury cuts ; whether the Service men's married quarters for a present ministerial set-up for handling specific period seems to me to give the this matter is correct ; and the wisdom whole programme some insulation and or not of cutting the renewal period some protection, not only from the Treasury chopper and the Services them from five to three years. Those are my four main questions. selves, but, at a pinch, when Treasury pressure is on they may be prepared to My three supplementaries are as opt for guns rather than for butter, for follows. The first concerns the quality battleships rather than for bathrooms. and the cost of these married quarters. That is why ·I was a little surprised and, I gather that they are estimated to cost indeed concerned, to read in the Report about £3,000 each, which, of course, of the proceedings in another place in seems on the face of it-because land Committee that the Minister had said: does not come into this-a little on the " I know that the Service departments high side. A lot depends on the stan believe that they are insulated by the Bill dards at which the Government and the and I take responsibility for it."-[OFFJCIAL Services are aiming. Many of the new REPORT, Commons, Vol. 707, (No. 65), col. 738, February 25, 1965.J married quarters are quite excellent. However, so far as I lmow, the Govern Immediately preceding that he said: ment have not yet adopted the Parker " I do not think they are insulated." Morris standards for married quarters, I wonder whether the noble Lord can although they have commended them to tell us anything more about this matter local authorities. As I see it, the Gov of insulation? Can he resolve this ernment should take the lead, not only apparent dichotomy within the breast of in experimenting with new building tech the Government and within the breast of niques and industrialised techniques, but the Minister himself? also with quality. On the face of it, it seems wrong that they should commend My final and leading question to standards to local authorities which the noble Lord is to ask him whether, they are not themselves prepared to in 'his vii:mr, the r,resent ministerial adopt. I should be grateful for any organisation in this respect is a good thing the noble Lord could say on that one. As be knows, the Government point. of which ([ was a member introduced the organisaition whereby the separate My second question again bears on Service works departments were taken industrialised building techniques. Many over by the Ministry of Public Build of these new Service estates are to be ing and Works ; and thart Ministry there very large indeed. A start has been fore handles this programme for the made, as was mentioned in the Defence Services as an allied service. There are White Paper, on an estate at Gosport, advantages behind that method, and also the first slice of which will amount to 559 Armed Forces [ LORDS] (Housing Loans) Bill 560 [Earl Jelliooe.] very often can become part of the official 1,000 maisonettes. I think it is even pool of hirings. Will the Protection from tually intended that this should be ex Eviction Act make it more difficult for panded to 3,000 to 4,000 maisonnettes. that Service man to regain possession In effect, it will be a small New Town. of his house when he is posted back The noble Lord, Lord Silkin, can speak from abroad? I noted what the noble on this point with far greater authority Lord had to say on this matter on the than I. I believe that one of the lessons Second Reading of the Protection from of the New Towns was that, in our Eviction Act. Anything more ,vhich he natural desire to give priority to housing, can add on that specific point I, for one, we gave too little priority to the pro shall be glad to hear. vision, in the early stages, of what are called community services-perhaps nl)t I have spoken at some ,tittle1 length schools, but playgrounds, swimming on this Bill. I make no apology for that, pools, community centres, pubs, bowling because I believe that good housing and, alleys, dance halls and, not least, above all, the right number of ma,rried churches. These Service housing estates quarters of the right quality, in the right are likely to contain a particularly places, is a major factor in oljr ability mobile community, and I should have to secure the volunte:::rs we need for our thought that, in planning them, early Armed Forces and, what is eqt1ally im attention should be given to the provi portant, having got them, to retain them. sion of these community services. AH that said, I should like once again to say how much I welcome thj' Bill in I should like to ask the noble Lord general. what the Government's intentions are, and whether they are thinking of ways 5.38 p.m. in which a more settled population could LORD SILKIN: My Lords, I must be introduced into these estates. I have apologise to the House for �ot being a couple of suggestions to make in this present at the introduction of the Bill, regard. The first is that there could be nor for most of the speech of the noble provision-in my view, there should be Earl, Lord Jellicoe. Perhaps the right provision-to enable Service men to buy thing would therefore be for me to sit their accommodation before they retire, down. But I had given my n�me as a or even beforehand, on these estates. speaker, and unfortunately, I V(as called Secondly, I should like to suggest that away at the last moment. I haq intended the Government should consider intro to raise two questions, just two, because ducing housing associations on to these I thought the noble Earl was more estates from an early stage. A start has familiar with the background of this been made along these lines with the question than I was. I wanted to ask Victory Housing Association at Gosport, how it comes about that we require £45 but I think it is possible that this could million to be spent in 3 years when we be extended. have provided £95 million to be spent over 15 years. I was going to ask My third and final supplementary . is not, I fear, directly related to the Bill, whether this £95 million has already but it is specifically related to Service been spent. Judging by the ex�enditure, housing. During the not •altogether satis it looks as if there is to be a great in factory discussion on this Bill in another tensification of the provision df housing place, the Government were more than for the Armed Forces over the next three once asked about the impact of the Pro years. tection from Eviction Act on the Services. The other question concerns the rate This has, or could have, as I see it, quite of interest. The rate of interest, of an impact. The late Government were course, determines the rents which have encouraging, and the present Govern to be charged. Under the Bill, the rate ment, I am glad to see, are encouraging, of interest is to be settled by the Service men to buy their own houses. Treasury. I should like to know whether This is good in itself. It is good also the noble Lord. Lord Mitchison. can because it adds to the pool of houses tell us what will be the rate of interest will 1 which may become available, because thatn be determined by the Treasury. when a Service man is posted abroad he Ufortunately, in these cases the rate of can let the house which he owns, which interest is determined for the Jilext 20 or 561 Armed Forces [ 23 MARCH 1965] (Housing Loans) Bill 562 30 years according to what is the pre- Acts, as I see it. is to provide machinery valent rate of interest at the time when for keeping Service housing in line with the loan is granted. At the moment rates the improvements and additions that are are very high and we do not know how being made in civilian housing. Obviously long they are going to remain high. Is you do not want to turn the whole there any provision for special rates of of your available building labour and interest in connection with-this particular building resources on to the provision service, or will the rates charged be the of housing for the Services, any more normal one?-in which case rents will, than you want to neglect them in any of course, be very high indeed. way. They have to keep in line with the civilian housing programme, and at Those were the questions I meant to present it is perfectly obvious that in ask, but the noble Earl has put a ques many places there is a severe and urgent tion to me about the services that will need for more new housing. · We are be made available for officers and men hoping therefore, and we intend, that in the camps, and whether or not I housing programmes taken as a whole agreed that in the New Towns we were shall increase. We also intend that this a little slow in providing facilities other particular sector of it shall increase, too. than housing. I think we were. Possibly we might have been a little faster. In I gave figures which really indicated our desire to build houses we con a very marked improvement. As my noble centrated on them ; but there is a danger, friend Lord Silkin has just pointed out, as I am sure the noble Earl will agree there is a great deal of difference between with me, of going too fast in providing £95 million spent over 15 years and £45 things which you think are going to be million spent over 3 years. The exact suitable for the people who are going equivalent, if my arithmetic is right, would be £225 million over 15 years in to occupy your houses but which turn I out to be white elephants. My own stead of £95 million ; and concede to inclination has always been to wait until the noble Earl at once that that improve the demand comes from below. When ment was begun under the last Govern people really want a thing, then you ment. We are carrying it on and, in view provide it. But if you provide it in of our intentions with regard to the advance you find very often that it is general housing programme, we are not appreciated. So one has to hold a accelerating it a little more. balance, providing things in the early I am afraid that I cannot give any stages which one is quite sure about and definite figures about the third of the waiting until the demand develops for three years of the present rolling pro others. That is all I want to say, and gramme-that will be year 1967-68-be I hope noble Lords will forgive me for cause those are the figures which I men not having been present to hear what tioned in my first speech as being under he said. negotiation at the moment with the Treasury. I can therefore give no figure 5.43 p.m. and no pledge of any sort. But I think I LORD MITCHISON: My Lords, if it may say that, with the picture as it is not too unorthodox a beginning, I appears up to 1967, it would be surpris would say that my noble friend did not ing if 1967-68 showed any diminution. miss much. I should like, if I may, to But I always want overtime for prophecy, answer . as succinctly as possible the especially three years ahead. Therefore, I points which the noble Earl has so think that is as far as I can go. courteously and dearly put, to begin with Before I come to the minor points, as on adequacy. There is always this diffi the noble Earl put them, the next point culty about any housing programme: is the question of cutting to three years that you build what appears to be suit and how far I am satisfied with the able at the time-I am now talking about insulation (I know exactly what he the quality of the housing-and as stan means) that is intended to keep this kind dards rise (and they do rise) you find that of expenditure a little out of the ordinary the buildings of 20 or 30 years ago are run of annual budgeted expenditure. That no longer what you would build nowa was the intention of the original Bill. days. The period of three years really has On number-if I may turn to that the object, as I indicated in my opening aspect of adequacy-the object of these remarks, of providing an opportunity Vol. 264 K 563 Royal [ LORDS] Commission 564 [Lord Mitchison.] have been provided since the war. But of reviewing at a rather earlier stage. the bottom 20,000, the ones that were As I pointed out, too, there have been I1 there before, do include a great deal of changes-changes in the position of the ' reconditioned property, and probably it Ministry of Public Building and Works; is inevitable that they should be so, with and, of course, a major change in the out undue waste of buildings that could fact that the Ministry of Defence has be made suitable. One has to remember, now taken the place of the three separate as the noble Earl himself indicated, that Service Departments-so that it seemed one never catches up with the full wise to ensure a review at a rather demand. In that respect it is like any earlier stage. housing programme, and therefore one has not to waste anything that i� properly There is a further reason. The rolling usable without causing disco'.mfort or programme-I rather dislike the words affecting recruitment and re-engagement. but they have been used-goes in three year waves, as it were, and it is probably THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORT better that these Bills, which represent a FOLIO (LORD CHAMPION): MY Lords, part of the rolling programme total, the programme of the House makes it should also go in three-year periods. But necessary for me to move that �he House it is not intended to make any serious do now adjourn duriug plea�ure until change in policy, and there are no dark the Royal Commission at 6 o'clock. intentions behind it. I see that the Prime Minister on March 11, 1965, answered Moved accordingly, and, on Question, some questions, with which I will not Motion agreed to. trouble the House in detail at this stage, in Col. 618 of Hansard in another place. They make it quite clear that this did not signify any broad change of policy. House adjourned during pleasure. I I am asked whether I think it is the House resumed. best way of doing it. I hesitate to put my own views to the noble Earl-I think he knows more about this than I do-but it seems to me a sensible ROYAL COMMISSI a kind of tear gas which causes nausea mission, in which the Indian and Polish and vomiting. But tear gas tloes not delegations reported that the American cause nausea and vomiting: it affects bombing of North Vietnam was a the eyes and the throat. Gas which violation of the Geneva Agreements, and causes nausea and vomiting is not tear that was that ; and in which the gas. So there is a complete and obvious Canadian delegate dissociated himself contradiction on this statement, and we from this position, pointing out that the should find out the truth before adopting bombing was due to the increased a position about whether or not this is activity of the Viet Cong, with North simply a police-type gas which happens Vietnamese and Chinese help. to have been used in a war. If it were, Perhaps we do not remember so well it woU1ld not be so terrible. If it causes the back history. What happened be nausea and vomiting, I think the pre fore? How did we get into this position? liminary conclusion should be that it is How did the Americans get into this not a police-type ,gas. I know of ho -police position? Let us remember also the 1962 force in the world which uses gases Report of the Control Commission, in causing nausea ,and vomiting. which -all three delegations-the Polish, There is another contradiction One of Indian and Canadian-agreed that both the American statements yesterday said sides had repeatedly broken the Geneva that this gas was used to " clear out " Convention. The North broke it in ways areas in which Viet Cong forces had with which we are all too familiar-by taken refuge among non-combatants running arms across the frontier to sup which I assume means to make the Viet port the Viet Cong revolt. The South, Cong forces run away. Of course, tear they maintained, broke it because there gas has precisely that effect. If you was a de facto military alliance (which meet it, you run away to try tq get out was precluded in the Convention) be of it: but a gas which produce;, nausea tween the Government of South Vietnam and vomiting by no means has that and the Government of the United States; effect. It makes you lie down and vomit. 573 British Policy [ 23 MARCH 1965] In Asia 574 It seems, then, that if this is the nature which contains not one Chinese soldier. of the gas, it would not be proper to What is the U.S.A.'s long-term aim? Do describe it as an agent for " clearing they see this shape in the same way as out" this or that area. It would be it might be seen by someone less closely proper to describe it as an agent for involved in it? How long do they expect laying out the troops concerned while to maintain 30,000 troops six thousand you occupy that area. By the time they miles from home and to bomb a country have recovered, you are in charge. which does not contain any of the troops That is enough about gas, except for of their principal adversary?-for China the overall point of the 1925 Convention, is their principal adversary. How do which America did not sign. On the one they expect to bring it to an end? Here hand, you may say that any sort of I wish to put one possibility before your incapacitating gas from which people Lordships. I cannot see myself how recover is much more humane than they expect to bring it to an end. They napalm or white phosphorus, or even have said nothing about what they wish plain bullets and mortar bombs. In their position to be there in, say, ten physical terms, that is true: it does not years' time. All they say is: "Let the kill you. But the 1925 Convention was Viet-Cong stop attacking and we will not selective. It banned the use, I think stop attacking, too." But this is a mini I am right in saying, of all noxious mum statement and does not withdraw gases-it did not say lethal gases, but the veil at all from their true intentions noxious gases-in warfare. The use of about what they want in the area. Is this gas in what is undoubtedly a war it possible-and I ask Her Majesty's therefore reintroduces, for the first time Government this question-that the in 50 years, the use of gas as a weapon United States wish to draw Chinese in warfare. The fact that it is apparently forces into that war in order to have the a small and harmless gas should not lead excuse to bomb the production facilities us to neglect the fact, that in one respect for Chinese nuclear weapons in the clock bas been put back 50 years to Sinkiang? If it is possible, I think we a form of weapon which we thought we may hope the Government will do their had abolished. best to dissuade them from so doing. Now this war, my Lords, is one which Lastly, on the question of China itself we support-there is no doubt about -because what we are talking about that. I am not talking now about really boils down to China-what sort declarations. We have a military mission of an animal is it, the new China? I in Vietnam, in support of the Govern think we may be blinded by the short ment of Vietnam, working in collabora term issues ; but we ought not to forget tion with the United States forces there. that these are people who were civilised We have a large civilian mission, buil a thousand years before the Greeks ing roads, development ways ; but we learned to read and two thousand years also have a small military mission. I before we got as far as woad. They have know it is only advising on village not forgotten that civilisation. Is China defence ; it is not occupied in the sort our enemy? Our immediate and most of operation which the Americans are vulnerable interest in the neighbourhood now carrying out across the border of North Vietnam. But it is, nevertheless, of China is Hong Kong. They have not a military mission under a serving done anything about that. Would it be British military officer. It is, therefore. right to say that China was and should our war, and that gives our Government be regarded as an implacable adversary every right to speak on it as they wish ; of Britain's interests for the rest of and it gives our Parliament every right time? If not, what plans have the Gov to urge what it wishes upon our own ernment for getting out of this position Government. of continued escalation of a war in which we are directly involved? Do we want to What is the strategic and geopolitical stop China from having a position of shape of this war? I have already spoken peaceful hegemony, dominating peace about the tactical shape. The United fully South-East Asia or Eastern Asia States of Ameriea has 30,000 troops in in general? Can we stop them if we South Vietnam, six thousand miles from want to? Do we want to, even if we home, and they are bombing a country ean? Do we want to stop China from Vol. 264 K4 575 British Policy [ LORDS] In Asia 576 [Lord Kennet.] to see achieved. We are concerned about achieving a position similar to that the situation in Vietnam. Reference has achieved by the U.S.A. in Latin been made by the noble Lord, Lord America? Should we not first face the Kennet, to the use of gas. I must em possibility that (a), we cannot stop China phasise the widespread concern felt in from achieving this position in time ; this country at the use of gas warfare and (b), it is not against our or American and the effect on opi11ion in A$ia, which interests if China does achieve such a may well be quite out of proportion position? to any military advantages to pe gained My Lords, I come back to the ques by such a form a warfare. It may be tion of the Government's long-tenn that this particular use of gas is in the policy. I think this country is rather nature of a policing activity. As the like a small dinghy being towed by an noble Lord, Lord Kennet, sai�. we do extremely large and fast ship. This not know precisely what kind of gas is not a bad position to be in if you has been used. But surely it is clear know where the ship is going. I ask that it must provide material for very this question again; do the Government powerful propaganda among the people know where the American ship is going? of Asia, against uot only the United If not, have they any right to keep the States of America but the West as a people of this country on tow, going in whole. Therefore I think (he best an unknown direction which involves friends of America must express their manifest danger? It would be for dis views at this time. cussion-and I hope that we can get As the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, some light from the Government this pointed out, since the 1914-18 war use has evening-whether it might not be time to not been made of gas and we must be change the position. I do not recom thankful that that is so ; but I understand mend that we cut the painter. We might that there has been much research and lengthen it, which would enable us to great progress-if that is the right word yaw a little, or shorten it and climb in the methods of use and deV;elopment on board to talk to the captain. Has of gas and germ warfare. If, eten in its that been done? mildest form, gas is used in Vietnam, is Lastly, there is one final point which there not a risk that this will be1extended was very much on my mind. The Foreign and that we may in future see the use of Secretary is in Washington and has been very much more serious and devastating talking of these very things with the forms of gas and germ warfare in con President of the United States. Is it sequence? It may be difficult for Her Majesty's Government to say all that is proper to say anything at all at such a moment? I examined that question for a known to them. It is always d�fficult in very long time and I came to the conclu situations such as this, where there are sion that it was proper, if only for this diplomatic considerations to be taken into account ; but I hope that some indication reason: in these days of high-powered will be given to-night of Her Majesty's inter-Governmental diplomacy, there is Government's views of what representa al�ays a Minister somewhere talking tions have been made to the United with some other Government about the States. most pressing issues of the day-and so there should be. If one is to refrain from Finally, I should like to have some raising a matter in debate because of assurance that, in the opinion of Her this, then one would never get a chance Majesty's Government, there has not been to air one's views at all. a breach of international obligations and conventions. It may be difficult for the 6.46 p.m. spokesman on behalf of Her �ajesty's LORD WADE: My Lords, I should Government to tell us all the facts ; but like to make a very brief intervention in I hope at the close of this debate some this debate with particular reference to thing will be said to allay the fears that Vietnam. May I make it clear at the are very genuinely held. I outset that I have no desire to rouse or to stir up anti-American feeling? It 6.49 p.m. would be very unwise to do so and it LORD CARRINGTON: My Lords, I would not help bring about the ultimate had not intended to make any !observa settlement which I am sure all of us wish tions on Lord Kennet's Questi911, but I 577 British Policy [ 23 MARCH 1965] In Asia 578 hope the House will allow me to say one Asia left. However the noble Lord, Lord thing, because the noble Lord always Walston, answers for the Government makes a very interesting speech and this question on the Order Paper, our always asks very interesting questions. policy in the Far East has needed the Now that the noble Lord, Lord Wade, biggest military build-up since Suez. Is from the Liberal Benches bas said some it a mere coincidence that this has taken thing, it might seem odd if nobody from place at the same time as the American these Benches made any remarks at all. open war in Vietnam? Unfortunately, I did not hear the earlier The struggles of the people of part of Lord Kennet's speech, as I came Vietnam and of Malaysia are part ol in rather late ; but in his closing remarks a single strnggle against Anglo-American he suggested that this country was like imperialism in South-East Asia. To-day, a small dinghy being towed by the large when public opinion has been stirred up ship of the U.S.A. and he wanted to know over the use of gas, we surely have to where that large ship was going. That is ask ourselves why we and the Americans not for me to answer. No doubt that is are in South-East Asia at all. The Ques what the noble Lord, Lord Walston, is put down by going to answer in a moment. tion the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, is an apt and pointed one to-day, However, I would say this on behalf when the people of Britain are deeply of those who sit on these Benches. I horrified to hear on the radio and to read hope very much that nobody is going to in the Press that the Americans are using suggest-regardless of gas or any of these gas. Yesterday, it was napalm; to-day, things--that the American ship should gas. As bas been said, in 1925, all the be going in the direction of an abandon leading countries, except America, signed ment of their position in South Vietnam. an agreement saying that they would Those of us who remember history, as never use gas. the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, has pointed out, remember that there has been a LORD KENNET : Did the Soviet gradual erosion of the Western position Union? -and it is a Western position--=in that area. We started off with the whole of LORD MILFORD: I do not know. It Vietnam. Now North Vietnam is entirely might be at present a nerve gas, though dominated by the Communists, and South it is ominous that the Pentagon has Vietnam is partly so. An abandonment refused to identify its chemical composi of the American position there would tion. And if this gas is unsuccessful, who have the most serious effect upon the i1s to say that it will not be a lethal gas other two States, Laos and Cambodia, to-morrow? Jf napalm is unsuccessful, and would have an effect on the South who is to say that it will not be nuclear East Asia Treaty Organisation, on the wea,pons to�morrow? There are already Philippines and, in particular, on rumours and reports of discussions on Thailand, which would be incalculable selected nuolear targets. Again, new for the whole position of the Free World weapons have been tried out on a coloured in that area. So I hope that nobody will race. suggest that the Americans, wherever the There has not been such consternation dinghy is going-and I hope that the in this country since the noble Earl, Lord noble Lord, Lord Walston, will say where Attlee, went to ·President Truman to stop the ship is going as well as the dinghy the use of atom ·bombs in Korea. The should abandon that position. I think American Ambassador in Saigon, General that the Americam: are in a very difficult Maxwdl Taylor, has said that there is no situation and that they should ·have our limit to the escalation of the war and that support in what they are doing to con the United States may directly enter the tain aggression and to support the posi ground fighting. Furthermore, the Ameri tion of the Free World in that area. can Air Force jets are now flying over North Vietnam selecting targets at will. 6.52 p.m. This means that young, trigger-happy LORD MILFORD: My Lords, I think pilots are " making whoopee" with that we may not be able to know where rockets and napalm. We must remember the ship or the dinghy is going, because that, although President Johnson won the things are so serious and dangerous that election easily, an awful lot of people there may not be much of South-East voted for Goldwater. 579 British Policy [ LORDS] fo 4sia 580 [Lord Milford.] made the leader of a Parltamentary The 1955 Geneva Agreement, in the delegation representing both sides of drawing up of which ,the noble Earl, Lord the House. I think that probably all Avon, played such a leading I_Jart, pro members of the delegation wopld agree vided for the independence of Vietnam, that the situation in Jordan is be Laos and Cambodia ; for the withdrawal devilled by the Arab-Israeli conflict. of foreigu troops and bases ; and for the The national expenditure of 1ordan is establishment of the 17th Parallel as the £35 million a year, and of that :total £21 demarcMion line untiil elections in the million is spent upon the Army and whole of Vietnam in 1956 to unify the security forces. It is fair to 'add that country. America did not sign, but under these forces are often used !for con took not to use force to overturn ,this structive purposes. We saw lthe mili agreement. However, she poured in tary, with military equipment, I bui,lding money, equipment and advisers, to prop a great dam for water storage and the up the corrupt and unpopular Dien, who generation of power. But concentra refused to hold elections in 1956. He and tion upon the conflict between the Arab his Government were loathed and despised Governments and Israel means that for their oppression and corruption. So, while £21 million is expended for mili in 1960, the National Liberation Front tary purposes, the expenditure on was formed. Its programme was merely education is only £4 million, and that land reform, factory welfare and the on health only £2 million. liquidatiou of American monopolies. I am not going to suggest that Government, as co-chair it will The British be easy to resolve the conflict, put I man of the 1954 Geneva Convention, be lieve that something could be done to should insist that ,the 1954 Agreement, deal with that there should be no some of its effects. I wish to which stipulated refer to four of those foreign troops or bases in Vietnam and effects which we saw. There was a that the people of Vietnam should decide village near Bethlehem, the birthplace of the man their own affairs, is observed. America who lived up to the Jewish Command- is violating this Agreement. Any con ment, I ference on negotiations must be based on "Love thy neighbour as thyself". its observance. Those who helped to put in a Labour where the netting frontier between Jordan Government hoped that there would be and Israel passes between homes with an end of imperialism and of " showing mothers and their children on different the flag". They hoped that there would sides. As we came to that f{i!ncing, I be a big cut in armaments and arma have never in my life seen anything more ments expenditure. But, instead of a inhuman in relations between families. gunboat policy, there are now huge They are prohibited even from speaking fleets, napalm, gas and nuclear bombs. to each other through the netting. A Every day the Labour Government con daughter gave her aged mother a chicken tinues to support the Americans' open at the New year, and the mother of 81 and dirty war is a challenge to the years of age was sentenced to one year's Labour movement and is causing con imprisonment for receiving it. Fortu sternation, cynicism and anger ; but nately, as a result of the intervention of America's criminal irresponsibility the Member of Parliament for Bethle brings the possibility of a third world hem, that sentence was reduced to three war nearer. months. There were little children on either side of the fencing not allowed 6.59 p.m. to speak to each other. I became so LORD BROCKWAY: My Lords, I angry that, had I not been a guest there, wish to begin by thanking my noble I think I would have tried to break friend Lord Kennet for initiating this down that fencing with my fists. It is one debate tonight. It covers a very wide of the most cruel things I have ever seen area, the whole of Asia; and the noble in my life. Lord has referred to many parts of Let me take another instance. 6n a hill Asia. I am going to take advantage top over old Jerusalem, on the Jprdanian of this by making some reference to side of the frontier are a hospitf11 and a the MiddJe East, from which I have just university which have remainefl empty returned. Rather to my surprise, I was for seventeen years. Those pelple are [ 23 MARCH 1965 ] 58-1 British Policy In Asia 582 desperately in need of hospitals. The concrete proposals. I believe that if that Jordanian Government, with consider were done on the four issues which I able heroism, are begining their own un-i have particularly mentioned some agree versity, but after two years' effort they ment might be found. have been able to provide accommodation Already there has been a reconsidera for only 230 students. And there the tion of the frontier between the two terri hospital, which could save lives, and the tories in a particularly cruel case of a university, which could develop minds, division of families. I heard, as I are empty, guarded only by 60 Jewish returned through Israel itself, that on soldiers who once a month are escorted the Israeli side there are similar cases. I over the frontier by United Nations would urge very strongly that there guards. should be a reconsideration of the worst There is the problem of the refugees features of this frontier division so that in their camps, living in appalling condi the kind of cruelties I have described tions: one room-dirt floor, mud walls, might be ended. I have my friends in no furniture, a mattress, a Primus lamp, the Israeli Government, and I am now a washing basin,.a frying pan-10 feet by going to make to them an appeal that 7 feet, and a family of ten living there. the policy they pursued in retaining the There is the fact that the United Nations hospital and the university in Jordanian have been compelled to give their rations Jerusalem, which they hoped would be only to the original refugees, 250,000 temporary, should now, after seventeen children born since receiving no rations years be reconsidered. The beds and at all. student places are so much needed that There is the problem of the Jordan the Israeli Government should make the waters. One saw in Jordan itself a concession that the hospital and the tributary running into the Jordan from university should now be made available which a canal has been built which can for Jordanian needs. already take one-third of the waters of So far as the Jordan waters are con the river. That canal is doing construc cerned, there is no consideration as to tive work: it is feeding parched land ; it where those waters can be best used to is giving the opportunity to peasant popu satisfy human needs. The only considera lations. It has been deepened so that it tion is the needs of the Governments on will be able to take 60 per cent. of the the two sides. Indeed, I believe that if water-indeed, it will be able to take there were a proper allocation of those 100 per cent. Israel, itself wanting water waters •they could be of benefit both to for the great jagged mountain area of the Arab countries and to Israel. I saw the Negev, may be starved of water if how effectively they were being used in in Lebanan, Syria and Jordan the waters Jordan. Lebanon has its great plans for are cut off. the irrigation of the South, and for its I am going to make this plea: that, dam to store water. But the very waters whilst it will be impossible for Jordan which Israel proposes to go far to the and Israel to have direct negotiations in South, to the Negev, could be used not present circumstances-the Arab only for the benefit of Israel. I was a Governments declining to negotiate with little surprised, as I went South through the Israeli Government and the Israeli Jordan, to reach Akabar, on the Gulf Government declining to negotiate on of Akabar, to find that one, passed these problems except within the terms through exactly the same terri-tory as one of a general peace-it should be possible, finds in the Negev-sand, jagged rocks, by a third-party effort, to seek to reduce fantastic mountains of all colours, rich at least the suffering of some of the with mineral resources. The very water effects of this conflict. When my noble that could be taken to the South of Israel friend, Lord Robens of Woldingham, was could be piped to the South of Jordan, at the Foreign Office for a time he made and could be used also for the benefit a suggestion on this problem which I of Jordan. I believe that that problem think was of great promise. He suggested could be dealt with on a reasonable and that someone should be authorised, per constructLvei basi� if, unofficially,' we haps unofficially, patiently, if necessary could find some third party who would over the years, to pass from Cairo to negotiate. Jerusalem negotiating, negotiating, nego Now the problem of the refugee camps. tiating and trying to find agreement on I came back from Jordan more op timistic 583 British Policy [ LORDS] In Asia 584 [Lord Brockway.] On the last occasion when I spoke in about that problem than when I went. your Lordships' House, I dealt mostly I do not believe it to be as intractable as with Vietnam, and I do not want to go it is thought. In the first place, the over the ground again to-day-I should original refugees-many of them now like to acknowledge what my noble growing old, unable to work their farms, friend Lord Kennet said about that even if they were returned to them, and speech. But there have been very dis �ishing _to end their days in a sympathe turbing developments since. I am not tic env1ronment-are more and more now thinking of the report of I the use ready to spend the rest of their lives of gas. Non-lethal gas is notas de�tructive in an Arab environment rather than in of life as napalm bombs, or bomps which �he environment of Israel. I believe that, are explosive, dropped from �he air ; 1f their right of self-determination were the greatest danger of it seems to irnethat. conceded, if they were given compensa once having used gas, there may be tion, many of them would elect to stay reports of using more deadly gas, and in Arab countries rather than return to that we may deteriorate to a situation Israel. where the most deadly forms of gas Secondly, there is the development of which have been developed might be the youth in the camps. In the seventeen used. No, my Lords, I am thinking really years they have grown up ; many of of such statements as that niade by them have been technically trained. I General Maxwell Taylor, the Uni,ted went to that wonderful training school in States Ambassador in Saigon, to which Jericho, conducted by a man who I think my noble friend Lord Milford referred might be called the Dr. Schweitzer of -the statement that there is no limit to Jordan, where training in farming and the military action which may be taken in mechanical processes proceeds. When by the United States. the boys have finished their technical I want to urge upon Her Majesty's training they are passing to Kuwait, to Government, with all the earnestness Iraq, and to Syria. that I can possibly command, that it is In my view, the problem of the refugee not enough now to speak with I a mute camps in Jordan, and in other areas, voice upon these issues. Those o� us who could be solved if it were recognised that belong to the Labour Party are _rirobably the refugees should have the right to more proud of the action of my noble decide for themselves where they were friend Lord Attlee during the Korean going, and if compensation were given to war, in going to Washington and per those whose property had not! been suading President Truman against returned to them. making bombing attacks upon China across the Korean frontier, than we are My Lords, I have spoken longer than of any other single action within our I had intended on that subject, and there Labour Movement. Oh that that action fofe I will be brief on the very urgent otner matters that I want ,to raise. I could be repeated now, and tbat Her should like, first, to say to Her Majesty's Majesty's Government might make a Government, of which I am a loval similar gesture in relation to Vietnam ! supporter (and I often subdue my own When I spoke on the last ocq1sion, I language because of my admiration for indicated the .terms of peace which the Government of North Vietnam and the very much that they do) that many of us Viet have been disturbed, we are uneasy and Cong were prepared to accept. I have disquiet, because of the use of the think that at least we now have the right phrase, " British responsibility East of to ask : what terms of peace would the Suez". That policy has led to the des Government of the Unirted States p.ccept? patching of large numbers of forces. It It has given no indication. It has been has been reflected in the Government's satisfied merely ,to continue the war, and White Paper on Defence and in the surely the British Government, with its allocation of bombers which could Foreign Secretary now in Washington, carry nuclear arms. They are termed ought to be seeking from the American "peace-keeping forces" but many of us Government the rtermson which it would remember how that phrase has fre be prepared to end the war. quently been used by Imperialist Govern I had proposed to speak I about ments in the past ; and we hope that it Tndonesia and Malaysia, bnt I �11 re will not be used in a similar way to-day. frain. I will end by saying tliat if I MARCH 585 British Policy [ 23 1965 ] In Asia 586 speak with feeling on these matters, it the blindness is only temporary ; but is perhaps because I am a son of India. if it is a simple kind of chemical why I was born in Calcutta, and India is still cannot we be informed precisely what my spiritual home. I would urge, as the constituents are? my last words, that the policy of the May I ask another technical question? Government, in the whole spirit of the Is gas a " conventional" weapon? If the British Socialist Movement, should now United States or any other country that be one of seeking peace : peace in happens to be our Ally are using a Vietnam ; peace between the Arab weapon which is not conventional, do countries and Israel ; peace between they tell us, or do they ask our advice, Indonesia and Malaysia. Difficult? Yes. on what is known, I believe, as the But only as we move towards this peace "hot 'phone", as to whether they will the future of Asia and the peace should? The other point about this of the world be made secure. gas is that it is non-selective. We are 7.21 p.m. told that the gas is going to be used in BARONESS GAITSKELL: My Lords, those areas where there are non I wish to detain your Lordships for only combatants. A non-selective gas then will a minute or so, to refer to one or two attack not only the combatants but also points. It is perhaps interesting for the entirely innocent non-combatants; and noble Lord, Lord Kennet, to ask what that is an important aspect of gas warfare. are the Government's intentions for, say, If the noble Lord can answer these the next fifteen years ; but I am not technical questions I shall be very much so sure that the question is particularly obliged. helpful when the Government are dealing 7.24 p.m. with this particular crisis. The noble THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER Lord, Lord Kennet, asked what are our SECRETARY OF STATE FOR intentions in India in the next fifteen FOREIGN AFFAIRS (LORD WALSTON): years: are we going to build up a large My Lords, the Question of the noble force of arms there? That sort of ques Lord, Lord Kennet, as shown on the tion can be answered by asking: are Order Paper is : we going to allow China to overrun "To ask Her Majesty's Government what is India in the next fifteen years? That their long-term policy in Asia." is just as relevant as his own question. I am glad he put it down. I think this With regard to gas, the noble Lord, is a very important Question, and that it Lord Kennet, said that the use of gas is very apt at this time that we should in Vietnam puts the clock back. For be talking about such matters. But I my part, I should not mind putting the would emphasise that all this Question clock-that is, the nuclear clock that asks is what is Her Majesty's Govern we have at the moment-back fiftyyears. ment's long-term policy in Asia. There But non-lethal gas? It is non-lethal gas, fore, with the greatest respect, I would we are told. It may have its dangers; say to the noble Baroness, Lady stronger gas may be used. But let us Summerskill, that the composition of the remember that we have the most power gas now being used in Vietnam and the ful weapon of all; we have the nuclear motive behind it are really entirely bomb, and nothing can touch that. irrelevant to this particular Question, 7.23 p.m. important though they are in the imme BARONESS SUMMERSKILL: My diate present and in the immediate future. Lords, may I, before the noble Lord I think we should be straying far too answers, ask a question or two about far, at this relatively late hour, from the gas? We are told that it is non-lethal. subject of this Question if we were to What proof have we? It is a fact, as embark upon that. the noble Lord, Lord Milford said, that Once more, let me refer to the Ques the United States refuses to reveal the tion itself. It is not only on long-term chemical constituents. If tl.iat is not so, policy, but on Asia, which is a pretty could the noble Lord tell us what are large area, ranging from the Bering the chemical constituents of this gas? Straits to the Suez Canal. So it was It seems to me extremely powerful if it entirely right and proper that my noble produces severe gastro-intestinal symp friend Lord Brockway should raise a toms and blindness. We are told that matter concerning a part of the world 587 British Policy (LORDS] In Asia 588 [Lord Walston.] the more urgent points-I do not know which, I think, many of us do not always whether that is the right word-or to realise is in fact in Asia ; but I hope the points which are occupying our he will not think me discourteous if I minds rather more urgently at the present do not spend very long on his point time: specificailly the points of �he noble as far as Jordan is concerned. That Lord, Lord Kennet, in the order that he is not because I do not think it is raised them. Before doing that, let me important ; it is clearly of the greatest answer with real gravity his Question. importance, and I think all of us who Unfortunately, it would not be tight if I listened to him must have been moved sat down immediately after doing that by what he said and how he said it. I personally was particularly pleased Our long-term aim, the long-term aim when he raised this matter. because I of Her Majesty's Government, 1 in Asia is to ensure that all the countries of Asia remember many years ago, some thirteen are able to lead a life of freedom and or fourteen, I also was in those pursue their march towards prosperity parts. I visited some of the refugee without interference from any other camps and saw the magnificent work country, large or small. It is towards that being done by a fine Arab, I believe objective that we are making all our called Musa Alami. efforts, and everything that we are doing LoRD BROCKWAY: My Lords, may at the present time must be v�ewed in I just interrupt the noble Lord? Musa that light, and I say categorically that Alami was the "Dr. Schweitzer" of the we have no aggressive intentions. no desire Jordan to whom I referred. to promote Empire, to infiuen9e other countries into a way of life that they do LoRD WALSTON: I discerned that not wish to have ; and that when we have that was so. I hesitated only because our forces East of Suez it 1s solely for his name has not been in my mind for the protection of those things that we many years and I was not sure that I hold to be important for ourselves and, had it right. I agree entirely with what therefore, hold to be important for other the noble Lord said about the value people too. Our intentions in India are of his work, and I recall the magnificent not specifically, in the words I of the things he was doing while I was there noble Lord, Lord Kennet, to make India and which I am glad to know he is strong. What we want to do is to help still doing, although I am sorry that India, and other countries too, so to there is the need for them to be done. build up their own economy and their I also remember writing an article, own strength in every aspect, not only which I believe was published, called military, that the 400 million people living something like " The Barbed Wire Cur in India can live their lives in freedom tain separating the Jordan Waters"; and and bring up their families in security, I would bear out everything that my free not only from the threat of invasion noble friend Lord Brockway has said in from China or wherever it may be, but that respect. I sincerely hope that the from the ,even greater threat to them of efforts, whether they be governmental starva1tion. That is our intention in India or made through private individuals and elsewhere. and often in a case of this sort private So far as the nuclear problem is con efforts are of greater effect than Govern cerned, we believe, in Asia as well as in ment efforts-will do something to miti Europe in non-proliferation. Because gate the hardships of those refugees who China now has a nuclear bornb, we do are living there in those conditions. I not want other countries to feel that they say very sincerely that if the Israeli must achieve their own nuclear bombs, Government felt that they were in a and so we will work towards any form of position to allow this hospital to be collective assurance to non-nuclear coun used for the relief of suffering, whether tries, which means at this stage all in the sufferers happen to be Israelis or Asia other than China or Russia, iJ you those on the other side of the border, inclnde Russia as an Asian Power, so they would command the respect and that they will not feel constrained to gratitude of the whole world. have their own nuclear bombs. How this Let me move from that part and can be done is a matter for neg9tjation. come to what I was going to say were We are thinking of it; we are talking 589 British Policy [ 23 MARCH 1965] In Asia 590 of it. It is our long-term aim that this wealth, Australia and New Zealand, to should be achieved. help her in meeting this aggression. And when the noble Lord, Lord LORD KENNET: My Lords, is it then Kennet, spoke rather disparagingly of the the position that Her Majesty's Govern dangers of the Europeanisation of Asia, I ment have committed large numbers of am not sure that the present situation British troops without any idea whatever in Europe, although it has many worries of a suitable solution to the confrontation and many problems, is all that disastrous, in which they are engaged? when we think of what it might have been, when we think of the relaxation of LORD WALSTON: Of course we have tension which has taken place along the ideas a:s ,to a sui,table solution. The first Iron Curtain, which is a word now suitable solution, which the Malaysians scarcely used and with very little mean accept and which we support them in ing, and the relative spread of freedom in accepting, is that the •aggression by the many countries in Europe which before Indonesians should stop. When that has were not free. So the Europeanisation of happened we have no doubt ,that the Asia is not necessarily something we Tunku-and he has said so-will be pre should regard with despair, though I hope pared to enter into talks ; in fact he went we shall profit from the many mistakes so far the other day as to say be would which have been made in Europe and not gladly enter into talks with President repeat them when we come to Asia. Soekarno so long as the actual incidents stopped. For some reason best known to LORD KENNET: My Lords, may I himself, President Soekarno went back on interject? In saying a kind word for the the offer he had made through the Thai Europeanisation of Asia, would the noble Government, and at the moment these Lord extend the kind word to cover tens talks are off. But I cannot say this too of thousands of o.uclear weapons up emphatically: ,that we do not consider against the Himalayao. frontier, as they that ·this is something where we have any are now against the dividing line in right at all to dictate to Malaysia what Germany? the conditions should be; but we will assist them in the first instance in repell LORD WALSTON: Most certainly not. ing aggression and, in the second instance, I hope that is one of the lessons we have we will do all we can to bring about a learnt and profited from, and that we can peaceable and permanent solution in that achieve non-proliferation so that that sort part of the world. of thing does not take place. Simply on one matter of fact, may I Turning to Indonesia, if I may say so say thart: the noble Lord suggested-I do to the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, he not think I am misquoting him-that the seemed to me to be adopting what I can casualties were fairly equally divided be only call a neo-colonialist attitude to tween the two countries. In fact that is wards Malaysia. He says that we, Her very far from the case. I do not know Majesty's Government, should take the that it is particularly relevant, but there initiative and not leave it to the Malay have been in the two years, the 23 sians : that they are a young people ; they months, since this started, 74 casualties have been there only three years, and it is on the Malaysian side, including British the lazy way out to leave it to them ; we Commonwealth troops, and very nearly must do it. That is not the policy of 1,000 casualities on the Indonesian side. Her Majesty's Government. We do not believe we should step in and dictate to I tum to Vietnam, about which most an independent country, whether it be a of your Lordships who have taken part in member of the Commonwealth or not, this debate have spoken. Again I men how they should run their foreign policy. ion two questions of pure fact, possibly The situation in Indonesia and Malaysia not relevant but for the sake of the record. is quite simple. Malaysia is an indepen I think two noble Lords spoke of gas as dent country. It has been confronted not having been used for 50 years. In by aggressive acts, by its far more power fact it is more like 30 years since gas ful neighbour, 120 million Indonesians. was used, by the Italians in Abyssinia. Malaysia is defending herself to the best I do not think that has any great rele of her 2bility. She has called upon us vance to this argument ; it does not make and other members of the Common- gas any more attractive or less repulsive. 591 British Policy [LORDS] InAsia � 592 [Lord Walston.] as they refuse to do that, one can hardly to us, but the fact is that it was used be surprised that the South V�etnamese 30 years a,go and not 50 years ago. The are anxious for their allies to go on help noble Lord, Lord Kennet, said we bad a ing them, and one would hardly admire British Military Mission in Vietnam. We an ally who left South Vietnam to fight do not have a British Military Mission ; this battle alone at this stage. we have a British Advisory Mission which consis,ts of civilians, a very small number Many noble LQrds have urged that we, of civilians. One of them who was there Her Majesty's Government, should take at one time but ,is there no longer was a strong action with the United States Gov ernment, to demand from them what retired Army officer. But it is a civilian their peace conditions are, and things of mission which is there to help with that kind. I. do not know what noble experience we have gained in these parts Lords who have said that reaily think of :the world in counter-insurgency among goes on in Washington, when my right civilians, and is not a mHitary outfit at honourable friend the Secretary of State all. for Foreign Affairs talks with the Secre LORD KENNET: My Lords, on a point tary of State, Mr. Dean Rusk . or the of refinement, is not counter-insurgency President, and when Mr. GromyMo comes a military operation? here, and so on. Of course these things are talked about the whole time. Of LORD WALSTON: It depends whether course we are doing what we can not to it is among civilians and carried out by desert our allies, not to surrender this civilians or carried out by members of area to a totalitarian regime which they Her Majesty's Forces. In this case they do not wish for, not to turn it-7into the are not members of Her Majesty's Forces $Oft of country that Communist China is and therefore it is not only technically to-day ; because we do not want to live but actually not a military mission. How in that sort of country and we1 do not ever, we are giving help and we are not think that other countries who do not ashamed of it ; we are proud of it. And want to live like that should be left to we shall go on giving help of this kind their fate either, to become a Hungary so long as it is needed. or whatever it may be. I Let me once more remind your Lord But we do not want this fighting to ships what I said was our long-term continue, we do not want it to escalate, objective: that is, to enable these and we talk. We do not talk at the top countries in South-East Asia and the rest of our voices in the market place, telling of Asia eventually to lead a life of free everybody what our ciscussions with our dom. That is not open to them at the allies are, a:1d they do not do that either. present time in Vietnam. It would take But T can assure your Lordship�, if your far too long, and I think it would be Lordships need any assurance, that we profitless, to go back to past history of are in continuous consultation and, as I who started what when. There is no say, my right honourable friend is to-day doubt about it at all, however, that at in Washington at this moment speaking the present time the Viet Cong are being with the United States Government on helped by troops and arms from North these particular matters. We do not have Vietnam, some of which have come enormous confidence that within the next from China, some of which have come week or so peace will be restored to that from Czechoslovakia and some of which part of the worid; but we do havo hopes have come from Russia ; and in South that within the next months there will be Vietnam the Government of the country, some settlement of this fighting which whether you like them or not, are given will not be a betrayal either of our allies help by American forces. What we want or of the people who are dependent upon to do, as the Americans want to do, and certainly as the Vietnamese want to do, us ; it wi,H not be a scuttling for safety, is to bring these hostilities to an end, and for the safety of our own Continent, for I am quite certain that if North Vietnam the safety of our own comfortabl� Island, were to say that it would desist from but will be fulfilling the responsibilities of helping the Viet Cong there would be any civilised country which has any power little in the way then of getting both and any pretentions to have influence in sides to sit down and talk. But so long the world. 593 The Northampton [ 23 MARCH 1965 J Order 1965 594 LORD KENNET: My Lords, may I that we are two ships movin,g in convoy, intervene for just one last time? A few one obviously ra,ther larger and rather hours ago the Prime Minister said in the more powerful, but that we are working House of Commons that he did not know under our own independent ca·ptains but the Americans weJ",r going to use gas. May in concert towards the same objective. I ask now the pr,ecise question : do Her I have been asked questions about the Majesty's Government know the overall United States long-term policy. It is not American :plan? for me to answer for another Govern LORD WALSTON: My Lords, I would ment, but I can assure noble Lords that not give a precise-- in the long-term objectives there is nothing between the United States and BARONESS · SUMMERSKILL: My ourselves. We have the same traditions; Lords, I asked that question. I must ask we have the same beliefs in freedom and the noble Lord why be told me in bis the other things that I have spoken of. opening remarks that •he could not answer Those are the things which move us here, my questions. We now hear that in in Vietnam, in Malaysia, in Indonesia another :place the Prime Minister has been and throughout the whole of Asia. asked questions similar to mine and has given an answer. LORD WALSTON: My Lords, the THE NORTHAMPTON ORDER, 1965 answer to the noble Baroness is that some body put down that Question by Private 7.47 p.m. Notice and my right honoura:ble friend VISCOUNT DILHORNE rose to move, answered it. I could have answered it That an humble Address be presented to without any difficulty, because I could Her Majesty, praying that the Northamp have said exactly what ,my right honour ton Order 1965 (S.I. 1965 No. 250), laid able friend said. But I still maintain that before the House on February 19, be this has nothing to do with the long-term annulled. The noble and learned Vis policy in Asia, which is what we are count said: My Lords, had this Order discussing. had to be considered by the Special Orders Committee I should have ex LORD KENNET: My Lords, may I pected them to report that the Order, at correct the noble Lord? It was a supple least in certain parts, is not founded on mentary question. precedent, and also that it raises import THE EARL OF LONGFORD: My ant questions of principle. I have tabled Lords, the noble Lord had informed us this Motion in order to give the Govern that be was ,going to interrupt for the last ment an opportunity of giving explana time. I hope that, he will stick to that. tions to your Lordships of some of the curious features. The conduct of the LORD WALSTON: My Lords, I can Home Secretary in all this has already answer the last question of the noble been the subject of a Censure Motion in Lord, Lord Kennet, though not in a way another place. It is not my intention to satisfactory to him. All I would say is have another Censure debate to-night, that we are in close consultation, a!lmost though I must necessarily criticise some continuous consultation, through different of the actions of Her Majesty's Govern sources with the Americans and with all ment. the other people interested in this matter. This Order was laid on February 19 ; The actual long-term ,policies must have part of it came into force on February a certain amount of fluidity in them, and 22, and part of it takes effect on April 1. it might be misleading if I said that in The first matter calling for explanation fact-if ,I were allowed to ,tell him pre from the Government is why this Order, cisely-I could say what tihe United States laid on February 19, was not made Government ,were intending to do in the available to your Lordships in the next three weeks. All I can do is to Printed Paper Office until 10 o'clot:k assure him that we are working oloselv on February 25, three days after with the Americans in this matter. I part of it had come into opera would refute his suggestion that we are a tion, and six days after it had been laid. small dinghy being towed behind a large Why was this? Why was the Order held and powerful ship. I would rather say up for these days? On whose instructions? 595 The Norlhampton [LORDS] Order 1965 596 [Viscount Dilhorne.] instructions contained in a letter sent to I think we should be told, for I gather the Town Clerk read as followi; : that definite instructions were given by " The natural aim in drawing up the new somebody that on no account was the ward boundaries would no doubt pe- Or;der to be made available, either to (a) to provide an aJ>proximately equal your Lordships or to Members of another number of local government elpctors for place, until that time, 10 o'clock on each councillor, allowance being made for any likely change in electorate because of Thursday, February 25. That was the development within the next five years".- precise day on which the Censure debate on the matters dealt with by this Order y our Lordships will note 1those words took place in another place. I do not and (b) to have regard- know whether there is a sinister rela (i) to the desirability of having easily tionship between the two, but at least identifiable boundaries ; and (ii) to any local ties which would be this is a matter upon which we are en broken by the fixing of any particular titled to have an explanation. boundary." The time during which a Prayer to Your Lordships will see that there is annul an Order can be effectively made nothing in those instructions from the is laid down by Statute, and it is surely Home Office about regard being had to wrong that a Minister can cut short the the political consequences of cbmplyfug opportunities for securing the annulment with those criteria. It is, of course, right of an Order by giving orders that it is that regard should not be ha<;! to the not to be made available to Members effect on the political Parties of such a of either House of Parliament until a revision. It would be just as wrong to certain date. I raise this matter at the revise ward boundaries to secure political beginning of rmy speech in order to give advantage as it would be to aiter con the Government full opportunity of stituencies to make a safe seat for one obtaining, if they have not got it already, Party or the other. The objbct of a full. information about this situation. review of ward boundaries must surely Which Minister was responsible for this, be to secure the fairest representation, of and why was it done? May we have an the electorate, without regard1 to the assurance that it will not happen again? interests of the political Parties or of the Party which for the time 9eing has I must, I fear, remind your Lordships control of the council. of some of the facts to which public attention has already been drawn. I On October 12, 1964, a public inquiry will do so as shortly as I can. Following was held at which an independent on the recommendation of the Local barrister, very experienced in tihis kind Government Commission it was decided of work, presided. Two sets of proposals that the boundaries of the Borough of were considered. One was prepared by Northampton should be extended to in the Town Clerk, on his own initiative, clude certain parts of my former con and was adopted by the Labour Party; stituency, and to include about 10,000 and as they bad a majority on the council new electors in the borough. I may say, those were called " the Council's pro in passing, that the vast majority of my posals". The other proposals y,,ere put former constituents were bitterly opposed forward by the Conservative Party. Both to this, and I even had representations sets of proposals sought to comply with from the local Labour Party about it. the criteria laid down by the Home It was decided that these extensions Office. They were gone into in great should take effect on April 1 this year. detail. Evidence was given by, among This Order provides for that. The others, the leader of the Labour Party extension of the borough meant that the on the Council. ward boundaries would have to be The Labour Party's proposals were revised to take account of the fact that objected to by the Conservatives on three the new population was being brought grounds. First, that they caused un into the borough. necessary disturbance of existing ward boundaries and that no sufficient account On March 25, 1964, the usual instruc was taken of historic associations or tions were given by the Home Office. present ward boundaries. Secontlly, that May I remind your Lordships of what artificial boundaries were created instead they were? The relevant parts of the of having boundaries which followed 597 The Northampton [ 23 MARCH 1965 ] Order 1965 598 clearly defined courses. Thirdly (this was appreciates the contention that, since such development would take place for the most the important reason), that insnfficient part in wards abutting the boundary whilst numbers had been allocated to the inner wards in the centre of Northampton would be land-locked wards which had no room affected by slum clearance, the electorates of for growth and, in many cases, were the former wards would tend to increase and those of the latter to decrease with the result affected by slum clearance proposals that that there would be disparities between the would further reduce the number of electorates of the proposed wards in a few electors represented in these wards, years' time. In the view of the Secretary of whereas in the outer ring of wards there State the counter-proposals take account of this situation more satisfactorily than do the was considerable growth potential. Council's proposals, by providing for wards in The inspector made a very full report, the centre with high electorates at present and wards abutting the boundary with low and I will read his conclusions. He said, electora,tes. The Secretary of State accordingly under the heading " Conclusions " : accepts Mr. Verney's recommendation that " Both the schemes which were put forward the counter-proposals should be accepted sub at the inquiry were honest attempts to divide ject to minor changes for the purpose of the county borough into wards in strict accor .adopting boundaries which are more easily dance with the criteria laid down. The Coun identifiable." cil's scheme achieves more immediate parity of electorates, but the author of it conceded Apart from these minor changes, the that, although he had looked to the future, Home Secretary made only one change he had not been in a position to ascertain from the inspector's recommendations. In all the current development plans since he view of what happened later, what the was acting privately in August, 1963. Accept ing that due regard ought to be paid to fore Home Secretary said about this is of seeable changes within the next five years, I particular importance. What he said am not convinced that the Council's scheme was: will show an equality of electorates at the " The Secretary of State notes thl!Jt all end of that period. parties a.re agreed that there should be fresh " In recommending for acceptance the elections of councillors in 1965. Mr. Verney scheme prepared by the Conservative group was in favour of elections on May 13, as for the purpose of the inquiry, I am impressed preferred by all Parties, or alternatively on by the evidence secured as to future trends, a date before the appointed day, April 1, both of development and clearance and by 1965, so thaf councillors could come into the probability that within the relevant period office on the appointed day. The Secretary something approaching equality will be of State agrees that there should be fresh achieved. The boundaries selected are, in my elections. As for the date on which they opinion, preferable to those put forward by should be held, the Secretary of State does the Council and there is no obvious inter not consider that it would be satisfactory to ference with any existing community of adhere to the ordinary day of election if interest." the effect is that the areas to be added to ,the county borough would be unrepresented He also recommended that the new Conn on the Council between April 1 and the coming cil should be elected en bloc in May, into office of the newly elected councillors 1965, the extensions of the borough on May 17. The alternatives are to provide taking effect on April 1. in the Minister's Order for the added areas to be joined to existing wards for the period My Lords, that report was dated April 1 to May 17 or for the holding of November 16. About five weeks later (I elections prior to April I. The Secretary ask your Lordships to note the time), of State takes the view that the first of these alternatives would complicate the order, which on December 23, the Home Secretary would then con,tain .transitional provisions for announced his decision in a letter sent the period April 1 to May 17 as well as to the Town Clerk. I should like to provisions for the new ward structure after read from that letter: May 17. He considers that ,the more satisfac tory course would be to adopt the alternative " The Secretary of State has carefully con proposed by Mr. Verney, namely to hold sidered Mr. Verney's report and the counter elections before April 1. The Secretary of proposals made by the Conservative group State has decided therefore that provision of Northampton County Borough Councillors, should be made in the order for elections to supported by the Northampton Conservative be held on such day prior to the appointed and Unionist Association. He notes that all day as the returning officer shall appoint." Parties agreed, and Mr. Verney recommended, that there should be 12 wards for the. enlarged So the Home Secretary at that time county borough each returning three coun regarded it as of such importance that cillors. The Secretary of State accepts this the 10,000 new electors should not be proposal. unrepresented on the Council from April "The Secretary of State has considered the main criticism made of the Council's proposals 1 until May 17, ·that he decided uhat new that they fail sufficiently to take into account elections should be held before April 1. residential development in Northampton. He He rejected tihe alternative of just adding 599 The Northampton [LORDS] Order 1965 600 [Viscount Dilhorne.] what passed at the interviews they had. new electors to the existing wards, on I suspect that the Labour Councillor was the ground of the ,transitory provisions well satisfied by what he was told, for involved. three days later, on January 28, the There is, of course, another objection, Council carried, in the face of opposi which the Home Secretary did not men tion, the resolution recommend� to them tion ; ,that is, that if that were done the by the Finance and General Purposes new electors would, it is true, be repre Committee. Then, a week later, on sented on the Council, but by persons February 4, the Home Secret�ry wrote whom they had taken no part in electing. another letter reversing the decision he This decision was not to the liking of had given on December 23. lit took him the local Labour Party. On January 5, five weeks (I make no complaint about at a meeting ,of the Finance and General that) to consider the inspector's report Purposes Committee of the Council, the before reaching his first decision. But Chairman of ,that Committee, the leader in less than a fortnight after tii;e visit of of the local Labour Party and the gentle the · local Member of Parliament, and man who had given evidence at the a week after the Council had passed this public inquiry, said that the proposals resolution, he reversed himself ; and he accepted by the Home Secreta_ry were did so just on representations made by, weighted heavily in favour of tiie Con or on behalf of, the local Labour Party. servMive Party ; and, secondly, that the My Lords, this is what was said in Labour Party had had no opportunity of his letter: challenging them on the basis of their " I am directed by the Secretary of State politicaiJ. consequences. to refer to your letter of 29th January for warding the resolution of the Northampton Your Lordships will remember that Borough Council asking him to rescind the both the Home Secretary and the inspec decision regarding the warding arrangements tor had ,reached the conclusion that the for the extended county borough conveyed to you in the Home Office letter of the 23rd Conservative proposals best satisfied the December, and asking that the Order to be criteria laid down by the Home Office, made by the Minister of Housing and Local and tha,t meant that in their view these Government under the Local Goverf)ment Act, proposals provided for the fairest repre 1958, should provide instead for the areas added to the borough to be temporarily sentation of the electorate. If the result annexed to contiguous wards and that the was likely to favour the Conservatives, Order should include provision for the Council that was purely fortuitous. The Con to submit a petition under Section 125 of the servative Party had objected to the Local Government Act, 1933, by a specified Labour Party's proposals on the ground date. that they favoured the Labour Party, "The Secretary of State has given the most careful consideration to the Council's resolu but they did not pursue that ground of tion. He notes the view expressed in the objection at the inquiry. The Finance resolution that Mr. Verney, the independent and General Purposes Committee on barrister who held the local inquiry, was January 5 recommended to the Council misinformed on certain material aspects." ·that the views put forward by the Chair Your Lordships will note that t�e resolu man be accepted, and that they be sub tion did not, in fact, say that the inde mitted to the Minister of Housing and pendent barrister who presided, over the Loca,l Government, with a request that inquiry had been misinformed o;n certain it the proposed warding arrangements be material aspects. What did I say was abandoned. that the proposals were heavily !weighted The local Labour Party, however, did in favour of the Conservative Party. not rest content with just making that This observation by the Home �ecretary recommendation to the Council. They could be understood to imply a feflection consulted the Labour Member of Parlia on the eminent solicitor who presented ment for the Borough, and on January 25 the case for the Conservative proposals that Member of Parliament and the at the inquiry, and I am glad that the chairman of the local Labour Party, wbo Home Secretary has made it quite clear had given evidence at the inquiry, visited that he did not intend that. !!he Ministry; and I think that the Mem But if the consequences to a political ber of Parliament saw the Home Secre Party of warding arrangements con tary. My Lords, it would indeed be sidered to secure the fairest representa interesting to, know whom they saw and tion of ,the electorate are now to be 601 The Northampton [ 23 MARCH 1965] Order 1965 602 treated as a material aspect, iJt certainly is the merits of each scheme as presented a departure from previous Home Office to him ; and the Home Secretary's first policy. What weight is to be given decision was no doubt based on the to this aspect? Are wards in future to merits of each scheme. I think we be arranged so as to maintain the Labour ought to be told what weight is .to be given Party's position? The Labour Party at the next inquiry to the Party political have a majority on the Northampton advantages or disadvantages of any par Borough Council-a microscopic ticular proposals, and whether any new majority-as a result of one vote, which criteria are to be laid down. I ask that has been held to be a spoiled vote, being a positive answer should be given to held, on an election petition, to be a that question. If they are not, why have good vote. another inquiry? If they are not, is �t the vi-ew of the Government that warding My Lords, the Home Secretary's letter arrangements which are considered to be went on: the best on their merits should be altered " While the Secretary of State does not accept that insufficient opportunity was given so that the Conservative Party do not to all concerned to express their views fully fortuitously derive any benefit there at the public inquiry, he has decided that in from? My Lords, to do this would be the circumstances the best course will be for a denial of democracy and political the whole question of the warding of North ampton to be considered afresh and publicly gerrymandering of the worst kind. at a further local inquiry." On ,these facts, which I have So the Horne Secretary rejects the con endeavoured to state accurately, it is tention that the local Labour Party had not surprising that the Home Secretary's insufficient opportunity to express their conduct was made the subject of a Vote views fully. But, none the less, on their of Censur,e in another place. I have representations, and on their representa known the Home Secretary for many tions alone. he has ordered another public years, 'and I do not doubt that he was inquiry ; and the sole ground for doing led into doing wha,t he thought was so is the alleged political consequences right, and honestly thought was right ; of the decision he first made. but the fact remains that to very many It is true that in the body of his Report people he appears to have acted very the inspector said-and I quote from wrongly indeed in the discharge of what page 23 of the Report : might be described as his quasi judicial duties. It would indeed be interesting "These proposals are virtually non-contro versial, but in approaching the remaining nine to know what passed at the interviews wards, there is a fundamental disagreement. that Mr. Paget, the Member for No:rith It is right to emphasise that the Town Clerk's ampton, and the leader of the proposals, which now form the basis of the Northampton Labour Party had on Council's scheme, were drawn uo by him alone with no political outcome in mind. The January 25. If an appeal were brought criticism from the political point of view was against a judgment in the courts and n?t pursued . at the inquiry and should be was allowed without the other side disregarded m assessing the merits of the being heard at all, the Home Secretary scheme. It is equally important to emphasise that no suggestion was made that the new would, I am sure, be one of the first to Conservative proposals should be criticised say that that was very wrong. But what as designed to secure political advantage, what he has done here is to allow an appeal ever may have been the defects of earlier and to order a new trial without hearing proposals." the other side, solely on representations After giving his conclusions he said: by the Labour Party. " I am reinf?rced in the view by the fact that no suggestion of political motive has been The consequences of his doing so are advanced: W�en the balance of power between serious and, I would think, unprece two Par_t1�s 1s so . �l?se, it must be expected dented. I am afraid I have already that legitimate cnt1c1sm on this basis would taken some time (I have taken it as be put torward, if it reasonably could be. shortly as I can, but I had to spend 1:'here bemg no such criticism of the Conserva tive scheme, and the political criticism of the some time on the history), but I want to Council's scheme not ha".ing been pursued, I direct attention now to the consequences �ave been free to determme my recommenda of his decision. May I read again from tion on the merits of each scheme as presented to me." his let�r? He says: "The Secretary of State understands that He said, as your Lordships will note, the Minister proposes to lay the Northampton that he made his recommendation on Order before Parliament during the third week 603 The Northampton [LORDS] Order1965 604 (Vrisoount Dilhome.] Order, you will see that not only is effect of February in time for it to take effect on given to this decision of the Home Secre 1st April this year. There is insufficient time tary but it is also provided that there for warding arrangements to be fully and publicly considered afresh before this date. shall be no election before the new ward In the circumstances the Secretary of State ing arrangements are made. The 10,000 has decided to advise the Minister to provide new electors included in the borough on in his Order for the areas to be added to April 1 are, I see from the Press, to suffer the borough to be temporarily annexed to the exis?,ng wards as from the 1st April a rate increase of ls. ld. in the pound, next .... whereas the present raJtepayers in the borough will have only an 8d. increase. That means that 10,000 new electors are to be represented compulsorily on the Was it necessary to preserve this council by persons for whom they have Socialist control, gained as a result of one had no opportunity of voting, and, as vote at the last elections, in I order to your Lordships will see, it is proposed provide for a further public inquiry? Was that this should continue, not for a few it necessary to deprive the electors of the weeks but for many months. The letter borough of their right to elect a new goes on: council on May 13 if they wished to? "The Secretary of State considers that the Was it necessary to do all these things first elections to be held for the borough as in order to enable a new inquiry to be extended should be held on the basis of a held? My Lords, I submit that the new ward scheme and not on the basis of answer to these questions is in the the existing wards with the added areas negative. Why not just postpone the annexed. It would not be practicable for the procedure under Section 25 of the Act of extension of the borough until after the 1933 to be completed in time for the public inquiry and approval of the new ordinary date of borough council elections, warding arrangements? There really (13th May). Accordingly the Secretary of cannot be any real urgency about making State is asking the Minister of Hou&ing and Local Government to provide in his Order the extension. It could not have mattered for the ordinary borough elections in May to very much if that extension had been be postponed to such date as may be pro postponed until, at the latest, October. vided in an Order in Council under Section If that bad been done, it woul not have 25 ; and that until the councillors elected at dl the postponed elections come into office, the been necessa1y to cancel the May borough existing councillors should represent the exist elections ; it would not have been neces ing wards, subject to the added areas being sary to provide by Statutory Iµstrument annexed to contiguous wards. The Secretary for Socialist coutrol of the C